I saw a pattern on Eric Brown’s Political Activity Law Blog entry for today – articles talking about lobbying spending. Each one comes to us from The Hill and each one tells of dropping numbers. I thought they were significant, so here they are:

Staff article: “Lobbying Revenue – Third Quarter 2011”

“Influence industry officially in a funk” by Kevin Bogardus and Rachel Leven

“Chamber of Commerce and legal affiliate report spending $45.8M on lobbying” by Kevin Bogardus

Photo of the U. S. Capitol dome and flag by Florian Hirzinger on Wikipedia.

Lobbyists are prominently mentioned in this Wall Street Journal piece, “Washington Area Is Tops in Income” by Elizabeth Williamson.

NCSL published “Social media tools can pose ethical problems for lawmakers,” by Judy Nadler. The article explores the ethical considerations lawmakers face when using social media tools. The article raises the question about the types of relationships that are established on a network like Facebook by citing the example of someone running for office: “A ‘push’ was organized to add key lobbyists, government contractors and others as ‘friends.'” Nadler discusses government-using-social-media issues such as transparency, playing favorites, and the obligation officeholders have to choose the words they use online carefully.

The Fierce Government IT article, “‘Snapshots cannot accurately archive gov 2.0 content, says Navy official” by Molly Bernhart Walker, discusses the challenges posed by the need to keep a record of government presence in social media platforms.

From Federal Computer Week: A recent survey takes a look at mobile device trends in “Government workers using mobile to access social media, survey shows” by Alice Lipowicz.

Dave Levinthal just published the article “K Street suffers from Twitter jitters” in Politico, where he talks about how lobbyists face a world increasingly using social media.

Members of Congress and their staff are communicating more and more via Facebook and Twitter. So too, many of the companies and organizations that hire lobbyists are employing social media platforms in their communications strategies.

Levinthal’s article explains how lobbyists prefer face-to-face meetings over video conferences or Facebook updates as a way of getting their message across to lawmakers. He also stresses that lobbyists are eager to keep their clients’ information from being broadcast in all directions over social networks.

The article quotes Patton Boggs Chairperson Nick Allard in order to highlight the dilemma: “I’m sure when lawyers or lobbyists used the telegraph for the first time, they faced this kind of issue …  But you cannot be a Luddite and a lobbyist. Luddite lobbyists go out of business.”

What communications will lobbyists embrace in the face of social media? Don’t miss Politico’s analysis.

Photo of the K Street street sign by Ben Shumin on Wikipedia.

Federal:

Company Shops for Campaign Cash

Former Lobbyist Sent to Jail for a Few Hours for Taking Hill Aides to 2003 World Series Game

‘Scarlet L’ for K Street Returns as Obama Sharpens 2012 Rhetoric on Lobbyists

‘Super PAC’ American Crossroads Seeks Permission to Feature Candidates in Ads

The Outsized Returns from Lobbying

From the States and Municipalities:

California

California OKs Donations via Text

California

L.A. Ethics Commission Slaps Developer with Maximum Campaign Fine

California

Proposed California Regulations Spell Out Gift-Reporting Requirements for Elected Officials

Massachusetts

DiMasi Friend Admits Breaking Massachusetts Lobbying Law

New Mexico

GOP Files Lawsuit against Newly Imposed Campaign Contribution Limits in New Mexico

Tennessee

Tennessee Lawmaker Arrested on DUI, Gun Charges

Vermont

Judge: Republican Governors Association violated Vermont campaign finance laws

State and Federal Communications produces a weekly summary of national news, offering more than 80 articles per week focused on ethics, lobbying, and campaign finance.

News You Can Use is a news service provided at no charge only to clients of our online Executive Source Guides, or ALERTS™ consulting clients.

Jim Sedor is editor of News You Can Use.

The Sunset Commission, a legislative body created by the Texas Legislature to identify and eliminate waste, duplication, and inefficiency in government agencies, will seek public input during its scheduled review of the Texas Ethics Commission.

During the evaluation of the Ethics Commission’s mission and performance, submitted comments and suggestions will be accepted until the suggested date of November 21. The Sunset Commission then anticipates it will issue a report in March 2012 followed by a public hearing with testimony in April.

Based on the public input and the report, any recommendations to the legislature will be submitted at the start of its next session in January 2013.

Some of the duties the Texas Ethics Commission administers and enforces are the election code concerning political contributions, expenditures and political advertising, and lobbying registration, reports and activities.

The announcement of the review can be found here.

Photo of the Texas State Capitol by LoneStarMike on Wikipedia.

The Economist reported on a recent study by the analysis firm Strategas, which says companies that spend more on lobbying do better over time on the S&P 500.

Here is the article in the Economist: “Money and politics: Ask what your country can do for you” from October 1, 2011.

Brad Plumer also covered the story in “The outsized returns from lobbying” from yesterday’s Washington Post.

California Governor Jerry Brown has signed senate bill 398 into law. The bill alters definitions and reporting requirements for those who do business with the board of a public pension or retirement system to manage securities or other assets and went into effect upon signature.

Specifically, the new law modifies the definition of external managers to mean a person who is seeking to be, or is, retained by a board or an investment vehicle to manage a portfolio of securities or other assets for compensation, or a person who manages an investment fund, and who offers or sells, or has offered or sold an ownership interest in the investment fund to a board or investment vehicle. The law also alters the definition of a placement agent to a person directly or indirectly hired, engaged, or retained by, or serving for the benefit of or on behalf of, an external manger and who acts or has acted for compensation as a finder, solicitor, marketer, consultant, broker, or other intermediary in connection with the offer or sale to a board or investment vehicle either the investment management services of the external manager or an ownership interest in an investment fund managed by the external manager.

Additional changes made as the result of the new law include the exemption of placement agents from any requirements imposed by a local government agency, including lobbyist registration and reporting, if the placement agent is an employee, officer, or director of an external manager, or of an affiliate of an external manager, and the external manager is registered as an investment adviser or a broker-dealer with the Securities and Exchange Commission or any state securities regulator. Further, placement agents are exempt from local requirements if the external manager is participating in a competitive bidding process, such as a request for proposal, or has been selected through a competitive bidding process and is providing services pursuant to a contract executed as a result of that bidding process, or when the external manager, if selected through competitive bidding, has agreed to a fiduciary standard of care for the contract.

Federal:

How One Criminal Case Hit K Street

Hybrid PACs: Super PACs and Traditional PACs Can Merge

Lobbyists In On ‘Super’ Secrets

OMB Finalizes Details on White House Lobbying Reform Rules

From the States and Municipalities:

Alabama

Commission’s Opinions Further Define 2010 Ethics Law

Delaware

Colbert Takes Satirical Swipe at Abuse of Delaware Spending Disclosure Laws

Minnesota

Disclosure Rules Apply, Campaign Finance Board Says

New Jersey

N.J. Ethics Reform Efforts Bogged Down for Year

New Mexico

New Mexico Governor Signs Bill to Close Loopholes in State Contract Bidding

New York

NYC Mayor Cross-Examined at Ex-Operative’s Trial

Texas

Recall Case Likely to Extend Beyond El Paso

Utah

Lobbyists Want Keys to the Gym and Valet Parking at Capitol

Virginia

Trackers an Evolving but Undeniable Political Force

State and Federal Communications produces a weekly summary of national news, offering more than 80 articles per week focused on ethics, lobbying, and campaign finance.

News You Can Use is a news service provided at no charge only to clients of our online Executive Source Guides, or ALERTS™ consulting clients.

Jim Sedor is editor of News You Can Use.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) will no longer prohibit nonconnected political committees from accepting corporate and labor organization contributions, provided the political committee maintains and deposits those contributions into separate bank accounts.

The Commission will also not limit the amounts permissible sources can contribute to such accounts.

In an statement released by the FEC, it stated, consistent with its agreement to a stipulated order and consent judgment in Carey v. FEC, it would no longer enforce 2 U.S.C. §§ 441a(a)(1)(C) and 441a(a)(3), as well as any implementing regulations, against any nonconnected political committee with regard to contributions from individuals, political committees, corporations, and labor organizations under certain conditions.

A single committee may now contribute directly to candidates and political committees, and make independent expenditures, separating the funds only by using two separate bank accounts. The committee must maintain the statutory limits on the solicitation of funds used for direct contributions while it may simultaneously seek unlimited funds for use in their independent expenditures.

The FEC intends to develop new regulations and amend its reporting forms. Until that time, the Commission says committees should follow the procedures the FEC outlines in its current statement, which is located here.

This post follows up  previous articles by George Ticoras, “FEC Agrees Not to Enforce Some Laws Against NDPAC” and “One PAC Is Enough.”

An ethics reform bill heralded this summer by Massachusetts House Republicans has been blocked.

The Democratic-controlled house voted 116 to 34 today against a motion allowing House Bill 3718 out of committee for a full vote. Among the changes in the bill are the requirement lobbyists wear badges identifying themselves as such, contribution restrictions for house members, and the prohibition of house members and their staff from contacting public entities regarding pending procurement decisions.

The reform measure arose as a response to the conviction this summer of former house speaker Salvatore DiMasi on seven counts of corruption.

This post follows up a previous article by George Ticoras, “New House Ethics Rules Proposed for Massachusetts” from June 23.

Photo of the Massachusetts Statehouse by Fcb981 on Wikipedia.

Registered federal lobbyists may not serve on any boards, commissions, or similar groups created by the President, the Congress, or an Executive Branch department or agency, the Office of Management and Budget (O.M.B.) has affirmed.

The O.M.B. issued its Notice of Final Guidance detailing, in a question and answer format, the limitations of federal lobbyists’ service on federal boards and commissions. The policy does not apply to full-time federal employees, state lobbyists, or employees of organizations that engage in lobbying activities. If an appointment is made pursuant to statutory authority or presidential directive by Congress or state governors, the O.M.B. encourages the appointments to be made to individuals who are not federally registered lobbyists whenever possible.

The O.M.B. policy was created at the directive of a June 18, 2010 Presidential memorandum “Lobbyists on Agency Boards and Commissions.” Federal lobbyists on boards and commission as of June 18, 2010 may serve out the remainder of their terms.

The O.M.B.’s final guidance will be effective 30 days from issuance in the Federal Register.

The outage will occur in the afternoon while we make some upgrades.

Thank you for your patience. We appreciate our many readers!

State Senator Lou Correa is planning to introduce legislation that would make members of the public who are appointed to serve on boards subject to the state’s revolving door provision.

The legislation would require that all board members wait 12 months after terminating board service before lobbying their former colleagues.

Photo of the California Senate chamber by David Monniaux on Wikipedia.

NCSL’s blog The Thicket at State Legislatures put up a post yesterday that discusses where legislators turn in order to get information to help them make public policy decisions.

The blog cites two sources of information and makes a comparison. The first source is a survey by NCSL, the Council of State Governments, and the State Legislative Leaders Foundation from 2002. The second source is a book called Power, Knowledge, and Politics: Policy Analysis in the States by John Hird from 2005.

The two surveys approached the question in different ways, but according to the blog post, they came up with the same rankings. Take a look at this chart, which summarizes it with bar graphs. Interest groups and lobbyists appear in eighth place on the list.