Massachusetts: “Casinos industry spent millions lobbying in Mass.” by The Associated Press in the Boston Herald.

Oklahoma: “Lobbyist: Lawmaker Morgan sought help for ‘friends’” by Nolan Clay in the Tulsa World.

South Carolina: “Senators hold moment of silence for missing lobbyist, search continues” by Noelle Phillips in The State.

Wisconsin: “Union lobbying plummets in last half of 2011” by Bill Lueders in Wisconsin Watch.

Arizona: “Ariz. lawmakers want elected officials to disclose use of public funds” by Howard Fischer in the East Valley Tribune.

Georgia: “Advocates push for ethics funding” by Charles Edwards on WABE News.

“Watchdog groups demand more money for ethics board” by in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Maryland: “Maryland Ethics Panel Suggests Reducing Local Disclosure” by Brian Witte (Associated Press) on NBC Washington.

“Bill would require online disclosure” by Michael Dresser in the Baltimore Sun.

Minnesota: “Lobbying violations vex understaffed Minnesota regulator” by Brad Schrade in the Star Tribune.

North Carolina: “Dome: Few ethics complaints probed, report shows” by John Frank in The News & Observer.

Democratic legislators have submitted a bill for introduction that restricts the activity of special interest organizations that write bills for legislators.

The bill titled the ALEC Accountability Act applies existing lobbying laws to any organization or person who advocates for the introduction of model legislation. The bill also requires the reporting of any “scholarships” organizations pay to legislators and prohibits state taxpayer funds from being used to pay for attendance at the organization’s conventions.

The bill is currently awaiting a bill number and committee referral.

Photo of the Wisconsin State Capitol building by Darin ten Bruggencate onWikipedia.

Federal:

Ethics Reform Bill to Ban Insider Trading by Congress Members, Executive Branch by House

Obama Yields in Marshaling of Super PAC

From the States and Municipalities:

Arizona

Arizona Supreme Court Bars Candidate with Limited English

California

High-Speed Rail Tapped State Fund for Unusual Lobbying Contract

Connecticut

For Donovan, Lobbyist Bucks Seep Through Loophole

Georgia

With House Bill Stalled, Senator Targets Lobbyist Gifts

Michigan

Critics Worry Senate Ad Will Revive Asian-Bashing

Montana

Schweitzer Appoints Former Labor Leader to Head Political Ethics Office

Oklahoma

FBI Created Fake Company during Investigation of Oklahoma Legislature

Texas

New Rules Would Target ‘Bundlers’ Who Raise Big Sums for Austin Races

West Virginia

W.Va. Lawmakers Navigate Lobby Ban, Social Media

Wisconsin

Wisconsin GOP Leader Admits He’s Packing Heat in State Assembly
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.

WAYNE COUNTY, MICHIGAN:  County Executive Robert Ficano has issued a new executive ethics policy that contains lobbyist registration provisions, gift restrictions, and conflict of interest disclosure requirements for executive appointees.

The policy requires a lobbyist who lobbies any executive appointee to register with the State of Michigan and bars lobbyists not verified as registered from meeting with executive appointees.

Additionally, the policy prohibits lobbyists from providing executive appointees with food or beverage valued at more than $100 annually and prohibits all other monetary or non-monetary gifts or gratuities.

U.S. Congressman Chris Van Hollen has introduced a campaign finance bill in the House called DISCLOSE 2012 Act.

Like the similarly entitled bill introduced and defeated in 2010, House Resolution 4010, the Disclosure of Information on Spending on Campaigns Leads to Open and Secure Elections Act of 2012, aims to increase the reporting requirements of political expenditures and contributions by corporations and other outside groups.

Corporations, unions, and other groups, will be required to report certain campaign-related activity to the Federal Election Commission (FEC), to disclose their campaign-related expenditures to their shareholders and members, and to make their political spending available to the public, through a hyper-link to the FEC, on their websites.

In his press release, Congressman Van Hollen states, “I urge my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to support this legislation – if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear from the DISCLOSE 2012 Act.”

Additionally, the bill also requires lobbyists to disclose their political expenditures in their lobbying disclosure reports in conjunction with the report of their lobbying activities.

Last night the U.S. House removed all registration requirements by those conducting political intelligence activities from the Senate’s Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act, which passed the Senate last week with a bi-partisan vote of 96 to 3.

The original Senate Bill 2038, now in the house, expanded the Lobbyist Disclosure Act to include requiring registration and reporting from those conducting political intelligence activities, which was defined as “political intelligence contacts and efforts in support of such contacts, including preparation and planning activities, research, and other background work that is intended, at the time it is performed, for use in contacts, and coordination with such contacts and efforts of others.”

While the House also made other changes to the bill, the only reference to the removal of the reporting and registration requirements made by Congressman Eric Cantor in a press release issued last night stated, “Tonight, we will introduce a strengthened and expanded STOCK Act, and remove provisions that would have made the bill unworkable or raised more questions then they answered.”

If passed as changed in the House, the bill would have to return to the Senate for another vote. The current version of Senate Bill 2038 can be found here.

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

Broward County is expected to file suit in order to ensure the countywide ethics code remains in force countywide after residents of Wilton Manors, Hillsboro Beach, and Sea Ranch Lakes voted to undo portions of it during the January 31, 2012 election. Voters were asked whether local elected officials should be subjected to state law on issues relating to their side jobs, instead of the new county code of ethics, and voters in all three cities unanimously voted in favor.

Broward County Mayor John Rodstrom and Broward County Commissioners have all expressed their belief that the language used on the ballot was deceiving, as no mention of lobbying or the new county code of ethics, extended to all cities in Broward County on January 2, 2012, was contained in the language of the ballot questions.

The county is expected to pursue one of the following legal paths: suing on the ballot language as deceptive or acquiring a ruling concerning Broward County’s authority over the three cities in regards to the code of ethics.

For full news coverage, read:

“W.Va. lawmakers navigate lobby ban, social media” by The Associated Press in the Washington Examiner.

“W.Va. lawmakers seek buffer from e-lobbying but not blockade with public in social media age” by Lawrence Messina (Associated Press) in The Republic.

Photo of the West Virginia State Capitol Building by Analogue Kid on Wikipedia.

Abramoff will be working with United Republic’s Republic Report, a blog that started just this month.

According to Abramoff’s first blog post from February 3: “Hi, everyone. I’m new to blogging, so this is an exciting experiment for me.

I’ll be posting more serious pieces next week. But, for now, I just want to say how honored I am to join Nick Penniman, Josh Silver, and the gang at United Republic in the vital effort to effect real reform in Washington.

It is a privilege for me to add my insights and experience to their strong and sagacious team and I look forward to working with them to reveal to our nation the way Washington really works.”

For news coverage read: “Jack Abramoff has unlikely second act as watchdog” by Melanie Mason in the Chicago Tribune.

Thank you to News You Can Use Editor Jim Sedor for pointing me in the direction of this news piece.

Yesterday, the U.S. Senate passed a bill which expands the Lobbyist Disclosure Act to include those conducting political intelligence activities.

Senate Bill 2038, the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act, defines the term ‘political intelligence activities’ to mean “political intelligence contacts and efforts in support of such contacts, including preparation and planning activities, research, and other background work that is intended, at the time it is performed, for use in contacts, and coordination with such contacts and efforts of others.”

‘Political intelligence contact’ is defined to mean oral, written, and electronic communication to covered executive and legislative branch officials intended for use in analyzing securities or commodities markets, or in informing investment decisions.

The lobbyist registration and disclosure requirements would be required by both political intelligence consultants and political intelligence firms, also defined in the bill.

The U.S. House version of the bill, House Resolution 1148, also called the STOCK Act, contains similar requirements.

Lobbying

“A record year for lobbying industry” by Michael Shaw in the Sacramento Business Journal.

“Lobbying Money Hits New Record” by Jenny O’Mara on KBPS.org.

Campaign finance

“Michigan Democrats are taking 1st shot at corporate funding with proposed ethics, campaign finance reform” by Rob South in Michigan Live.

Gov 2.0 and Social Media

“Consumers Turn to Social Media for Presidential Campaign Info” in yesterday’s eMarketer.

“New York City Readies for a Website Overhaul” by Sarah Rich in Government Technology.

Redistricting

Iowa – “5 Iowa legislators resign following redistricting” by The Associated Press in the Muscatine Journal.

Massachusetts – “In redistricting’s wake, Rep. Paul Adams opts to run for state Senate” by Matt Murphy in the Boston Herald.

Ohio – “Only 3 of 16 districts competitive in new map” by William Hershey in the Dayton Daily News.

Pennsylvania – “Targeted lawmakers stuck in ‘political limbo’” by Rachel Weaver in today’s Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

Representative Philip Johnson has introduced House Bill 3025, which would allow employers of lobbyists to host receptions for standing committees in either chamber of the general assembly.

Tennessee law prohibits lobbyist employers from holding receptions, unless all state legislators are invited.

The current prohibition was part of ethics reforms enacted after the Tennessee waltz scandal.

Photo of the Tennessee House Chamber by Ichabod on Wikipedia.

Q:  Can I change the method by which I am calculating my lobbying expenditures for purposes of filing my Federal  LD-2 reports?

A:  Yes, at the appropriate time.  Under the LDA, registrants have the option of electing the compilation method for quarterly expenditures – that is, whether they use the LDA definitions or the IRC definitions for lobbying.  A change in that method election can only take place, however, in the first quarter of each new year.  Once a report has been filed using one method then all subsequent reports for that reporting year must employ the same method.  That being the case, this is a very good time to consider whether it makes sense to change.  There are advantages and disadvantages to each method and the decision to change your method should be made after careful consideration.  Here are just a few important differences to keep in mind when considering a new method election for 2012:

• The IRC method allows an organization to employ only one tracking system for both tax and LDA purposes;
• The IRC method provides a greatly narrowed definition of communications with executive branch officials;
• Under the LDA method, neither grassroots nor state and local lobbying expenditures are included.

If you think it may make sense to consider a change in your calculating method, please let us know and we’d be happy to assist in a more thorough analysis.

You can directly submit questions for this feature, and we will select those most appropriate and answer them here. Send your questions to: marketing@stateandfed.com.

(We are always available to answer questions from clients that are specific to your needs, and we encourage you to continue to call or e-mail us with questions about your particular company or organization. As always, we will confidentially and directly provide answers or information you need.) Our replies to your questions are not legal advice. Instead, these replies represent our analysis of laws, rules, and regulations.