February 3, 2011 •
Indiana Bill Introduces Local Lobbying Laws
Covers Persons Seeking Business Relationships
Senator James Arnold has introduced a bill which would require persons seeking business relationships with local jurisdictions and their agencies to register and report activity and expenditures as lobbyists, whether or not the local jurisdictions have ordinances dealing with lobbying. Senate Bill 0330 defines ‘business relationship’ to include pecuniary interest contracts and purchases with an agency with an aggregate value of at least $100,000.
The bill calls for the reporting to be filed with the local county clerks where the lobbying activity occurs. A $100 a day late fine would be imposed for each day a lobbyist misses his or her filing date and lobbyists knowingly failing to register or file would face a Class A infraction.
The bill also allows local jurisdictions to adopt ethics ordinances and establish ethics commissions.
Map of Indiana by Jim Irwin on Wikipedia.
February 3, 2011 •
News You Can Use from California
Lobbyist receives fine
Jim Sedor, editor of News You Can Use, pointed out this article – “Lobbyist for San Manuel Tribe Fined $30,000 by State” from Tuesday’s Riverside Press-Enterprise.
According to the article, lobbyist Frank Molina of Strategic Solutions Advisors was fined $30,000 by the California Fair Political Practices Commission for failing to file lobbying reports. The article states Molina has lobbied for the San Manuel Band of Mission Indians and the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians, both operating casinos.
News You Can Use is State and Federal Communications’ weekly summary of national news focused on ethics, lobbying, and campaign finance.
February 3, 2011 •
Alabama Lawmakers Overhaul Ethics Rules in Special Session
Following a headline-grabbing scandal in which several prominent Alabama lawmakers, businessmen, and lobbyists were indicted in a cash-for-votes scheme related to pending gambling laws, state legislators took the opportunity to overhaul lobbyist, campaign finance, and other ethics rules.
The special session, called by Governor Riley in late December, lasted seven days and saw the passage of several landmark bills, each of which was promptly signed into law.
The most dramatic change concerning lobbyists is the newly enacted expenditure limits. Previously, lobbyists could spend anything on an official without having to report it until the spending exceeded $250 per day. Now, lobbyists may only spend $25 on an official for a meal with an annual limit of $150. For a lobbyist’s employer, the limit is $50 per meal with a $250 annual cap. This law has been criticized by some as having too many loopholes. For instance, the limit does not apply to an “educational function” or certain “widely attended” events. Disclosure of spending at these events is still required when spending exceeds $250 per official.
Lawmakers also passed a ban on PAC-to-PAC transfers of funds. This, lawmakers hope, will reduce the “shell game” sometimes played which makes it very difficult for the public to track who is actually funding candidates or making expenditures.
Several of the laws passed impacted the actions of state officials directly. Starting in 2014, a state lawmaker will no longer be allowed to hold another government job. Additionally, the reforms include a ban on “pass through pork.” This is a practice whereby state lawmakers could direct an agency to spend money a certain way without legislative approval. Finally, the Alabama Ethics Commission will be granted subpoena power; this is expected to make enforcement of the laws much easier and effective.
The most controversial bill passed during the session is one banning politically active groups from receiving contributions via payroll deduction from state employees. This law was decried as an attack on the American Education Association, a group usually linked to Democratic candidates. Governor Riley, a Republican, defended the bill as a step to prevent misuse of state time and money.
While most agree the reform package is not perfect or all-inclusive, most within the state’s ethics and political circles agree they are a significant step forward at a time when Alabama badly needs one.
Photo of the Alabama Statehouse by Spyder_Monkey on Wikipedia.
February 2, 2011 •
Maryland Legislative Bill Creates Cooling Off Period For Lobbying
Lobbying Exceptions Provided
Delegate Anthony J. O’Donnell introduced a bill creating a cooling off period for executive branch officials who wish to lobby upon leaving office. House Bill 0027 would prohibit former state and public officials of the executive branch from lobbying, or assisting in lobbying, for compensation in matters of legislative action for a period of one year after leaving employment.
The bill provides an exception permitting the former officials to lobby for a municipal corporation, county, or state governmental entity.
Photo of the Maryland Statehouse in Annapolis by Thisisbossi on Wikipedia.
January 31, 2011 •
Hawaii Bills Propose Additional Reports and Disclosures for Lobbying Activity
The Hawaii Legislature will have the opportunity to debate changes in regards to the reporting and disclosure requirements for lobbyists and their clients during the 2011 session due to the filing of House Bill 637 and Senate Bill 671.
These bills would alter reporting and disclosure requirements to mandate reports be filed each month during the period from January through May of each year, as well as during any other month in which the legislature is in session. Further, an additional report would be filed on January 15 of each year to cover the period of June 1 to December 31.
Additionally, the bills would require lobbyists and their clients to make new disclosures, including campaign contributions made, the existence of any contractual relationships with legislators, and events attended wherein members of the legislature were in attendance and an average cost of $25 or more per person or total of $500 including gifts was expended. The bills also provide for definitions to pertinent terms, including ‘candidate,’ ‘candidate committee,’ ‘committee,’ and ‘contractual relationship.’
January 27, 2011 •
News from the Mississippi Legislature
They Will Consider Stopping ‘Revolving Door’ for Four Year Period
House Bill 44, a bill regarding ‘revolving door’ legislation, has been introduced in the Mississippi legislature. According to the bill, a member of the legislature would not be permitted to engage in or perform any function which would require registration as a lobbyist for a period of four years following the expiration of his or her legislative term. If passed, the bill would take effect July 1, 2011.
Photo of the Mississippi State Capitol by Charlie Brenner on Wikipedia.
January 27, 2011 •
New York City Council Confirms Appointments to Lobbying Commission After Three Year Wait
Commission to Improve Lobbying Laws
City Council has confirmed the appointments of Herbert Berman, Margaret Morton, Lesley Horton, and Jamila Ponton Bragg to the New York City Lobbying Commission. Berman, a lobbyist and former Council Finance Committee Chair, was selected to be the Lobbying Commission Chair.
Formation of the Lobbying Commission had stalled for three years as suitable candidates were sought. The Lobbying Commission is an advisory body charged with making recommendations to improve New York City’s 2006 lobbying laws.
Photo of the New York City Hall by Momos on Wikipedia.
January 26, 2011 •
Bill To Curb Rhode Island Revolving Door
Cooling Off Period Prescribed
Representative Joseph M. McNamara introduced HB 5127 to amend the state’s “Code of Ethics” law. The bill would create a cooling off period for executive branch government officials who wish to lobby for specific entities once they leave office.
The law would require those employed by the department of administration in a decision-making position or capacity or those with influence over legislation with the executive branch to not lobby for or even work for a state agency, quasi-public agency, or any other state subsidized corporation or entity should they leave their employment until a new governor is elected.
January 26, 2011 •
Public Officials’ Post-Service Employment Options May Be Limited
The Idaho senate has passed two bills which would restrict public officials’ employment options after leaving office.
SB1037 would prohibit certain officials from working for a company receiving certain state contracts or grants for one year if the former official was involved in the award process.
SB1038, a “revolving door” law, would prohibit state officials or legislators from working as a lobbyist for one year after leaving office.
January 20, 2011 •
Technical Difficulties at the Illinois Index Department Give Lobbyists Extra Time to File
Reports due on January 23.
Because of a technical malfunction, the Illinois Secretary of State‘s reporting system was unavailable from January 16th until early on January 18th. Accordingly, the Index Department has extended the deadline for reporting expenditures made in the first half of January.
Instead of being due on January 20th, those required to file reports now have until January 23.
January 20, 2011 •
Ask the Experts – Disclosure of “All-Invited” Events
Here is your chance to “Ask the Experts” at State and Federal Communications, Inc.
Q. If my employer hosts a function to which all members of the state legislature are invited, must I disclose the name of each individual legislator attending, or can I merely reference the fact that all members were invited?
A. This is a very common occurrence for most lobbyists: to pay for events where all members of the legislature, or some other identifiable group, are invited. The reporting implications for such events range from simple aggregate disclosure to detailed reporting where the name of every legislator attending must be listed. The key to accurate reporting is to know how the state defines “all invited” and whether it takes into consideration any type of “sub-group.”
Here is a representative summary of the varied reporting requirements you might encounter with this type of event:
Arizona – All expenditures incurred by a principal or lobbyist for a special event for legislators – including parties, dinners, athletic events, entertainment, and other functions – to which all members of the legislature, either house of the legislature, or any committee of the legislature are invited must be reported. These expenditures do not have to be reported based on the cost per legislator. However, a description of the event, date and location of the event, number of persons invited, and total expenditures must be reported.
Arkansas – A “special event” is a planned activity to which a specific governmental body or identifiable group of public servants is invited. One of the unique aspects of Arkansas disclosure in this situation is that if the event has multiple co-hosts, the names of all other lobbyists sharing in the cost of the event must be reported.
Also in Arkansas, hospitality rooms may be reported as a “special event” provided the lobbyist invites specific governmental bodies or identifiable groups of public servants. When reporting hospitality room expenses, the lobbyist must itemize the date the hospitality room was open; the name of the event hosted; the exact amount paid by the lobbyist towards the total expenditure for the hospitality room; and the names of all other lobbyists sharing in the cost of the room.
Georgia – Aggregate expenditures on food, beverages, and registration at group events to which all members of an agency, including the legislature and its committees and subcommittees, are invited must be disclosed. Also, if an expenditure is made on behalf of a public official and is simultaneously incurred for an identifiable group of public officials, the individual identification of whom would be impractical, the name of the individual official need not be disclosed. A general description of the identifiable group will suffice.
Louisiana – For legislative lobbying, the following must be invited before invoking group disclosure: the entire legislature; either house; any standing committee; select committee; statutory committee; committee created by resolution of either house; subcommittee of any committee; recognized caucus; or any delegation thereof. Disclosure includes the name of the group invited; the amount, date, and location of the event.
For executive branch lobbying, group disclosure is when more than 25 executive branch officials are invited to a reception, social gathering, or other function. The name of the event, amount, date, and location must be reported.
Utah – In Utah, food or beverage expenditures must be reported if the aggregate daily expenditures benefitting the public official are greater than $25, unless the food or beverage is provided in connection with an event to which all of the members of the legislature, a standing committee, interim committee, legislative task force, or a party caucus are invited.
Washington – Washington does not provide for group reporting. Even if all members of the legislature, or all members of any sub-group within the legislature, are invited, every individual person must be listed by name if the expenditure exceeds $25 per occasion (which it usually does when group events are involved).
If two or more lobbyist employers share the expenses of a reception or other entertainment event, the lobbyist primarily responsible for organizing the event must disclose on his or her monthly L-2 report the names of the legislators (and members of their immediate families) attending the group event. Rather than duplicating this list of attendees, the L-2 reports filed by the lobbyists of the other employers sponsoring the event may make reference to the lobbyist’s report that contains these details.
We have not listed rules for all the states, only examples of some states. If you have a question on a state not listed here, please contact us directly at 330-761-9960.
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.
January 19, 2011 •
Texas Bills Look to Slow Legislator-to-Lobbyist Transition
If passed, a violation would be a class A misdemeanor.
Companion bills seeking to create “revolving door” restrictions for members of the Texas legislature have been introduced during the 2011 session. Senate Bill 128 and House Bill 508 seek to prevent former members of the legislature from lobbying “before the date of final adjournment of the second regular session of the legislature to convene after the date the person ceases to be a member.”
If passed as presently written, a violation would be considered a class A misdemeanor in Texas.
Image of the Texas flag and state courtesy of Shem on Wikipedia.
January 19, 2011 •
Bill Seeks to Curtail Lobbyist Political Contributions
New York Bill Proposes to Limit Contribution Amounts and Timing
Senate Bill 37, introduced by Senator Daniel Squadron, proposes to curtail political contributions by lobbyists. The bill limits lobbyist political contributions to $250 per candidate, per election and contributions may only be made between the first of July and the end of the year.
The bill further bars lobbyists from soliciting or transmitting a contribution or a request for a contribution from any person, including a political committee, for the benefit of a public official or party committee.
Photo of New York State Capitol courtesy of UpstateNYer on Wikipedia.
January 18, 2011 •
West Virginia Looking to Slow Down Revolving Door
Public officials may have to disclose their spouse’s income.
A proposed ethics law would create a “revolving door” restriction for former West Virginia elected officials and senior members of their staff.
Under House Bill 2464, these people would have to wait one year after leaving office before acting as a lobbyist at the state level. A more controversial aspect of this bill would require public officials to disclose their spouse’s source of income in campaign disclosure filings.
A similar bill was proposed last year but stalled in the Senate Finance Committee.
Photo of the West Virginia state capitol building by Analogue Kid on Wikipedia.
State and Federal Communications, Inc. provides research and consulting services for government relations professionals on lobbying laws, procurement lobbying laws, political contribution laws in the United States and Canada. Learn more by visiting stateandfed.com.