Congress Loosens Lobbyist Disclosure


The Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate are loosening their interpretation of lobbyist disclosure provisions on gifts to lawmakers and staff members and on PAC contributions. The new rules will be put in place after lobbyists and ethics lawyers launched a lobbying campaign to loosen disclosure requirements in the new LD-203 form – a new disclosure document requiring disclosure of campaign contributions and gifts.

The two offices initially ruled that lobbyists must disclose the fee of events where a “covered official” is in attendance. This rule no longer applies:

The new revisions require lobbyists and lobbying organizations to report the fee or contribution for an event if a covered official is honored or receives an award and they are a “sponsor” as defined by the Senate and House gift rules.

The House and Senate’s gift rules take a narrow view of sponsor, requiring that a person or group not only make a financial contribution to an event but have primary responsibility for the event’s organization.

The new ruling also reduce disclosure for lobbyist spending through political action committees (PACs):

The previous guidance stated that lobbyists sitting on a PAC board would have to list all donations of the PAC on their personal LD-203 form. This could require a single lobbyist to list all the donations of several PACs they were involved with.

Under the new guidance, lobbyists are required to list only that they are on the board of the connected PAC, not document the individual contributions made by the PAC.

While certain lobbyists were complaining to force these changes, Sunlight’s John Wonderlich filed his LD-203 and had this to say about it on twitter, “lobbying disclosure was really painless.” Onerous disclosure requirements are in the eye of the beholder, I guess.

Categorized in:
Share This:
  • Never stay up on the barren heights of cleverness, but come

  • Orle

    The ONE program just flew a bunch of Senators to Rwanda. The legislation seems to be trying to justify the trip based on the opening of PC in Rwanda, but PC isn’t happy about the trip because they still won’t put the headline on the front page as is customary.

    PC used to partner with ONE and PC pays lobbyists, NPCA, to lobby Congress. They also have Presidential and Congressional lobbyists – paid employees of PC. Agencies like CIA do this allot, but I’m not sure about the other agencies like NSA.

    The lobbyists issue comes up around agencies so much because they think they are special and allowed to do this. So, who paid for the Congressmen’s trip and was the goal the opening of PC Rwanda or was it all the US AID going to the country? I guess ONE can’t claim they sponsored because they didn’t arrange the PC opening in Rwanda, unless they lobbied Congress and PC and NPCA………..