• Mission & Governance
• Services Overview
• How to Get Involved
• Standing Committees
• NCSL Foundation

• Issue Areas: A-Z
• State-Federal Relations
• NCSL Standing Committees
• News from D.C. and the States

• About State Legislatures
• Elections, Campaigns & Redistricting
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory
• Web Sites

• Online Guide to NCSL Services
• Staff Sections and Networks
• Meetings & Professional Development
• Staff Directories

• Meetings Calendar
• Online Registration
• Meetings Home Page
• Legislative Summit

• Bookstore
• State Legislatures Magazine
• NCSL's StateConnect Directory

State-Federal Relations

 

LOBBYING, ETHICS AND EARMARK REFORM 

House / Senate

The new congressional Democratic majority promised during the 2006 election campaigns to tackle a handful of key issues in the first two weeks of the 110^th Congress. That promise began to take form on January 4^th as House Democrats advanced a rules and legislative package addressing these issues. Out of the box first were a host of rules changes addressing lobbying and ethics reform which passed the House by a vote of 430-1. A summary of those rules changes follows.

NCSL has no official position regarding these changes, but modifications to the legislative process involving earmarks for special projects will indirectly affect states. Earmarks in appropriations measures generally consume billions in domestic discretionary funding available for state-federal partnerships and other programs. The rules package advanced by House Democrats requires more disclosure and transparency than current practice, thereby potentially tempering the amount of earmarks sought and approved. If that proves to be the case, states could find additional federal funding available for various state-federal programs in a fiscal environment where resources are limited.

The following chart will be updated as these rules changes, which are likely to be followed by related statutory changes, advance through the legislative process in the nation’s capital. For additional information, please contact Hirsh Kravitz (202-624-8695, hirsh.kravitz@ncsl.org) or Michael Bird (202-624-8686, michael.bird@ncsl.org).                                                      

                                            

EARMARK REFORM     Rules Changes

Requires legislation and conference reports to be accompanied by a list of earmarks and limited tax or trade benefits, and names of their sponsors. It requires sponsors of earmarks to provide information about the recipient and purpose of an earmark, and requires certification that the member, or his or her spouse, will not benefit financially. It also prevents making an earmark conditional on a vote on another matter. The new rule requires members who request earmarks to file written statements to the chairman and ranking member of the committee which lists the names of the member, the name and address of the beneficiary or location of the activity, the individual or entities that would benefit and the purpose. A  member would have to certify that neither the member, nor his/her spouse has a financial interest in the earmark. These provisions require committees of jurisdiction and conference committees to publish lists of the earmarks, limited tax benefits, and limit tariff benefits, along with their sponsors, contained in the reported bills, unreported bills, manager’s amendments, and conference reports brought to the House floor for consideration. A member may make a point of order against the consideration of any rule that waives this requirement. The rule defines an earmark as any Member-requested project that is targeted to a specific place and falls outside a formula-driven or competitive award process. The rule defines a limited tax benefit as a revenue losing provision  that provides a federal tax deduction, credit, exclusion or preference to 10 or fewer beneficiaries, and contains eligibility criteria that are not uniform with respect to other potential beneficiaries. The rule defines a limited tariff benefit as a provision that modifies the Harmonized Tariff Schedule in a manner that benefits 10 or fewer entities. Prohibits a rule or order reported by the Committee on Rules that waives this Act or all or unspecified points of order from being considered over the objection of any Member, except when so determined by a vote of two-thirds of the total membership of the House. Amends Rule XXII (House and Senate Relations) to prohibit consideration of a conference report on such measure unless the joint explanatory statement accompanying it lists the earmarks in it (together with the names of requesting Members and all other required information) that were not committed to the conference committee by either chamber.

LOBBYING REFORM Rules Changes Places restrictions on the gifts, including items, meals and tickets (tickets to sporting events or other entertainment events that are given to members or staff must be valued at face value, or at the highest cost of a ticket with a face value if the ticket does not have a face value), that members and staff can receive. Generally, gifts must be valued below $50 and no more than $100 in gifts may be accepted in one year, although gifts valued below $10 do not count toward the annual limit. This clause also provides a number of exceptions from these limits including when recipient pays market value or returns the gift, gifts given because of a personal relationship and not because of an official position, and certain contributions. Bars members and their staffs from knowingly accepting any gifts or meals from a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign principal. The ban also extends to gifts from private entities that retain or employ registered lobbyists or foreign agents. However, this ban would not apply if the gift meets the current exemptions for the gift limits under House rules, including those relating to gifts between family members or those with existing relationships. Beginning March 1, House members would be barred from participating in travel financed, planned or arranged by lobbyists or organizations that employ lobbyists. In addition, members would be prohibited from being reimbursed for a trip financed wholly or in part by private entities that retain lobbyists or foreign agents unless the role of the lobbyist or foreign agent in the planning, organization, request or arrangement of the trip is de minimis. Travel financed by colleges would not be covered. The House ethics committee would write the guidelines allowing for “de minimis” lobbyists involvement in lawmakers’ one-day, one-night trips to visit specific sites, attend forums or participate in panel discussions or to give speeches. Requires that trips financed by private organizations not connected with lobbying be pre-approved by the House ethics committee. Further, it requires disclosure reports to be filed within 15 days after any travel Prevents House members from using their office allowances, personal funds or campaign funds to pay for travel on non-commercial corporate aircraft other than charter planes Requires the House ethics committee to develop and revise, within 45 days and at annual intervals thereafter, guidelines on judging the reasonableness of travel expenses; such as the factors that establish connections between a trip and official duties, the reasonableness of amounts spent by a sponsor, relationships between events and officially connected purposes, and a direct and immediate relationship between a source of funding and an event. The resolution specifies that these guidelines should take into account maximum per diem rates for official governmental travel. Prohibits House members from using their influence to coerce a private organization to make employment decisions on the basis of political affiliation Requires House employees to participate in annual ethics training

 

 

LOBBYING, ETHICS AND EARMARK REFORM - SENATE

The Senate took up reform bill (S. 1) as its first order of business. Many of the provisions of the new Senate bill are identical to the measure passed by the Senate last year and also similar to the provisions in the House ethics and lobbying reform package. The Senate has ruled out the inclusion of a campaign finance reform provision in their ethics package. The Following is an explanation of several key provisions that require further analysis.

Following in the footsteps of the House, the Senate passed reform bill (S. 1) by a vote of 96-2 as its first order of business for the 110^th Congress. Many of the provisions of the new Senate bill are identical to the measure passed by the Senate last year. However, several key Democrats supported a strengthening  of the previous measure by adding new gift and travel restrictions. The new measure calls for an outright ban on gifts and travel paid for by lobbyists and the organizations that employ them.

S.1 addresses statutory changes affecting lobbyists under the federal Lobbying Disclosure Act and other laws. The bill adopted by the Senate would ban senators and their staff from accepting means, gifts and trips from lobbyists. Further, Senators’ spouses are prohibited from lobbying the Senate unless they were employed as lobbyists for at least one year before their spouse’s election.

The Senate added language prohibiting senators from negotiating for private sector jobs while still in office and prohibits Senators from lobbying for two years after they leave Congress(so-called “revolving door provision”) and senior staff would be prohibited from lobbying for one year.

The Senate agreed to establish a database of lobbyists’ contacts and activities and force lobbyists to certify compliance with the gift laws.

S.1 mostly mirrors the House in calling for changes to curb earmarks. Earmarks will have to be disclosed in each bill and there will have to be a certification by lawmakers that neither themselves, their spouse, their immediate family members nor family members of their staff will receive a personal financial benefit from the earmark.

An amendment that would have given the President line-item veto authority in regards to earmarks was eventually struck down after debate on the provision delayed the passage of the reform bill.

Last updated February 8, 2007