Lobbying Reform: Background and Legislative Proposals, 109th Congress

Lobbying Reform: Background and Legislative Proposals, 109th Congress

Order Code RL33065
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Lobbying Reform: Background and
Legislative Proposals, 109th Congress
Updated June 9, 2006
R. Eric Petersen
Analyst in American National Government
Government and Finance Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Lobbying Reform: Background and Legislative
Proposals, 109th Congress
Summary
In the decade since enactment of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA),
concerns have been raised about the capacity of Congress to oversee the activities of
professional lobbyists. Lobbyists and others who seek to participate in public policy
activities through the formation of coalitions and associations whose members may
not be identifiable, and the use of grassroots campaigns that attempt to mobilize
citizens to advance the message of a lobbyist’s client have also raised concerns.
Some lobbying activities have also been linked to campaign finance practices,
congressional procedures regarding the acceptance of gifts from lobbyists, and the
inclusion of earmarks advocated by lobbyists in appropriations legislation.
In the 109th Congress, legislative proposals related to lobbying focus on six
broad areas, including (1) enhanced requirements for electronic filing of lobbying
reports and semiannual reports required under LDA; (2) redefinition of the term
“client” under the statute; (3) more detailed disclosure by lobbyists of which groups
and entities are funding coalitions and associations they represent; (4) more detailed
disclosure by lobbyists of the individuals in Congress and the executive branch they
contact; (5) congressional Rules regarding the interactions of Members and staff with
lobbyists; and (6) the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, as it
relates to lobbying activities.
Legislative proposals addressing some or all of those concerns introduced in the
House thus far in the 109th Congress include H.R. 4975; H.R. 5036; H.R. 4948; H.R.
4920; H.R. 4682; H.R. 4799; H.R. 4787; H.R. 4738; H.R. 4696; H.R. 4671; H.R.
4670; H.R. 4667; H.R. 4658; H.R. 4575; H.R. 2412; H.R. 1302; H.R. 1304; and
H.Res. 81. Measures related to lobbying issues introduced in the Senate include S.
2349, S. 2265, S. 2261, S. 2233, S. 2186; S. 2180; S. 2128; S. 1972; and S. 1398.
For further information, regarding the consideration of H.R. 4975 and S. 2349,
see CRS Report RL33293, Lobbying and Related Reform Proposals: Consideration
of Selected Measures, 109th Congress, by R. Eric Petersen.
On February 1, 2006, the House adopted H.Res. 648. The measure amended
House Rules to deny admittance to the House floor and certain House facilities to
former Members who lobby.
For further information regarding lobbying proposals and issues please see the
CRS Current Legislative Issues page on Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Reform at
[http://beta.crs.gov/cli/cli.aspx?PRDS_CLI_ITEM_ID=2405]. This report will be
updated as warranted.

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Current Lobbying Disclosure Law: A Summary of Potentially Affected
Provisions of LDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
LDA Enforcement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Current Legislative Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
House Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Measures Considered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Status of Proposals Passed by the House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
H.R. 4975, Committee Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
H.Res. 648 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Other Measures Introduced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
H.R. 4975, as Introduced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
H.R. 5036 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
H.R. 4948 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
H.R. 4920 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
H.R. 4799 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
H.R. 4787 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
H.R. 4738 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
H.R. 4696 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
H.R. 4682 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
H.R. 4671 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
H.R. 4670 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
H.R. 4667 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
H.R. 4575 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
H.R. 2412 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
H.R. 1302 and H.R. 1304 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
H.Res. 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Senate Measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Measures Considered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
S. 2349, Senate Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
S. 2349, Committee Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
S. 2128, Committee Consideration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
Other Measures Introduced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
S. 2265 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
S. 2261 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
S. 2259 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
S. 2233 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
S. 2186 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
S. 2180 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
S. 2128, as Introduced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
S. 1972 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
S. 1398 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Further Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Lobbying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Congressional Ethics Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
Congressional Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Campaign Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

Lobbying Reform: Background and
Legislative Proposals, 109th Congress
Introduction
The regulation of lobbying disclosure is governed by the Lobbying Disclosure
Act of 1995 (LDA),1 as amended by the Lobbying Disclosure Technical Amendments
Act of 1998.2 LDA requires any lobbyist who is compensated for his actions,
whether an individual or firm, to register and to file with the Clerk of the House and
the Secretary of the Senate semiannual reports of their activities. These reports
identify the name of the registrant lobbyist, client, and the broad issue areas in which
lobbying was carried out. In the decade since the enactment of the LDA, concerns
have been raised about the capacity of Congress to oversee lobbying activities of
professional lobbyists who seek to participate in public policy activities through the
formation of coalitions and associations whose members may not be identifiable, and
the use of grassroots campaigns that attempt to mobilize citizens to advance the
message of a lobbyist’s client.
Concerns related to the efficacy of current lobbying disclosure practices have
also been linked to other activities carried out by lobbyists. These include campaign
finance practices,3 congressional rules regarding the acceptance of gifts and support
from lobbyists,4 and the inclusion of earmarks advocated by lobbyists in
appropriations legislation.5
In the American political system, the pursuit of private interests through
adoption and amendment of public policy dates back to the founding of the republic.
Writing in support of the new Constitution, James Madison identified interest groups,
or factions — groups of citizens united by a common impulse of passion or of
1 P.L. 104-65, Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (109 Stat. 691, 2 U.S.C. 1601).
2 P.L. 105-166, Lobbying Disclosure Technical Amendments Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 38, 2
U.S.C. 1601 note)
3 See CRS Issue Brief IB87020, Campaign Finance, by Joseph E. Cantor.
4 For further analysis, see CRS Report RL33234, Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Proposals
Related to Lobbying Introduced in the 109th Congress: A Comparative Analysis, by R. Eric
Petersen; and CRS Report RL33237, Congressional Gifts and Travel, Legislative Proposals
for the 109th Congress, by Mildred Amer.
5 See CRS Report RL33295 Comparison of Selected Senate Earmark Reform Proposals, by
Sandy Streeter; and CRS Report 98-518, Earmarks and Limitations in Appropriations Bills,
by Sandy Streeter.

CRS-2
interest — as a cornerstone of the American regime.6 In 1803, Alexis de
Tocqueville observed that “in no country in the world has the principle of association
been more successfully applied ... than in America.”7 The First Amendment provides
opportunity for these groups to exist by prohibiting laws abridging freedom of
speech, the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the government
for a redress of grievances.8
For the past 40 years, observers have noted a steady increase in the number of
organized interest groups, including associations, public interest groups, and
professional organizations. Additionally, these observers note a change in the types
of activities in which these organizations engage to advance their interests.9 In
addition to longstanding lobbying techniques of establishing personal ties with
Members of Congress, their staff and executive branch officials, and testifying at
congressional and administrative hearings, interest groups are also using direct mail,
public relations, newspaper advertisement, and other marketing techniques to
generate public interest in public policies and programs. These activities can include
engaging citizens to lobby on their behalf to persuade a government official regarding
legislation or executive agency action. Some of these organized efforts, which are
not currently subject to disclosure under LDA, are also accompanied by sophisticated
media campaigns to advance the causes of a group.10 Widespread lobbying
campaigns may be targeted to citizens, journalists, lawmakers, executive agency
personnel, and other groups with interests similar to those of the organization on
whose behalf the campaign is mounted.11 This practice is sometimes referred to as
“grassroots” advocacy to identify its appeal to the general public. Some observers,
noting the use of marketing techniques and alleging that a connection to the general
public is lacking, sometimes refer to such efforts as “astroturf” lobbying.12
6 See Federalist Number 10, in The Federalist by Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and
John Jay, edited by Benjamin Fletcher Wright, (Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of
Harvard University Press, 1961), pp. 129-136.
7 Alexis de Tocqueville, Democracy in America (New York: Colonial Press, 1989), vol. I,
p. 191.
8 For a broad overview of the roles and activities of groups that lobby Congress, see U.S.
Senate, Committee on Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on Intergovernmental
Relations, Congress and Pressure Groups: Lobbying in a Modern Democracy, 99th Cong.,
2nd sess. (Washington: GPO, 1986), pp. 1-40.
9 See H. R. Hood, Interest Group Politics in America: A New Intensity (Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall, 1990).
10 Darrell M. West and Burdett A. Loomis, The Sound of Money: How Political Interests Get
What They Want (New York: W. W. Norton and Company, 1998), pp. 16-20; and R.
Kenneth Godwin, “Money Technology and Political Interests: The Direct Marketing of
Politics,” in Mark P. Petracca, ed., The Politics of Interests: Interest Groups Transformed
(Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1992), pp. 308-325.
11 West and Loomis, The Sound of Money, pp. 45-64.
12 Nicholas Confessore, “Meet the Press,” Washington Monthly, Dec. 2003, available at
[http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.confessore.html].

CRS-3
In addition to the expanded scope and breadth of lobbying campaigns, some
observers have noted that many lobbying campaigns involve increased reliance by
interest groups on anonymous, or “stealth” campaigns, in which the lobbying
activities directed to the public or policy makers are organized through coalitions and
associations. Some of these coalitions and associations form alliances with other
groups, or serve as groups which exist solely to advance a campaign for or against
a specific policy action.13 Political scientists Darrell West and Burdett Loomis assert
that anonymous campaigns are carried out in voter education efforts, and electoral,
legislative, and rulemaking settings, and that “the key in each of these efforts is that
the actual sponsor is masked by front organizations that make it difficult for the
public to see who really is funding the activity. Stealth campaigns are consciously
designed to fly under the radar of press and public oversight.”14
Anonymous campaigns to sway public opinion and affect public policy are not
new. Writing a series of articles that became known generally as the Federalist
Papers, Alexander Hamilton, James Madison, and John Jay,15 sought to sway the
general public in the 13 United States, and New York residents in particular, to press
their leaders for ratification of the U.S. Constitution. In 1787 and 1788, 85 articles
authored by the trio appeared in newspapers throughout the country under the
pseudonym “Publius,” as part of what has been described as the “most significant
public-relations campaign in history.”16 In the articles, the three authors made no
mention of their close association with the Constitutional Convention that drafted
and approved the document.
Presently, however, concern has been expressed that entities that use anonymous
lobbying activities and public relations campaigns might circumvent the process of
public consideration of lawmaking and regulatory activities. Observers suggest that
current lobbying disclosure laws, described below, allow interested entities to shield
their lobbying activities through the use of ostensibly separate, independent coalitions
and associations.17 Proposals to require more detailed disclosure of lobbying clients,
the government officials who have been lobbied, and expenditures dedicated to
lobbying have followed. Those supporting more detailed disclosure might argue that
such efforts could afford greater transparency and a broader understanding of the
effects of private interests in the public policy making process. From their
perspective, such a change might also instill greater accountability. Those opposing
changes to current lobbying disclosure practices might maintain that expanding
disclosure could have a potential adverse impact on constitutionally protected rights
13 For examples of anonymous lobbying, see Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, “Lobbying Under The
Cloak Of Invisibility,” Washington Post, Mar. 7, 2005, p. E1, retrieved through nexis.com.
14 West and Loomis, The Sound of Money, pp. 69-70.
15 Hamilton, Madison and Jay went on to become the first Secretary of the Treasury, a
Representative in the First through Fourth Congresses and fourth President, and the first
Chief Justice of the United Sates, respectively.
16 The Federalist Papers website, [http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/federalist/].
17 Josephine Hearn, “Dems Want to Change Congressional Rules,” The Hill, July 14, 2004,
p.3; and Alison Mitchell, “Loophole Lets Lobbyists Hide Clients’ Identity,” New York
Times, July 4, 2002, p. A1.

CRS-4
of assembly, association, and to petition the government, particularly the
longstanding tradition of carrying out these activities without the necessity of self-
identification. Additionally, opponents might assert that such a change could
increase the administrative burden associated with reporting on their lobbying efforts
under LDA.
Current Lobbying Disclosure Law: A Summary of
Potentially Affected Provisions of LDA
LDA requires any lobbyist, whether an individual or firm, whose lobbying
expenses exceed certain thresholds18 to register with the Secretary of the Senate and
the Clerk of the House of Representatives within 45 days after the lobbyist first
makes a lobbying contact with covered officials in the legislative and executive
branches of the federal government on behalf of a client.19 The law requires lobbyists
to file with the Clerk and the Secretary semiannual reports of their activities. These
reports identify the name of the registrant, lobbyists the registrant employs, client,
and the broad issue areas in which lobbying was carried out. In addition, the
disclosure must include
! a good faith estimate, by broad category, of the total amount of
lobbying-related income from the client, or expenditures by an
organization lobbying in its own behalf, during the semiannual
period. Expenditures may be estimated at less than $10,000 or in
increments of $20,000;
! the specific issues that were the subject of a lobbyist’s efforts,
including “to the maximum extent practicable” a list of bill numbers;
18 If the total income for matters related to lobbying activities on behalf of a client
represented by a lobbying firm does not exceed $5,000, or total expenses in connection with
the lobbying activities an organization whose employees engage in lobbying activities on
its own behalf do not exceed $20,000, then no registration and disclosure is required.
19 Legislative branch officials covered under LDA include Members of Congress; elected
officers of either chamber; any employee of a Member, committee, leader or working group
organized to provide assistance to Members; and any other legislative branch employee
serving in a position that is compensated at a rate of 120% of the basic pay for GS 15 of the
General Schedule.
Executive branch covered officials include the President; the Vice President; any
officer or employee in the Executive Office of the President; any officer or employee
serving in a position compensated through the Executive Schedule; any member of the
uniformed military services whose pay grade is at or above O-7 under 37 U.S.C. 201 (In the
United States Army, Air Force, and Marine Corps, this is a brigadier general. In the United
States Navy and Coast Guard the equivalent rank is rear admiral.); and any officer or
employee serving in a position of a confidential, policy-determining, policy-making, or
policy advocating character that the Office of Personnel Management has excepted from the
competitive service under 5 U.S.C. 7511(b)(2)(b).

CRS-5
! a statement of the houses of Congress and the federal agencies
contacted by the lobbyist; and
! a list of the employees of the registrant who acted as lobbyists on
behalf of the client, and a declaration of any previous employment
as a covered executive branch or legislative branch official in the
two years prior to registration.
LDA defines a lobbyist as any individual compensated by a client for services
that include more than one lobbying contact, within certain limits.20 A “client” is
defined as any person or entity that employs and compensates another person to
conduct lobbying activities on their behalf.21 A coalition or association may also be
listed as a client. LDA does not require information on the specific membership of
these groups. Under the current guidance issued by the Clerk of the House and
Secretary of the Senate, such members of informal coalitions may optionally be
viewed as separate clients for disclosure purposes.22 Table 1 summarizes the number
of registrants, clients and lobbyists registered with the Secretary of the Senate since
LDA took effect.
20 An individual whose lobbying activities constitute less than 20% of the time engaged in
the services provided to a client over a six month period is exempt from LDA disclosure
requirements.
21 Under LDA, groups that carry out lobbying activities on their own behalf must also
register with the Clerk and the Secretary.
22 Office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives and Office of the Secretary of the
Senate, Lobbying Disclosure Act Guidance and Instructions, p. 11. The document is also
available through the Senate website at [http://www.senate.gov/pagelayout/legislative/
g_three_sections_with_teasers/lobbyingdisc.htm].

CRS-6
Table 1. Registrants, Clients and Lobbyists Registered Under
the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, 1996-2004
Registrants
Clients
Lobbyists
Yeara
Annual
Annual
Annual
Total
Total
Total
change
change
change
1996
3,557
—
8,118
—
10,798
—
1997
4,051
13.89%
10,013
23.34%
14,946
38.41%
1998
4,422
9.16%
16,873
68.51%
18,589
24.37%
1999
4,813
8.84%
13,793
-18.25%
21,279
14.47%
2000
4,774
-0.81%
13,865
0.52%
16,342
-23.20%
2001
5,160
8.09%
15,941
14.97%
18,854
15.37%
2002
5,536
7.29%
17,575
10.25%
21,089
11.85%
2003
6,005
8.47%
15,317b
-12.85%
24,872
17.94%
2004
6,231
3.76%
19,758
28.99%
30,402
22.23%
Source: Data from the Secretary of the Senate, Office of Public Records and CRS calculations.
Notes: Except for 2000, data reflect all records available on September 30. Data for 2000 reflect only
active registrations, clients and lobbyists.
a. As of Sept. 30 for each year. LDA became effective Jan. 1, 1996, and data for that year cover nine
months.
b. Total reflects Senate Office of Public Records efforts to regularize differences in various client
names.
LDA Enforcement
Whoever knowingly fails to rectify an incomplete disclosure report following
notification of the error by the Clerk of the House or Secretary of the Senate, or who
otherwise does not comply with the requirements of LDA, may be liable for a civil
fine of up to $50,000.23 The clerk and secretary must refer alleged incidents of
noncompliance to the United States Attorney for the District of Columbia. The
number of such referrals made since LDA became effective on January 1, 1996, is
not publicly available. During a hearing to examine procedures to make the
legislative process more transparent before the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration, however, Senator Christopher Dodd stated that “[s]ince 2003, the
23 For further discussion of LDA and other laws, rules, and regulations affecting those who
lobby Congress, see CRS Report RL31126, Lobbying Congress: An Overview of Legal
Provisions and Congressional Ethics Rules, by Jack Maskell.

CRS-7
Office of Public Records has referred over 2,000 cases to the Department of Justice,
and nothing’s been heard from them again.”24
The Department of Justice has reportedly claimed that between September 2003
and September 2005, it has received around 200 referrals involving possible LDA
violations and has pursued 13 of those cases for further enforcement action. Of that
total, media accounts claim that seven are still open, three have been closed without
further action by the department, and three have been settled. No public
announcements by the department regarding the settlements have been identified, but
it has been reported that the three cases were settled for fines totaling $47,000 and
other considerations including periods during which some registrants were prohibited
from conducting federal lobbying. It is not known whether these cases comprise the
total LDA enforcement effort. Attorneys for the Department of Justice reportedly
contend that the details of any settlements of violations under LDA are protected
from public disclosure by the Privacy Act.25
Current Legislative Proposals
In the 109th Congress, legislative proposals related to lobbying focus on six
broad areas, including
! redefinition of the term “client” under LDA;
! enhanced requirements for electronic filing of lobbying reports and
semiannual reports required under LDA;26
24 Senator Christopher Dodd, remarks during the Senate Committee on Rules and
Administration hearing to examine procedures to make the legislative process more
transparent, Feb. 8, 2006, retrieved through cq.com, at [http://cq.com/display.do?dockey=/
cqonline/prod/data/docs/html/transcripts/congressional/109/congressionaltranscripts109-
000002046780.html@committees&metapub=CQ-CONGTRANSCRIPTS&searchIndex=
0&seqNum=1].
25 Kenneth P. Doyle, “Senate Passed 2,000 Possible LDA Violations To DOJ, Dodd Reports;
DOJ Pursued 13 Cases,” BNA Money and Politics Report, Feb. 14, 2006; Kenneth P. Doyle,
“DOJ Refuses to Disclose Settlements With Those Who Violate Lobbying Law,” BNA Daily
Report for Executives, June 20, 2005; and Kenneth P. Doyle, “Justice Department Reveals
First Cases Settled Under Lobbying Disclosure Statute,”BNA Daily Report for Executives,
Aug. 16, 2005, retrieved from the BNA website.
26 The Office of the Clerk in Dec. 2004 inaugurated a voluntary electronic filing system for
those required to file under LDA. Pursuant to a directive issued by Rep. Bob Ney, chairman
of the Committee on House Administration, the Clerk will only accept electronic filing of
LDA materials after Jan. 1, 2006 (Bob Ney, chairman, Committee on House Administration,
“Electronic Filing of Disclosure Reports,” dear colleague letter, June 29, 2005, at
[http://www.house.gov/cha/dearcolleaguejune29-05.htm]; see also the Clerk’s website at
[http://clerk.house.gov/pd/index.html]). For some time, the Senate Office of Public Records
has maintained a voluntary program of electronic filing “for the purpose of minimizing the
burden of filing” LDA materials (Senate Office of Public Records, “Frequently Asked
Questions,” at [https://opr.senate.gov/faq.html]). Additionally, the Senate makes LDA
(continued...)

CRS-8
! more detailed disclosure of which groups and entities are funding
coalitions and associations;
! more detailed disclosure by lobbyists of the individuals in Congress
and the executive branch whom they contact;
! congressional Rules regarding the interactions of Members and staff
with lobbyists; and
! the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA), as amended.27
as they relate to lobbying activities.
Several measures, addressing issues related principally to lobbying, and
described below, have been introduced in the 109th Congress. Four measures that
have received committee consideration and have been subsequently reported either
to the House or Senate. These measures are
! H.R. 4975, the Lobbying Accountability and Transparency Act of
2006, introduced by Representative David Dreier;
! S. 2349, the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of
2006, introduced by Senator Trent Lott;
! S. 2128, the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of 2006,
introduced by Senator John McCain; and
! H.Res. 648, to eliminate floor privileges and access to Member
exercise facilities for registered lobbyists who are former Members
or officers of the House, introduced by Representative David Dreier.
For further information and analysis of proposals to reform congressional rules
governing ethics and legislative procedures, see CRS Report RL33234, Lobbying
Disclosure and Ethics Proposals Related to Lobbying Introduced in the 109th
Congress: A Comparative Analysis, by R. Eric Petersen; CRS Report RL33237,
Congressional Gifts and Travel, Legislative Proposals for the 109th Congress, by
Mildred Amer; CRS Report RL33295, Comparison of Selected Senate Earmark
Reform Proposals, by Sandy Streeter; and CRS Report RL32954, 527 Political
Organizations: Legislation in the 109th Congress, by Joseph E. Cantor and Erika
Lunder.
26 (...continued)
registration and disclosure reports available through the Internet at [http://sopr.senate.gov/].
27 2 U.S.C. 431.

CRS-9
House Measures
Measures Considered
Status of Proposals Passed by the House. The House passed H.R. 4975
on May 3, 2006 by a vote of 217 – 213. The House passed S. 2349 by unanimous
consent on May 23, 2006, with an amendment that substituted the language of H.R.
4975, as passed by the House. A conference between the chambers to reconcile
differences between the House and Senate versions of the bill is pending. For
detailed discussion and analysis of the consideration of H.R. 4975, see CRS Report
RL33293, Lobbying and Related Reform Proposals: Consideration of Selected
Measures, 109th Congress, by R. Eric Petersen. A comparison of the provisions of
H.R. 4975 as passed by the House and S. 2349 as passed by the Senate is available
in CRS Report RL33326, Lobbying, Ethics and Related Procedural Reforms:
Comparison of Current Provisions of S. 2349 and H.R. 4975, by Jack Maskell, R.
Eric Petersen, and Sandy Streeter.
H.R. 4975, Committee Consideration. During the week of April 3, 2006,
the House Committees on the Judiciary, Rules, House Administration, Government
Reform and Standards of Official Conduct held markups of H.R. 4975, and voted to
report the measure to the House.
Committee on the Judiciary. The Committee on the Judiciary met to
consider H.R. 4975 on April 5. During consideration of the measure, Representative
James Sensenbrenner, chairman of the panel, offered a manager’s amendment, with
the support of Ranking Member Representative John Conyers. The amendment
would
! require disclosure of the date, recipient, and amount of funds
contributed for fund-raising events for federal candidate or
officeholders or their leadership PACs or a political party committee
for whom a fund-raising event was hosted;
! require disclosure of the date, recipient, and amount of funds
contributed or arranged to pay the costs of an event to honor or
recognize a covered legislative branch official or covered executive
branch official; contribute to any entity that is named for a covered
legislative branch official or covered executive branch official, or to
a person or entity in recognition of such an official; contribute to any
entity established, financed, maintained, or controlled by a covered
legislative branch official or covered executive branch official, or an
entity designated by such official; or pay the costs of a meeting,
retreat, conference or other similar event held by, or for the benefit
of, one or more covered legislative branch officials or covered
executive branch officials;
! define leadership PAC as an unauthorized political committee
established, financed, maintained and controlled by a federal
officeholder or candidate for federal office;

CRS-10
! require disclosure of the names of Members of Congress with whom
registrants have had lobbying contacts. The Clerk of the House and
Secretary of the Senate would be required to notify Members of their
respective chambers when an LDA registrant discloses Member
contact;
! require LDA registrants to report their expenses rounded to the
nearest $1,000;
! require the clerk to create and maintain a databases that links LDA
information to the FECA database;
! increase the civil penalty for noncompliance with LDA from
$50,000 to $100,000; and
! establish criminal penalties for knowingly and wilfully failing to
comply with LDA disclosure requirements, punishable by
imprisonment of up to three years. Cases of corrupt failure to
comply with disclosure requirements would carry a potential prison
term of up to five years.
The Sensenbrenner amendment was adopted by voice vote. Other amendments
to H.R. 4975 considered in the Judiciary Committee included the following:
! Representative Martin Meehan offered an amendment to require
grassroots lobbying firms to register under LDA and to disclose an
estimate of income, including those related to paid advertising. The
amendment was ruled not germane.
! Representative Darrell Issa offered an amendment that would have
exempted violations for failure to file disclosures electronically, if
the violation would be subject to a civil fine. After brief debate the
amendment was withdrawn when another Member of the committee
raised a point of order that the amendment was improperly drafted.
! Representative Meehan offered an amendment to prohibit a Member
of Congress or elected officers of either chamber from knowingly
engaging in lobbying activities within two years of leaving office.
The amendment would also prohibit congressional staff members
from lobbying for one year after leaving congressional employment.
The amendment was ruled not germane.
! Representative Chris Van Hollen offered an amendment to require
registered lobbyists to disclose information on any contributions they
solicited and transferred to a candidate or political committee.
Additionally, registered lobbyists who serve as the treasurer of the
election committee of a candidate for a federal office or as treasurer
or chairman of a political committee, would be required to disclose

CRS-11
those affiliations to the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the
House. The amendment was adopted by a vote of 28 - 4.
! Representative Maxine Waters offered an amendment to require
lobbyists to disclose the names of congressional staff members, with
whom lobbying contacts are made. The amendment was adopted by
voice vote.
! Representative Robert Scott offered an amendment to require the
Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a study on
lobbyist employment practices and fee agreements. The amendment
was adopted by voice vote.
The Committee on the Judiciary voted to report H.R. 4975, as amended, to the
House by a vote of 18-16.
Committee on Rules. The Committee on Rules met to markup H.R. 4975
on April 5. The following amendments were considered:
! Representative Shelley Capito offered an amendment authorizing the
Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) to withhold the salaries of
House staff members who do not participate in mandatory ethics
training required in H.R. 4975. Representative James McGovern
offered a second degree amendment to the Capito amendment that
would strike the section of the underlying amendment calling for
staff salaries to be withheld if congressional staffers do not
participate in the mandatory ethics training. The McGovern second
degree amendment was rejected by a voice vote. The Capito
amendment was adopted by voice vote.
! Representative Louise Slaughter offered an amendment to require a
list of any items that were not in either the House- or Senate-passed
versions of a bill to be included in the rule providing for
consideration of a conference report. Additionally, the amendment
would provide for a motion to strike items beyond the scope of a
conference. The amendment was rejected by a vote of 4-9.
! Representative Phil Gingrey offered an amendment to expand the
definition of earmark to include legislative directives to federal
programs. The amendment was adopted by voice vote.
! Representative Slaughter offered an amendment to require a list
published in the Congressional Record of Members who voted or
changed their votes after 30 minutes whenever a recorded vote is
held open for more than 30 minutes. The amendment was rejected
by a vote of 4-9.
! Representative Slaughter offered an amendment to create a new
point of order for the exclusive use of the majority and minority
leaders that could be raised against a conference report when the

CRS-12
integrity of that conference is in question. The amendment was
rejected by a vote of 4-9.
! Representative Slaughter offered an amendment providing that staff
on the Committee of Standards of Official Conduct could be
dismissed only by vote of the committee. The amendment was
rejected by a vote of 4-9.
! Representative McGovern offered an amendment to allow a point of
order to be raised to determine whether the House will consider
conference report if the three-day layover were waived. The
amendment was rejected by a vote of 4-9.
! Representative McGovern offered an amendment to require
members to pay full charter costs when using corporate jets for
official travel and to disclose in the Congressional Record the owner
or lessee of the aircraft and any other passengers on the flight. The
amendment was rejected by a vote of 4-9.
! Representative McGovern offered an amendment to clarify that the
meaning of “face value,” as used in section 304 of H.R. 4975, of a
ticket for a sporting or entertainment event would mean the cost of
that ticket if a member of the general public were purchasing it. The
amendment was rejected by a vote of 4-9.
! Representative Alcee Hastings offered an amendment to mandate
public disclosure of Members who sponsor earmarks in
authorization, appropriation, and tax bills, including whether
Members have a financial interest in the recipient or beneficiary of
the earmark. The amendment was rejected by voice vote.
! Representative Hastings offered an amendment to establish a
pre-approval and disclosure system for privately funded travel, to be
overseen by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. The
amendment was rejected by a vote of 3-8.
! Representative Doris Matsui offered an amendment to require a roll
call vote in an open meeting of conferees, in order to report a
conference report. The amendment was rejected by a vote of 4-7.
! Representative Matsui offered an amendment requiring 24 hours,
instead of one legislative day, as the layover requirement for House
consideration of a rule reported out of the Committee on Rules. The
amendment was rejected by a vote of 4-8.
The Committee on Rules reported H.R. 4975, as amended, to the House by
voice vote.
Committee on Government Reform. The Committee on Government
Reform met to markup H.R. 4975 on April 6. Representative Tom Davis, chairman

CRS-13
of the panel, offered an amendment revoking federal retirement benefits for Members
of Congress, congressional staff, and political appointees in the executive branch,
convicted of certain crimes (including acceptance of bribes, perjury, falsifying
information, embezzlement), punishable by at least one year of imprisonment when
those crimes are committed while employed by the government. The amendment
was adopted by voice vote.
Representative Issa offered two amendments broadening the scope of
government employees affected by pension revocation provisions. Both amendments
were withdrawn after brief debate.
The Committee on Government Reform reported H.R. 4975 to the House by
voice vote.
Committee on House Administration. The committee on House
Administration met to consider H.R. 4975 on April 6. During consideration,
Representative Juanita Millender-McDonald, ranking member of the panel offered
three amendments to regulate the acceptance of privately funded travel by Members
and staff of the House; to create an office of public integrity in the office of the
House Inspector General; and to strike Title VI of H.R. 4975 related to the regulation
of 527 groups. Each of the three amendments were rejected by votes of 2 - 5.
The Committee on House Administration reported the measure to the House
without amendment by a vote of 5 - 2.
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. It has been reported that
the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct met to consider H.R. 4975 on April
6, and voted to report H.R. 4975 without amendment.28
H.Res. 648. On January 31, 2006, Representative David Dreier, chairman of
the Committee on Rules introduced H.Res. 648. On February 1, 2006, the House
adopted the measure under suspension of the Rules, by a vote of 379 - 50, 1 present.
H.Res. 648 amended House Rule IV to deny floor privileges to former
Representatives, House officers, parliamentarians or former minority employees
nominated as an elected officer of the House if they: are a registered lobbyist or agent
of a foreign principal; have any direct personal or pecuniary interest in any legislative
measure pending before the House or reported by a committee; or are employed or
represent any entity for the purpose of influencing, the passage, defeat, or amendment
of any legislative proposal.
The measure also amended House Rule IV to deny access to Member exercise
facilities to any former Member, officers, or their spouses, who is a registered
lobbyist.29
28 “Committee Endorses Lobbying Bill in Closed Session,” CQ Committee Coverage, Apr.
6, 2006, retrieved from cq.com.
29 In addition to H.Res. 648, five other measures with provisions regarding access to House
facilities by former Representatives or other former officials who have floor privileges who
(continued...)

CRS-14
Other Measures Introduced
H.R. 4975, as Introduced. H.R. 4975, the Lobbying Accountability and
Transparency Act of 2006, was introduced by Representative David Dreier on March
16, 2006. Representative Dreier, who is chairman of the Committee on Rules, was
designated by the Speaker to develop legislation related to lobbying and ethics
provisions on behalf of the House majority.30 The measure would amend LDA to
require
29 (...continued)
become lobbyists have been introduced in the 109th Congress. H.Res. 646, introduced on
Jan. 31, 2005, by Rep. Walter B. Jones, would deny admission to the Hall of the House to
former Members who are lobbyists. The measures was referred to the Committee on Rules.
No further action has been taken at the time of this writing. H.Res. 663, introduced on Jan.
31, 2005, by Rep. Vic Snyder, would also deny floor privileges to former Representatives
who lobby. Additionally, the measure would deny former Members who are registered
lobbyists services or facilities provided in House office buildings that are operated for the
exclusive use of Members and former Members. H.Res. 663 was refereed to the
Committees on Rules and House Administration. No further action has been taken at the
time of this writing. H.Res. 659, introduced by Rep. David Obey on Jan. 31, 2006, would
require former officials with floor privileges to sign a statement that the have no direct
personal or pecuniary interest in any legislative measure pending before the House or
reported by a committee; that they are not employed as a lobbyist or represent any party or
organization for the purpose of influencing legislation in the House; and that they will not
lobby for the passage, amendment, or defeat of any legislative measure pending before the
House, reported by a committee, or under consideration in any of its committees or
subcommittees. The measure was referred to the Committee on Rules, and in addition to
the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, for a period to be subsequently determined
by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned. H.R. 4682, the Honest Leadership and Open
Government Act of 2006, introduced Feb. 1, 2006, by Rep. Nancy Pelosi, and described in
greater detail below, would amend House Rule IV to deny floor privileges to former
Representatives, House officers, parliamentarians or former minority employees nominated
as an elected officer of the House if they are a registered lobbyist or agent of a foreign
principal; have any direct personal or pecuniary interest in any legislative measure pending
before the House or reported by a committee; or are employed or represent any entity for the
purpose of influencing, the passage, defeat, or amendment of any legislative proposal. The
measure would also amended House Rule IV to deny access to Member exercise facilities
to any former Member who is a registered lobbyist. No further action has been taken at the
time of this writing. H.R. 4696, introduced by Rep. Mike Rogers of Michigan on Feb. 1,
2005, and described below, would also suspend floor privileges to former Members who are
registered as lobbyists. The measure was referred to the Committees on Government
Reform, House Administration, Rules, and Resources, for a period to be subsequently
determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within
the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. No further action has been taken at the time
of this writing.
30 “House Speaker Hastert and Rep. Dreier Hold News Conference on Lobbying Reform,”
transcript, CQ.com, Jan. 17, 2006, at [http://www.cq.com/display.do?dockey=/
c q o n l i n e / p r o d / d a t a / d o c s / h t m l / t r a n s c r i p t s / n e w s m a k e r / 1 0 9 /
newsmakertranscripts109-000002036139.html@committees&metapub=CQ-TRANSCRI
PTS&searchIndex=1&seqNum=15].

CRS-15
! quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying disclosure
reports;
! reduction of the thresholds for which registration and disclosure is
required, from $5,000 to $2,500 for a lobbying firm and from
$20,000 to $10,000 for an an organization whose employees engage
in lobbying activities on its own behalf;
! reduction of the increments in which lobbying expenditures may be
estimated, from less than $10,000 to less than $5,000, or in larger
increments, from $20,000 to $10,000;
! electronic filing of lobbying registrations and disclosure reports;
! creation and maintenance by the Clerk and the Secretary of a
searchable, sortable, and downloadable database containing LDA
registration and disclosure information, made available through the
Internet;
! disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch and
congressional employment in the past seven years.
H.R. 4975 would amend LDA to require disclosure by lobbyists of any
contributions made to federal candidates, officeholders, leadership PACs, political
party committees or other entity which would be subject to disclosure under FECA.
Lobbyists would also be required to disclose any gifts that count toward the annual
gift limit established by House rules. The measure would increase the civil penalty
for failure to comply with lobbying disclosure requirements up to $100,000.
Registered lobbyists would be prohibited from traveling in corporate aircraft on
which a Member of the House travels.
H.R. 4975 would authorize the Inspector General of the House to audit LDA
disclosure information, and to refer potential violations of the act to the Department
of Justice. The measure provides for ongoing reviews and annual reports by the
inspector general on activities carried out by the Clerk of the House under LDA.31
31 In addition to provisions related to lobbying, H.R. 4975 would require notification by
the House to former Members, officers and senior staff of the beginning and ending
date of post employment restrictions mandated under 18 U.S.C. 207. A Member of
the House who is negotiating for prospective employment in which he or she has a
conflict of interest, or for which there is the appearance of a conflict of interest, must
make a statement within five days after commencing such negotiations to the
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Members of the House, House officers,
and employees would be prohibited from wrongfully influencing, on a partisan basis, any
entity’s employment decisions or practices. Privately funded travel would be suspended
under the measure, and the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct required to develop
guidelines regarding the use of such travel in the House. House gift rules would be amended
to include requirements for the valuation of tickets to sporting and entertainment events.
Frequent and comprehensive training on ethics would be required for existing and new
(continued...)

CRS-16
H.R. 4975 was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the
Committees on House Administration, Rules, Government Reform, and Standards
of Official Conduct, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
H.R. 5036. H.R. 5036, the Full Disclosure in Lobbying Act , was
introduced by Delegate Madeleine Bordallo on March 29, 2006. The measure would
amend LDA to require the disclosure of the original source of funds made payable
to any lobbyist who is subcontracted to lobby on behalf of a third party. The measure
would also require disclosure of the identity of the third party.
H.R. 4948. H.R. 4948, the Ethics Reform Act of 2006, was introduced by
Representative Earl Blumenauer on March 14, 2006. The measure would amend
LDA to
! transfer authority to receive LDA registrations and reports from the
Clerk and the Secretary to an independent ethics commission in the
legislative branch created by the measure;32
! require quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying
disclosure reports; and
! require electronic filing of LDA registrations and reports, and for
those reports to be made available to the public through the Internet.
H.R. 4948 was referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in
addition to the Committees on Rules, and the Judiciary, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such
provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. No further
action has been taken as of the time of this writing.
31 (...continued)
house staff, with Members of the House encourages to participate in such training. H.R.
4975 would require the biennial publication of an ethics manual. See CRS Report RL33234,
Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Proposals Related to Lobbying Introduced in the 109th
Congress: A Comparative Analysis, by R. Eric Petersen; and CRS Report RL33237,
Congressional Gifts and Travel, Legislative Proposals for the 109th Congress, by Mildred
Amer. The measure would rescind pensions accrued by a Member of Congress during their
time in office upon a conviction of certain offenses that occurred while the Member served
in Congress.
The measure also makes changes to provisions of FECA related to 527 organizations.
See CRS Report RL32954, 527 Political Organizations: Legislation in the 109th Congress,
by Joseph E. Cantor and Erika Lunder.
32 H.R. 4948 would also terminate the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. The
commission would investigate any alleged violation of chamber rules or other standards of
conduct by Members of the House or House employees; provide advisory opinions on ethics
matters to Members of the House and their staff, and establish an office on advice and
education.

CRS-17
H.R. 4920. H.R. 4920, the Accountability and Transparency in Ethics Act, was
introduced on March 9, 2006 by Representative Michael Castle. The measure would
amend LDA to
! transfer responsibility for receiving LDA registrations and reports
from the Clerk to the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct;
! require quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying
disclosure reports;
! require electronic filing of LDA registrations and reports, and for
those reports to be made available to the public through the Internet;
and
! establish a civil fine of not more $50,000 for any registrant or
lobbyist who attempts to offer a gift to a Member of the House in
violation of House gift rules.
The measure would also prohibit former Members officers, or employees of
Congress from lobbying any current Member, officer or employee for a period of one
year after they leave office or terminate employment.33 H.R. 4920 was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on House
Administration and Rules, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker,
in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned. No further action has been taken as of the time of this writing.
H.R. 4799. H.R. 4799, to establish a legislative branch office of public
integrity, was introduced by Representative Christopher Shays on February 16, 2006.
The measure would establish an office of public integrity within the legislative
branch, overseen by a director appointed jointly by the Speaker and minority leader
of the House, and the majority and minority leaders of the Senate. The office would
! receive, monitor, and oversee financial disclosure and other reports
filed by Members, congressional officers, and their staff under the
Ethics in Government Act of 197834, and reports filed by registered
lobbyists under LDA;
! investigate any alleged violation, of any rule or other standard of
conduct;
33 In addition to the lobbying provisions, H.R. 4920 would create an independent ethics
commission within the legislative branch to investigate any alleged violation of chamber
rules or other standards of conduct by Members of the House or House employees. The
measure would make changes in House rules regarding the duties of the Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct, and require annual ethics training for Members and staff of
the House. H.R. 4920 would amend House rules to require advanced authorization by the
Standards Committee of any privately funded travel to be undertaken by a Member of the
House.
34 Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 5 U.S.C. Appendix Sec. 401.

CRS-18
! present a case of probable ethics violations to the Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct of the House of Representatives or the
Senate Select Committee on Ethics, as appropriate;
! make recommendations to the appropriate ethics committee that it
report any substantial evidence of a violation by a Member, officer,
or employee of the House or the Senate of any law applicable to the
performance of his duties that may have been disclosed in an
investigation by the office;
! provide information and informal guidance to Members,
congressional officers, and their staff regarding any rules and other
standards of conduct applicable in their official capacities;
! give consideration to the request of any Members, congressional
officers, and their staff for a formal advisory opinion, subject to the
review of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the
House of Representatives or the Senate Select Committee on Ethics,
as appropriate, with respect to the general propriety of any current or
proposed conduct;
! conduct periodic and random reviews and audits of reports filed with
it to ensure compliance with all applicable laws and rules; and
! provide informal guidance to lobbying registrants of their
responsibilities under LDA.
Under the measure, the office would have authority to refer potential violations
of LDA to the Department of Justice, and to audit LDA registrations and disclosure
reports. LDA would be amended to require electronic filing of registration and
disclosure reports, which would be made available in a searchable database
accessible through the Internet.35
H.R. 4799 was referred to the Committee on House Administration, and in
addition to the Committees on Rules and the Judiciary, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such
provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned. No further
action has been taken as of the time of this writing.
H.R. 4787. H.R. 4787, the Truth-in-Lobbying Disclosure Act, was introduced
by Representative John Doolittle on February 16, 2006. The measure would amend
LDA to require the disclosure of any federal funds received through grants, contracts,
35 In addition to provisions affecting lobbying disclosure, H.R. 4799 would also make
several changes to current procedures for consideration of ethics complaints against
Members of Congress, including an expansion of who may file a complaint, processes for
investigating claims of chamber rules violations, and interactions between the office and the
House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and the Senate Select Committee on
Ethics.

CRS-19
or other sources by a client other than a state, during a semiannual reporting period.
Any funds received by reason of a provision in an appropriations act that specifies
the entity and the amount received, or specifies a project in a state or congressional
district would also be subject to LDA disclosure. H.R. 4787 was referred to the
House Committee on the Judiciary. No further action has been taken at the time of
this writing.
H.R. 4738. H.R. 4738, the Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress
Act of 2006, was introduced by Representative Mark Udall on February 8, 2006. A
similar measure, S. 2186, described below, was introduced in the House by Senator
Norm Coleman on January 25, 2006. H.R. 4738 would not change current lobbying
laws and regulations, but would establish a commission to strengthen confidence in
Congress through an evaluation of current congressional rules related to
congressional interactions with various lobbying activities. A bipartisan, 10 member
commission would be appointed by the majority and minority leadership of each
chamber. The commission would be charged to
! evaluate and report the effectiveness of current congressional ethics
requirements;
! weigh the need for improved ethical conduct with the need for
lawmakers to have access to expertise on public policy issues;
! determine and report minimum standards relating to official travel
for Members of Congress and staff;
! evaluate the range of gifts given to Members of Congress and staff,
determine and report the effects on public policy, and make
recommendations for limits on gifts;
! evaluate and report the effectiveness and transparency of
congressional disclosure laws and recommendations for
improvements;
! assess and report the effectiveness of the ban on Member of
Congress and staff from lobbying their former office for one year
and make recommendations for altering the time frame;
! make recommendations to improve the process whereby Members
of Congress can earmark priorities in appropriations acts, while still
preserving congressional power of the purse;
! evaluate the use of public and privately funded travel by Members
of Congress and staff, violations of congressional rules governing
travel, and make recommendations on limiting travel; and
! investigate and report to Congress on its findings, conclusions, and
recommendations for reform.

CRS-20
H.R. 4738 was referred to the Committee on House Administration. No further
action has been taken at the time of this writing.
H.R. 4696. Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan introduced H.R. 4696,
the Restoring Trust in Government Act, on February 1, 2006. The measure proposes
! creation of an independent commission on lobbying and in the
legislative branch composed of four members, with the Speaker and
minority leader of the House, and the majority and minority leaders
of the Senate each appointing one for a term of two years;
! development of a fee-based funding process under which LDA
registrants would be required to pay reasonable fees to cover the
estimated costs of operating the commission;
! requirements that each LDA registrant file with the commission
monthly reports in electronic form that cover lobbying activities that
relate to Congress, and that the commission post those disclosures
on the Internet; and
! enactment of a four-year ban on former federal employees lobbying
Congress after they terminate their government employment.
H.R. 4696 would extend current statutory provisions that prevent Members of
Congress from lobbying any Member or committee for one year to all senior
legislative branch staff. The measure would amend LDA to impose a prison term of
up to one year for failing to comply with disclosure requirements. H.R. 4696 would
also suspend House floor privileges for former Members who become lobbyists
subject to LDA registration. The measure was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Government Reform, House
Administration, Rules, and Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by
the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned. On February 9, the Committee on
Resources requested executive comment on sections of the bill that are unrelated to
lobbying law.36 No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
H.R. 4682. Representative Nancy Pelosi, who is the House Minority Leader,
introduced H.R. 4682, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2006 on
February 1, 2006. The measure would amend LDA to require
! quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying disclosure
reports;
36 In addition to the lobbying-related proposals, H.R. 4696 would amend congressional
financial disclosure regulations to permit random audits, and create an independent
commission to approve all congressional travel. The measure also address matters related
to Indian gambling and campaign finance statutes.

CRS-21
! electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure reports filed
with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House of
Representatives;
! reduction of the increments in which lobbying expenditures may be
estimated in larger increments, from $20,000 to $1,000;
! disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch and
congressional employment;
! establishment and maintenance by the Clerk and Secretary of
lobbying disclosure information in an electronic database that
directly links lobbying disclosure information to the information
disclosed in reports filed with the Federal Election Commission
(FEC) under FECA, and made available to the public free of charge
through the Internet, and to make those reports available within 48
hours of filing;
! disclosure by registrants, and their employees who work as lobbyist,
of any contributions made under FECA; and
! disclosure of grassroots lobbying communications by paid lobbyists
and itemized disclosure of expenditures on grassroots lobbying
activities. In the event that a grassroots lobbyist receives or spends
$250,000 or more for grassroots lobbying activities, an additional
report must be made within 20 days.
H.R. 4682 would require members of coalitions or associations that employ a
lobbyist, and not the coalition or association, to be listed as the clients of the
registrant lobbyist. H.R. 4682 provides an exception for tax-exempt associations and
for some members of a coalition or association if those members expect to contribute
less than $500 per any quarterly period to the lobbying activities of the coalition.
The measure would also require registrants to certify that the registrant and
lobbyists they employ have not provided a gift, directly or indirectly, to a Member
of the House in violation of House Rule XXV; a contribution to an event to honor a
covered legislative branch official or an entity named after or controlled by a covered
official in the legislative or executive branches; or to pay the costs of a retreat or
other gathering of more than one covered official from the legislative or executive
branches.
H.R. 4682 would establish an Office of Public Integrity within the House Office
of Inspector General. The office would receive LDA registrations and disclosure
reports, and conduct audits and investigations necessary to ensure compliance with
LDA. A director of the office would be appointed by the Inspector General. The
office would have the authority to refer violations of LDA to the United States
Attorney for the District of Columbia for disciplinary action.
H.R. 4682 would eliminate floor privileges and access to Member exercise
facilities to former Representatives who become lobbyists. The measure would

CRS-22
increase the civil penalty for failure to comply with lobbying disclosure requirements
up to $100,000.37 In addition, H.R. 4682 would establish criminal penalties for
noncompliance with LDA. Knowing and willful failure to comply with registration
requirements would be punishable by fines, a term of imprisonment up to five years,
or both. Whoever knowingly willfully, and corruptly fails to comply with LDA
disclosure requirements would be subject to fines, a term of imprisonment up to 10
years, or both. H.R. 4682 would extend the ban preventing former senior executive
personnel, former Members of Congress, and legislative branch personnel from
lobbying the entity in which they previously served from one to two years. The
measure was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the
Committees on Rules, Government Reform, Standards of Official Conduct, Armed
Services, and House Administration, for a period to be subsequently determined by
the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the
jurisdiction of the committee concerned.38 No further action has been taken at the
time of this writing.
H.R. 4671. H.R. 4671, the Clarity in Lobbying Act, was introduced by
Representative Scott Garrett on January 31, 2006. The measure would require LDA
registrants to disclose any gifts given to a covered legislative branch official. H.R.
4671 was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. No further action has been
taken at the time of this writing.
H.R. 4670. H.R. 4670, the Keep Lobbying Clean act, was introduced by
Representative Scott Garrett on January 31, 2006. The measure would prohibit
anyone convicted of a felony under federal, state or local law from lobbying. Failure
to abide by the prohibition would be subject to imprisonment for up to one year and
37 S. 2180 would require a number of other changes to laws and rules governing
congressional ethics that are not directly related to lobbying disclosure. These include
requiring public disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations; the
establishment of fines and penalties for Member of Congress who wrongfully influence, on
a partisan basis, any entity’s employment decisions or practices; amendments to Senate
Rules to prohibit favoritism; requiring the Senate Select Committee on Ethics to develop and
revise guidelines on reasonable expenditures for official government travel; requiring
certification that congressional travel meets certain conditions, and establishing civil fines
for false certifications.
38 H.R. 4682 requires a number of other changes to laws and rules governing congressional
ethics that are not directly related to lobbying disclosure. These include requiring public
disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations; the establishment of fines
and penalties for Member of Congress or employees of the House who wrongfully influence,
on a partisan basis, any entity’s employment decisions or practices; amendments to the
House Code of Official Conduct to prohibit favoritism; requiring the House Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct to develop and revise guidelines on reasonable expenditures
for official government travel; requiring certification that congressional travel meets certain
conditions, and establishing civil fines for false certifications. Additionally, H.R. 4682
would require changes in House operations elated to the congressional legislative
workweek, time to read measures before they are considered on the floor and procedural
changes in conference committees. Finally, H.R. 4682 would establish minimum
requirements for executive branch appointees in certain public safety positions, and make
changes to public contracting provisions.

CRS-23
a civil fine up to $50,000 or the amount of compensation which the person received
or offered for the prohibited conduct, whichever is greater. H.R. 4670 was referred
to the Committee on the Judiciary. No further action has been taken at the time of
this writing.
H.R. 4667. H.R. 4667, the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of
2006 was introduced by Representative Michael Fitzpatrick on January 31, 2006.
The measure would amend LDA to require
! quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying disclosure
reports;
! electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure reports filed
with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House of
Representatives;
! reduction of the thresholds for which registration and disclosure is
required, from $5,000 to $2,500 for a lobbying firm and from
$20,000 to $10,000 for an an organization whose employees engage
in lobbying activities on its own behalf;
! reduction of the increments in which lobbying expenditures may be
estimated, from less than $10,000 to less than $5,000, or in larger
increments, from $20,000 to $10,000;
! disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch and
congressional employment;
! establishment and maintenance of lobbying disclosure information
in an electronic data base which directly links lobbying disclosure
information to the information disclosed in reports filed with the
FEC under FECA, and made available to the public free of charge
through the Internet; and
! disclosure of grassroots lobbying communications by paid lobbyists
and itemized disclosure of expenditures on grassroots lobbying
activities.
H.R.4667 would amend LDA to redefine the term “client” as any person or
entity that employs a lobbyist on behalf of that person or entity. The measure
requires that firms and other entities that are members of coalitions or associations
that employ a lobbyist, are to be considered clients, along with the coalition or
association, if their total contribution related to lobbying activities is greater than
$10,000.
The measure would increase the civil penalty for failure to comply with
lobbying disclosure requirements up to $100,000. H.R. 4667 provides for reviews
and semiannual reports by the Comptroller General on activities carried out by the
Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate under LDA. Additionally, a
current ban on former senior executive personnel, former Members of Congress, and

CRS-24
legislative branch personnel, preventing them from lobbying the entity in which they
previously served, would be extended from one to two years.39
H.R. 4667 was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the
Committees on Standards of Official Conduct, Rules, Resources, and Government
Reform, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee
concerned.40 No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
H.R. 4575. On December 16, 2005, Representative Christopher Shays
introduced H.R. 4575, the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of 2005,
which would require
! quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying disclosure
reports;
! reduction of the thresholds for which registration and disclosure is
required, from $5,000 to $2,500 for a lobbying firm and from
$20,000 to $10,000 for an an organization whose employees engage
in lobbying activities on its own behalf;
! disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch and
congressional employment;
! reduction of the increments in which lobbying expenditures may be
estimated, from less than $10,000 to less than $5,000, or in larger
increments, from $20,000 to $10,000;
! electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure reports filed
with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House of
Representatives;
! establishment and maintenance of lobbying disclosure information
in an electronic database that directly links lobbying disclosure
information to the information disclosed in reports filed with the
39 H.R. 3623, introduced by Rep. Robert Andrews on July 29, 2005, would increase the
“cooling off”period to five years after the Member leaves office during which former
Members of Congress may not lobby, or appear or communicate with intent to influence any
matter before any Member, officer or employee of the entire legislative branch. The
measure was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
40 H.R. 4667 would require a number of other changes to laws and rules governing
congressional ethics that are not directly related to lobbying disclosure. These include
requiring public disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations; a ban on
privately funded travel for Members of Congress, and enhanced disclosure requirements
regarding gifts given by lobbyists to Members of Congress and congressional staff.
Additionally, the measure would institute House Rules changes related to the use of
earmarks and the availability of measures pending floor consideration , and clarify statutes
regarding the use of federal funds for political activity.

CRS-25
FEC under FECA and made available to the public free of charge
through the Internet; and
! disclosure of grassroots lobbying communications by paid lobbyists
and itemized disclosure of expenditures on grassroots lobbying
activities. In the event that a grassroots lobbyist receives or spends
$250,000 or more for grassroots lobbying activities, an additional
report must be made within 20 days.
H.R. 4575 would amend LDA to redefine the term “client” as any person or
entity that employs a lobbyist to carry out lobbying or grass roots lobbying activities
on behalf of that person or entity. The measure requires that firms and other entities
that are members of coalitions or associations that employ a lobbyist are to be
considered clients, along with the coalition or association, if their total contribution
related to lobbying activities is greater than $10,000.
H.R. 4575 would increase the civil penalty for failure to comply with lobbying
disclosure requirements up to $100,000. The measure provides for reviews and
semiannual reports by the Comptroller General on activities carried out by the Clerk
of the House and the Secretary of the Senate under LDA. Additionally, the ban on
former senior executive personnel, former Members of Congress, and legislative
branch personnel preventing them from lobbying the entity in which they previously
served would be extended from one to two years.41 H.R. 4575 was referred to the
Committee on the Judiciary, and Committees on Standards of Official Conduct,
Rules, and Resources for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in
each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the
committee concerned. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
H.R. 2412. H.R. 2412, the Special Interest Lobbying and Ethics Accountability
Act of 2005, was introduced by Representative Martin Meehan on May 17, 2005.42
The measure would amend LDA to require
! quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying disclosure
reports;
! electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure reports filed
with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House of
Representatives;
41 H.R. 4575 requires a number of other changes to laws and rules governing congressional
ethics that are not directly related to lobbying disclosure. These include requiring public
disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations; and increased disclosure
of travel by Members of Congress. The measure also specifies the valuation of tickets to
sporting and entertainment events provided to covered executive and legislative branch
officials.
42 A section-by-section discussion of the provisions of H.R. 2412 is available in CRS Report
RS22226, Summary and Analysis of Provisions of H.R. 2412, the Special Interest Lobbying
and Ethics Accountability Act of 2005, by Jack Maskell.

CRS-26
! establishment and maintenance of lobbying disclosure information
in an electronic data base which directly links lobbying disclosure
information to the information disclosed in reports filed with the
FEC under FECA, and made available to the public free of charge
through the Internet;
! identification of each executive branch official and Member of
Congress with whom lobbying contacts are made, on an issue-by-
issue basis, for each covered official contacted;
! disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch and
congressional employment; and
! disclosure of grassroots lobbying communications by paid lobbyists
and itemized disclosure of expenditures on grassroots lobbying
activities.
H.R. 2412 would amend LDA to redefine the term “client” as any person or
entity that employs a lobbyist on behalf of that person or entity. The measure
requires that firms and other entities that are members of coalitions or associations
that employ a lobbyist, are to be considered clients, along with the coalition or
association, if their total contribution related to lobbying activities is greater than
$10,000.
The measure would increase the civil penalty for failure to comply with
lobbying disclosure requirements up to $100,000. H.R. 2412 provides for reviews
and semiannual reports by the Comptroller General on activities carried out by the
Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate under LDA. Additionally, a
current ban on former senior executive personnel, former Members of Congress, and
legislative branch personnel, preventing them from lobbying the entity in which they
previously served, would be extended from one to two years.
H.R. 2412 was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, the Committees on
Standards of Official Conduct, and the Committee on Rules, for a period to be
subsequently determined by the Speaker, for consideration of those provisions that
fall within the jurisdiction of each committee.43 No further action has been taken at
the time of this writing.
43 H.R. 2412 requires a number of other changes to laws and rules governing congressional
ethics that are not directly related to lobbying disclosure. These include requiring public
disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations; the establishment of fines
and penalties for Member of Congress or employees of the House who wrongfully influence,
on a partisan basis, any entity’s employment decisions or practices; amendments to the
House Code of Official Conduct to prohibit favoritism; requiring the House Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct to develop and revise guidelines on reasonable expenditures
for official government travel; requiring certification that congressional travel meets certain
conditions, and establishing civil fines for false certifications. Finally, H.R. 2412 would
require the appointment of a bipartisan ethics task force in the House to make
recommendations on strengthening ethics oversight and enforcement, and providing the
resources necessary to accomplish that goal.

CRS-27
H.R. 1302 and H.R. 1304. On March 15, 2005, Representative Lloyd
Doggett introduced H.R. 1302, and H.R. 1304, both entitled the Stealth Lobbyist
Disclosure Act of 2005. H.R. 1302 would amend LDA to redefine the term “client”
as any person or entity that employs a lobbyist on behalf of that person or entity. The
measure would require members of coalitions or associations that employ a lobbyist,
and not the coalition or association, to be listed as the clients of the registrant
lobbyist. H.R. 1302 provides an exception for tax-exempt associations and for some
members of a coalition or association if those members expect to contribute less than
$1,000 per any semiannual period to the lobbying activities of the coalition. The
measure was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, Subcommittee on the
Constitution. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
H.R. 1304 would amend the Internal Revenue Code to treat any coalition or
association that is identified as a client on an LDA registration as a tax-exempt
political organization. Any such coalition or association would be required to notify
the Secretary of the Treasury of its existence within 72 hours after one of its lobbyists
makes an initial contact, and to report any change in its membership within 72 hours.
Reports to the Secretary of the Treasury would include a general description of the
business or activities of each member of the coalition or association, and the amount
each coalition member is expected to contribute to influencing legislation. H.R. 1304
would exempt from the disclosure requirements public charities and other tax-exempt
organizations which have substantial exempt activities other than lobbying, and
coalition or association members who contribute less than $2,000 per year for
lobbying activities. Finally, the measure would impose a penalty tax for failure to
give the required notices. H.R. 1304 was referred to the Committee on Ways and
Means. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
H.Res. 81. H.Res. 81, introduced by Representative Mark Green on February
2, 2005, would require the Clerk of the House of Representatives to post on the
Internet lobbying registration and reports filed with the Clerk under the Lobbying
Disclosure Act of 1995.44 The measure was referred to the Committee on the
Judiciary, and subsequently to the Subcommittee on the Constitution. No further
action has been taken at the time of this writing.
Senate Measures
Measures Considered
S. 2349, Senate Consideration. The Senate passed S. 2349, the Legislative
Transparency and Accountability Act of 2006 by a vote of 90 - 8 on March 9, 2006.
On May 23, the Senate disagreed to the House amendments to the measure, requested
44 The Senate Office of Public Records, an entity within the Office of the Secretary of the
Senate, provides access to LDA registration and semiannual reports through the Internet at
[http://sopr.senate.gov/].

CRS-28
a conference, and appointed conferees.45 For detailed discussion and analysis of the
consideration of S. 2349, see CRS Report RL33293, Lobbying and Related Reform
Proposals: Consideration of Selected Measures, 109th Congress, by R. Eric Petersen.
A comparison of the provisions of H.R. 4975 as passed by the House and S. 2349
as passed by the Senate is available in CRS Report RL33326, Lobbying, Ethics and
Related Procedural Reforms: Comparison of Current Provisions of S. 2349 and H.R.
4975, by Jack Maskell, R. Eric Petersen, and Sandy Streeter.
S. 2349, Committee Consideration. On February 28, 2006, the Senate
Committee on Rules and Administration marked up an original measure, the
Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2006. The measure was reported
to the Senate by an 18-0 vote. Introduced in the Senate on March 1, and numbered
S. 2349, the measure amends Senate rules governing the interaction of Senators and
Senate staff with lobbyists, and makes several changes regarding Senate procedures
thought to be subject to influence by lobbyists. As reported by the committee, S.
2349 would
! amend Senate rules to prohibit for one year any former Senate
senior-level employee46 who served on the staff of a Senator or of a
Senate committee, and who subsequently becomes a registered
lobbyist or lobbyist employee for the purpose of influencing
legislation, from lobbying any Senator, officer, or employee of the
Senate;
! require a Senator to file with the Secretary of the Senate, a statement
for public disclosure that he or she is negotiating or has any
arrangement concerning prospective employment if a conflict of
interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest may exist. The
disclosure would be required to file a disclosure within three days of
commencing such negotiation or arrangement;
! require a Senator or Senate staff member to obtain written
certification before undertaking any travel that the trip was not
financed in whole, or in part, by a registered lobbyist or foreign
agent, and that the provider did not accept funds from a registered
lobbyist or foreign agent specifically earmarked for the purpose of
financing the travel expenses. A Senator would be required to
provide the Select Committee on Ethics a written, detailed itinerary
of the trip; and a determination that the trip is primarily educational;
consistent with the official duties of the Member, officer, or
employee; does not create an appearance of use of public office for
private gain; and has a minimal or no recreational component;
45 Ibid., p. S5027.
46 The proposal would affect Senate staff who worked for a Senator or Senate committee and
whose rate of pay was equal to or greater than 75 percent of the rate of pay of a Senator for
more than 60 days in a calendar year. Senators are paid $165,200. Senate staff who earned
more than $2,382.69 or more per week for more than nine weeks, or $123,900 per year,
would be subject to the post employment restriction proposal.

CRS-29
! require written approval of privately funded travel from the Select
Committee on Ethics. Within 30 days of completing the travel, a
Senator, officer, or employee would be required to file with the
Select Committee on Ethics and the Secretary of the Senate a
description of meetings and events attended during such travel and
the names of any registered lobbyist who accompanied them, subject
to limited exception on national security grounds. The measure
would require that trip information be posted on the Senator’s
official website not later than 30 days after the completion of the
travel;
! amend Senate rules to require the disclosure of noncommercial air
travel taken in connection with the duties of the Member, officer, or
employee, and file a report with the Secretary of the Senate,
including the date, destination, and owner or lessee of the aircraft,
the purpose of the trip, and the persons on the trip, except for any
person flying the aircraft;
! amend Senate rules to prohibit Senators from accepting gifts from
lobbyists. Senators and Senate staff could accept a meal or other
food from lobbyists subject to gift rule limits. Any food gift
accepted would be subject to public disclosure through the Senator’s
website;
! amend Senate rules to revoke floor privileges from any former
Senator, Senator-elect, Secretary of the Senate, Sergeant at Arms of
the Senate, or Speaker of the House who is a registered lobbyist or
agent of a foreign principal, or is an employee or representative of
any party or organization for the purpose of influencing, the passage,
defeat, or amendment of any legislative proposal; and
! require a Senator whose spouse or immediate family member47 is a
registered lobbyist or employees of a registrant under LDA for the
purpose of influencing legislation to prohibit all staff employed by
the Senator, including staff in personal, committee, and leadership
offices, from having any official contact with the family member.
S. 2349 would also allow any Senator to make a point of order against
consideration of a conference report that includes any matter not committed to the
conferees by either House. The point of order could be made and voted on separately
for each item alleged to be in violation. The point of order could be waived or
suspended by an affirmative vote of 3/5 of the Members, duly chosen and sworn. The
Senate could appeal a ruling of the Chair on a point of order raised under this
measure by a 3/5 vote.
47 Under the measure, immediate family member would mean the son, daughter, stepson,
stepdaughter, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, mother, father, stepmother, stepfather,
mother-in-law, father-in-law, brother, sister, stepbrother, or stepsister of the Senator.

CRS-30
Additionally, the measure would amend Senate rules, creating Rule XLIV
regarding earmarks. An earmark would be defined as a provision that specifies the
identity of a non-federal entity to receive assistance in the form of budget authority;
contract authority; loan authority; and other expenditures; or other revenue items, and
the amount of the assistance. Before consideration of any bill, amendment or
conference report could be in order, a list identifying all earmarks in the measure,
along with identification of the Senator(s) who proposed them, and an explanation
of the essential governmental purpose for the earmark must be made available, along
with any joint statement of managers associated with the measure, to all Senators
and made available on the Internet to the general public for at least 24 hours before
its consideration. Similarly, S. 2349 would amend Senate rules to require that
conference reports be available on the Internet 24 hours before consideration.
The measure would also amend Senate rules to prohibit a Senator from taking
or withholding, or threatening to take or withhold an official act, or to influence or
offer or threaten to influence the official act of another with the intent to influence
on the basis of partisan political affiliation an employment decision or employment
practice of any private entity. Finally, S. 2349 would establish the sense of the
Senate that any restrictions on legislative branch employees should apply to the
executive and judicial branches.
S. 2128, Committee Consideration. On March 2, 2006, the Senate
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs marked up S. 2128, the
Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of 2005 introduced by Senator John
McCain, and voted 13-1 to report the measure as amended to the Senate. As
reported, S. 2128 would amend LDA to
! further define a client as any person or entity that participates in a
substantial way in planning, supervision or control of lobbying
activities. Disclosure would not be required if a connection between
the person or entity and the client is public knowledge, unless the
person or entity plans supervises or controls lobbying activities;
! further define lobbying activities to include paid efforts to stimulate
grassroots lobbying but that do not include grassroots lobbying;
! define grassroots lobbying to mean the voluntary efforts of members
of the general public to communicate their views on an issue to
federal officials, or to encourage other Members of the public to do
the same;
! define grassroots lobbyist to mean any individual who is retained by
a client to engage in grassroots lobbying, and who is paid $25,000
or more in each quarterly period;
! define paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying as any paid
attempt in support of lobbying contacts on behalf of a client to
influence more than 500 members of the general public to contact
one or more covered official to urge those officials (or Congress) to
take specific action on an issue. The measure excludes

CRS-31
communications from an entity to its members, employees, officers,
or shareholders;
! require quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying
disclosure reports;
! require disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch
and congressional employment;
! require electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure
reports filed with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the
House of Representatives;
! reduce of the thresholds for which registration and disclosure are
required from $5,000 to $2,500 for a lobbying firm, and from
$20,000 to $10,000 for an an organization whose employees engage
in lobbying activities on its own behalf;
! reduce the increments in which lobbying expenditures may be
estimated, from less than $10,000 to less than $5,000, or in larger
increments, from $20,000 to $10,000. Grassroots lobbyists would
be subject to disclosure ranges of less than $10,000, less than
$25,000, and increments above $25,000, rounded to the nearest
$20,000;
! require good faith estimates of the proportion of the total amount
spent on grassroots lobbying activities, and within that amount, the
total amount specifically relating to grassroots lobbying through paid
advertising;
! require electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure
reports filed with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the
House of Representatives;
! require the establishment and maintenance of lobbying disclosure
information in an electronic database that directly links lobbying
disclosure information to the information disclosed in reports filed
with the FEC under FECA and made available to the public free of
charge through the Internet;
! require registrants and lobbyists to file a report disclosing their
name, employer, and the name of each federal candidate or
officeholder, leadership PAC, or political party committee to whom
a contribution of $200 or more was made, or for whom a fund-
raising event was hosted or otherwise sponsored;
! require disclosure within 30 days of travel the name of each covered
official for whom a registrant or lobbyist employee provided or
arranged any payment or reimbursement for travel, including an
itemization of payments or reimbursements provided the purpose

CRS-32
and final itinerary of the trip, the names of registrants or employees
who were on the trip, the identity of the trip sponsor, and the identity
of any person or entity other than the sponsor who provided direct
or indirect payment for the travel;
! require disclosure of the date, recipient, and amount of funds
contributed or arranged by a registrant or registrant employee to pay
the costs of; an event to honor or recognize a covered legislative
branch official or covered executive branch official; contributions to,
or on behalf of, an entity that is named for a covered legislative
branch official or covered executive branch official, or to a person
or entity in recognition of such official; an entity established,
financed, maintained, or controlled by a covered legislative branch
official or covered executive branch official, or an entity designated
by such official; or to pay the costs of a meeting, retreat, conference
or other similar event held by, or for the benefit of one or more
covered official; and
! prohibit a registered lobbyist from making a gift or providing travel
to any Member of Congress or their staff.
S. 2128 as reported would require the Clerk and the Secretary to provide
semiannual reports to the House Committee on Government Reform and Senate
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs listing the number of
lobbyists and lobbying firms referred to the United States Attorney for the District
of Columbia for noncompliance. The measure would require the United States
Attorney for the District of Columbia to report on a semiannual basis the number of
enforcement actions and the amount of any fines to the House Committees on
Government Reform and the Judiciary, and the Senate committees on Homeland
Security and Governmental Affairs and the Judiciary. S. 2128 as reported would
increase the civil penalty for noncompliance with LDA to up to $100,000. The
measure would require the Comptroller General to audit annually registrations and
reports filed under LDA to determine the extent of compliance by lobbyists and their
clients and to report to Congress by April 1. Additionally, the ban on former senior
executive personnel, former Members of Congress, and legislative branch personnel,
preventing them from lobbying the entity in which they previously served, would be
extended from one to two years.
Other Measures Introduced
S. 2265. S. 2265, the Pork Barrel Reduction Act, was introduced by Senator
John McCain on February 9, 2006. The measure would amend LDA to require
recipients of federal funds to file a report identifying the name and amount paid to
any lobbyist registered under LDA whom the recipient retained to lobby on behalf
of the recipient to receive the federal funding.48
48 S. 2265 would also make changes to Senate procedures for considering appropriations
legislation, and conference reports. Additionally the measure would prohibit the obligation
(continued...)

CRS-33
S. 2261. S. 2261, the Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act of 2006, was
introduced by Senator Barack Obama on February 8, 2006. The measure would
amend LDA to require recipients of federal funds to file a report identifying the name
and amount paid to any lobbyist registered under LDA whom the recipient retained
to lobby on behalf of the recipient to receive the federal funding.49
S. 2259. S. 2259, the Congressional Ethics Enforcement Commission Act of
2006, was introduced by Senator Barack Obama on February 8, 2006. The measure
would create an independent office of public integrity in the legislative branch
overseen by a congressional ethics enforcement commission. The office would
! investigate lobbying disclosures filed with the Senate and the House;
! investigate Senators and Senate staff who violate restrictions on
interactions with lobbyists;
! conduct research concerning governmental ethics and implement any
public educational programs it considers necessary; and
! report annually to the Senate Select Committee on Ethics and the
House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct on the
commission’s activities, and make recommendations on matters
within the its jurisdiction.
The measure provides for a nine-member commission, with the Speaker and
minority leader of the House, and the majority and minority leaders of the Senate
each appointing two, and the final member appointed on the concurrence of at least
three of the chamber leaders. After an initial two-year appointment following
enactment of the measure, commission members would serve four-year terms. The
commission would conduct investigations of alleged violations of lobbying and
chamber rules on the sworn complaint of any U.S. citizen. Investigations by the
commission would be in lieu of any preliminary investigation by the ethics
committees of either chamber. During any investigation the commission could refer
the matter to the Attorney General if it finds evidence of criminal acts.
At the conclusion of its investigation, S. 2259 provides that the commission
could terminate its investigation if it does not find probable cause to proceed. In the
event that the commission has probable cause to believe that a violation has occurred,
upon a majority vote it may: initiate a private reprimand of the violator, if the alleged
violation did not result in significant economic advantage or gain by the alleged
violator, significant economic loss to the state, or significant impact on public
confidence in government; or initiate an adjudicatory proceeding to determine
48 (...continued)
of funds for appropriations earmarks that are included only in congressional reports, and
would require the disclosure by Senators of any proposed earmarks or unauthorized
appropriations.
49 S. 2261 would also make to Senate procedures regarding the inclusion and consideration
of appropriations earmarks.

CRS-34
whether to present a case to the Select Committee on Ethics of the Senate or the
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct of the House of Representatives as to
whether there has been a violation. The measure provides for fines up to $10,000 and
or imprisonment for up to one year for anyone who knowing files or encourages the
filing of a frivolous complaint before the commission.
S. 2259 was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
S. 2233. S. 2233, the Lobbyist Reform Act of 2006, introduced by Senator
Dianne Feinstein on February 1, 2006, would
! extend the cooling off period required under 18 U.S.C. 207 to two
years, and would extend provisions that currently bar former
Members of Congress from lobbying any Member, officer, or staff
member of either chamber to all employees of Congress;
! prohibit the acceptance of gifts from lobbyists by Senators and
Senate staff;
! prohibit the acceptance by Senators and Senate staff of privately
funded travel by lobbyists or entities that are affiliated with any
group that lobbies; and
! prohibit registered lobbyists from serving on political committees
authorized by FECA.
S. 2233 was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. A hearing
was held by the committee on February 8, 2006. At the conclusion of the hearing,
it was announced that a markup of proposals related to lobbying within the
jurisdiction of the committee could be held during the week of February 27.
S. 2186. S. 2186, the Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act
of 2006, was introduced by Senator Norm Coleman on January 25, 2006. A similar
measure, H.R. 4738, described above, was introduced in the House by Representative
Mark Udall on February 8, 2006. S. 2186 would not change current lobbying laws
and regulations, but would establish a commission to strengthen confidence in
Congress through an evaluation of current congressional rules related to
congressional interactions with various lobbying activities. A bipartisan, 10-member
commission would be appointed by the majority and minority leadership of each
chamber. The commission would be charged to
! evaluate and report the effectiveness of current congressional ethics
requirements;
! weigh the need for improved ethical conduct with the need for
lawmakers to have access to expertise on public policy issues;
! determine and report minimum standards relating to official travel
for Members of Congress and staff;

CRS-35
! evaluate the range of gifts given to Members of Congress and staff,
determine and report the effects on public policy, and make
recommendations for limits on gifts;
! evaluate and report the effectiveness and transparency of
congressional disclosure laws and recommendations for
improvements;
! assess and report the effectiveness of the ban on Member of
Congress and staff from lobbying their former office for one year
and make recommendations for altering the time frame;
! make recommendations to improve the process whereby Members
of Congress can earmark priorities in appropriations Acts, while still
preserving congressional power of the purse;
! evaluate the use of public and privately funded travel by Members
of Congress and staff, violations of Congressional rules governing
travel, and make recommendations on limiting travel; and
! investigate and report to Congress on its findings, conclusions, and
recommendations for reform.
S. 2186 has been referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration. A
hearing was held by the committee on February 8, 2006. At the conclusion of the
hearing, it was announced that a markup of some of the proposals related to lobbying
within the jurisdiction of the committee could be held during the week of February
27. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
S. 2180. On January 20, 2006, Senator Harry Reid, who is Senate Minority
Leader, introduced S. 2180, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of
2006. The measure would amend LDA to require
! quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying disclosure
reports;
! reduction of the increments in which lobbying expenditures may be
estimated in larger increments, from $20,000 to $1,000;
! disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch and
congressional employment;
! electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure reports filed
with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House of
Representatives;
! establishment and maintenance by the Clerk and Secretary of
lobbying disclosure information in an electronic database made

CRS-36
available to the public free of charge through the Internet, and to
make those reports available within 48 hours of filing; and
! disclosure of grassroots lobbying communications by paid lobbyists
and itemized disclosure of expenditures on grassroots lobbying
activities. In the event that a grassroots lobbyist receives or spends
$250,000 or more for grassroots lobbying activities, an additional
report must be made within 20 days.
S. 2180 would require the disclosure of any entity, other than the client, who
participates in the planning, supervision, or control of lobbying activities. S. 2180
would not require disclosure if an entity’s affiliation with the client is publicly
available knowledge, or if any funding for the client is publicly disclosed by the
entity. The measure would not require the disclosure of any information about
individuals who are members of, or donors to, an entity treated as a client by LDA.
The measure would establish a Senate Office of Public Integrity. The office
would receive LDA registrations and disclosure reports, and conduct audits and
investigations necessary to ensure compliance with LDA. A director of the office
would be appointed by the President pro tempore, based on recommendations of the
Senate majority and minority leaders. The office would have the authority to refer
violations of LDA to the Senate Select committee on Ethics and the Department of
Justice for disciplinary action.
S. 2180 would ban Senate floor privileges to former Senators who become
lobbyists. The measure would increase the civil penalty for failure to comply with
lobbying disclosure requirements up to $100,000.50 In addition, S. 2180 would
establish criminal penalties for noncompliance with LDA. Knowing and willful
failure to comply with registration requirements would be punishable by fines, a term
of imprisonment up to five years, or both. Whoever knowingly willfully, and
corruptly fails to comply with LDA disclosure requirements would be subject to
fines, a term of imprisonment up to 10 years, or both. S. 2180 would extend the ban
preventing former senior executive personnel, former Members of Congress, and
legislative branch personnel from lobbying the entity in which they previously served
from one to two years. S. 2180 was referred to the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs. No further action has been taken at the time of this
writing.
50 S. 2180 would require a number of other changes to laws and rules governing
congressional ethics that are not directly related to lobbying disclosure. These include
requiring public disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations; the
establishment of fines and penalties for Member of Congress or employees of the House
who wrongfully influence, on a partisan basis, any entity’s employment decisions or
practices; amendments to Senate Rules to prohibit favoritism; requiring the Senate Select
Committee on Ethics to develop and revise guidelines on reasonable expenditures for
official government travel; requiring certification that congressional travel meets certain
conditions, and establishing civil fines for false certifications.

CRS-37
S. 2128, as Introduced. Senator John McCain introduced S. 2128, the
Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of 2005, on December 16, 2005.
Similar in nature to H.R. 4575, the measure would have amended LDA to require
! quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying disclosure
reports;
! reduction of the thresholds for which registration and disclosure are
required from $5,000 to $2,500 for a lobbying firm, and from
$20,000 to $10,000 for an an organization whose employees engage
in lobbying activities on its own behalf;
! reduction of the increments in which lobbying expenditures may be
estimated, from less than $10,000 to less than $5,000, or in larger
increments, from $20,000 to $10,000;
! disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch and
congressional employment;
! electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure reports filed
with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House of
Representatives;
! establishment and maintenance of lobbying disclosure information
in an electronic database that directly links lobbying disclosure
information to the information disclosed in reports filed with the
FEC under FECA and made available to the public free of charge
through the Internet; and
! disclosure of grassroots lobbying communications by paid lobbyists
and itemized disclosure of expenditures on grassroots lobbying
activities. In the event that a grassroots lobbyist receives or spends
$250,000 or more for grassroots lobbying activities, an additional
report must be made within 20 days.
S. 2128, as introduced, would amend LDA to redefine the term “client” as any
person or entity that employs a lobbyist to carry out lobbying or grass roots lobbying
activities on behalf of that person or entity. The measure would have required that
firms and other entities that are members of coalitions or associations that employ a
lobbyist are to be considered clients, along with the coalition or association, if their
total contribution related to lobbying activities is greater than $10,000.
S. 2128, as introduced, would increase the civil penalty for failure to comply
with lobbying disclosure requirements up to $100,000. The measure would have
provided for reviews and semiannual reports by the Comptroller General on activities
carried out by the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate under LDA.
Additionally, the ban on former senior executive personnel, former Members of
Congress, and legislative branch personnel preventing them from lobbying the entity

CRS-38
in which they previously served would have been extended from one to two years.51
S. 1972. On November 7, 2005, Senator Rick Santorum introduced S. 1972,
the Terrorist Lobby Disclosure Act of 2005. The measure would amend LDA to
require Members of Congress and legislative branch employees to disclose to the
Secretary of State any contacts with representatives or officials of governments that
have been designated as state sponsors of terrorism by the Department of State. S.
1972 would require the Secretary to issue a report listing those who have had such
contacts to the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, the Senate Subcommittee on
State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs of the Committee on
Appropriations, the House Committee on International Affairs, and the House
Subcommittee on Foreign Operations, Export Financing, and Related Programs of
the Committee on Appropriations. S. 1972 was referred to the Committee on
Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. No further action has been taken at
the time of this writing.
S. 1398. S. 1398, the Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act of 2005 was introduced
by Senator Russell Feingold on July 14, 2005. Similar in nature to H.R. 2412, the
measure would amend LDA to require
! quarterly, instead of semiannual, filing of lobbying disclosure
reports;
! electronic filing of lobbyist registrations and disclosure reports filed
with the Secretary of the Senate or the Clerk of the House of
Representatives;
! establishment and maintenance of lobbying disclosure information
in an electronic data base which directly links lobbying disclosure
information to the information disclosed in reports filed with the
FEC under FECA and made available to the public free of charge
through the Internet;
! identification of each executive branch official and Member of
Congress with whom lobbying contacts are made, on an issue-by-
issue basis, for each covered official contacted;
! disclosure by registered lobbyists of all past executive branch and
congressional employment; and
51 S. 2128 requires a number of other changes to laws and rules governing congressional
ethics that are not directly related to lobbying disclosure. These include requiring public
disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations and increased disclosure
of travel by Members of Congress. The measure also specifies the valuation of tickets to
sporting and entertainment events provided to covered executive and legislative branch
officials.

CRS-39
! disclosure of grassroots lobbying communications by paid lobbyists
and itemized disclosure of expenditures on grassroots lobbying
activities.
The measure would amend LDA to redefine the term “client” as any person or
entity that employs a lobbyist on behalf of that person or entity. The measure
requires that firms and other entities that are members of coalitions or associations
that employ a lobbyist, are to be considered clients along with the coalition or
association if their total contribution related to lobbying activities is greater than
$10,000.
S. 1398 would increase the civil penalty for failure to comply with lobbying
disclosure requirements up to $100,000. The measure provides for reviews and
semiannual reports by the Comptroller General on activities carried out by the Clerk
of the House and the Secretary of the Senate under LDA. Additionally, the ban on
former senior executive personnel, former Members of Congress, and legislative
branch personnel, preventing them from lobbying the entity in which they previously
served, would be extended from one to two years. Finally, S. 1398 would revoke any
benefit or privilege extended to former Members of Congress, including floor
privileges, from former Members who are registered lobbyists.52 S. 1398 was
referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Hearings regarding lobbying proposals were held by the committee on January 25,
2006. No further action has been taken at the time of this writing.
52 S. 1398 requires a number of other changes to laws and rules governing congressional
ethics that are not directly related to lobbying disclosure. These include requiring public
disclosure by Members of Congress of employment negotiations; the establishment of fines
and penalties for Member of Congress or employees of the House who wrongfully influence,
on a partisan basis, any entity’s employment decisions or practices; amendments to the
House Code of Official Conduct and the standing Rules of the Senate to prohibit favoritism;
requiring the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to develop and revise
guidelines on reasonable expenditures for official government travel; requiring certification
that congressional travel meets certain conditions, and establishing civil fines for false
certifications.
S. 1398 would also institute a ban on gifts from lobbyists to members of Congress and
their staff. In the House, Rep. George Miller introduced H.R. 3177 on June 30, 2005 to ban
gifts from lobbyists. Both measures also would amend the rules of the respective chambers
in which they were introduced to prohibit Members from accepting gifts from lobbyists.
H.R. 3177 was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. No further action has
been taken at the time of this writing.

CRS-40
Further Resources
Lobbying
CRS Current Legislative Issues page on Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Reform, at
[http://beta.crs.gov/cli/cli.aspx?PRDS_CLI_ITEM_ID=2405].
CRS Report RL33293, Lobbying and Related Reform Proposals: Consideration of
Selected Measures, 109th Congress, by R. Eric Petersen.
CRS Report RL33326, Lobbying, Ethics and Related Procedural Reforms:
Comparison of Current Provisions of S. 2349 and H.R. 4975, by Jack Maskell,
R. Eric Petersen, and Sandy Streeter.
CRS Report RL33234, Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Proposals Related to
Lobbying Introduced in the 109th Congress: A Comparative Analysis, by R. Eric
Petersen.
CRS Report RS22226, Summary and Analysis of Provisions of H.R. 2412, the
Special Interest Lobbying and Ethics Accountability Act of 2005, by Jack
Maskell.
CRS Report RS22209, Executive Lobbying: Statutory Controls, by Louis Fisher.
CRS Report 96-809, Lobbying Regulations on Non-Profit Organizations, by Jack
H. Maskell.
CRS Report RS20725, Lobbyists and Interest Groups: Sources of Information, by
Mari-Jana “M-J” Oboroceanu.
Congressional Ethics Rules
CRS Report RL33237, Congressional Gifts and Travel: Proposals in the 109th
Congress, by Mildred Amer.
CRS Report RL33047, Restrictions on the Acceptance of “Officially Connected”
Travel Expenses From Private Sources Under House and Senate Ethics Rules,
by Jack Maskell.
CRS Report 97-875, “Revolving Door,” Post-Employment Laws for Federal
Personnel, by Jack Maskell.
CRS Report RS22231, The Acceptance of Gifts of Free Meals by Members of
Congress, by Jack Maskell.
CRS Report RL31126, Lobbying Congress: An Overview of Legal Provisions and
Congressional Ethics Rules, by Jack Maskell.

CRS-41
Congressional Procedures
CRS Report RL33295, Comparison of Selected Senate Earmark Reform Proposals,
by Sandy Streeter.
Campaign Finance
Campaign Finance and Regulation of 527 Organizations, at
[http://beta.crs.gov/cli/cli.aspx?PRDS_CLI_ITEM_ID=529]
CRS Report RL32954, 527 Political Organizations: Legislation in the 109th
Congress, by Joseph E. Cantor, and Erika Lunder.