Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Proposals Related to Lobbying Introduced in the 109th Congress: A Comparative Analysis

Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Proposals Related to Lobbying Introduced in the 109th Congress: A Comparative Analysis

Order Code RL33234
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Proposals
Related to Lobbying Introduced in the 109th
Congress: A Comparative Analysis
Updated June 9, 2006
R. Eric Petersen
Analyst in American National Government
Government and Finance Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Proposals Related to
Lobbying Introduced in the 109th Congress:
A Comparative Analysis
Summary
The regulation of lobbying activities by lobbyists, and the actions that certain
members of the executive branch and legislative branch may take in their interactions
with lobbyists, are governed by laws and congressional rules. Several proposals to
revise these laws and congressional rules with regard to lobbying activities and the
disclosure of such activities by lobbyists and Members of Congress have been
introduced in the 109th Congress.
In the House, these measures include H.R. 4975, the Lobbying Accountability
and Transparency Act of 2006; H.R. 5036, the Full Disclosure in Lobbying Act; H.R.
4948, the Ethics Reform Act of 2006; H.R. 4920, the Accountability and
Transparency in Ethics Act; H.R. 4799, to establish a legislative branch office of
public integrity; H.R. 4787, the Truth-in-Lobbying Disclosure Act; H.R. 4738, the
Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act of 2006; H.R. 4696, the
Restoring Trust in Government Act; H.R. 4682, the Honest Leadership and Open
Government Act of 2006; H.R. 4671 the Keep Lobbying Clean Act; H.R. 4670, the
Clarity in Lobbying Act; H.R. 4667, the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability
Act of 2006; H.R. 4658, to prohibit former Members of Congress from engaging in
certain lobbying activities; H.R. 4575, the Lobbying Transparency and
Accountability Act of 2005; H.R. 3623, to increase to five years the period during
which former Members of Congress may not engage in certain lobbying activities;
the Lobby Gift Ban Act of 2005; H.R. 2412, the Special Interest Lobbying and Ethics
Accountability Act of 2005, introduced by Representative Martin Meehan; H.R. 1302
and H.R. 1304, both entitled the Stealth Lobbyist Disclosure Act of 2005; and H.Res.
81, directing the Clerk of the House to post on the Internet all lobbying registrations
and reports filed with the Clerk under Lobbying and Disclosure Act. On February
1, 2006, the House adopted H.Res. 648 amending House Rules to deny admittance
to the House floor and certain House facilities to former Members who lobby.
Measures related to lobbying issues introduced in the Senate include S. 2349,
the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of 2006; S. 2265, the Pork
Barrel Reduction Act; S. 2261, the Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act of
2006; S. 2259, the Congressional Ethics Enforcement Commission Act of 2006; S.
2233, the Lobbyist Reform Act of 2006; S. 2186, the Commission to Strengthen
Confidence in Congress Act of 2006; S. 2180, the Honest Leadership and Open
Government Act of 2006; S. 2128, the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability
Act of 2005; S. 1972, the Terrorist Lobby Disclosure Act of 2005; and S. 1398, the
Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act of 2005.
This report, which will be updated as events warrant, provides context,
comparison, discussion, and analysis of the issues addressed in the legislative
proposals that have been introduced in the 109th Congress to address lobbying
disclosure and related laws and congressional rules. For further information, see the
CRS Current Legislative Issues page on Lobbying, Ethics and Related Procedural
Reform at [http://beta.crs.gov/cli/cli.aspx?PRDS_CLI_ITEM_ID=2405].

Contents
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
House Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
Proposals Adopted by the House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Status of Proposals Passed by the House . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
Senate Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Current Status of Proposals Passed by the Senate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Issues Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Issues Addressed Under Current Proposals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Definition of Client and Specification of Client Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Broader and More Frequent Disclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
Timing of Registration and Frequency of Disclosure Reports . . . . . . . . 8
Lobbying Disclosure Expense Thresholds and Estimates . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Grassroots Lobbying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Third Party Lobbying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Disclosure by Recipients of Federal Funds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Contact with a Covered Official . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Electronic Filing of Lobbying Registration and Disclosure Reports . . 11
Making LDA Disclosure Information Available Via the Internet . . . . 12
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Linking Lobbying Disclosure Information with Federal Election
Commission Reports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Tax Treatment of Lobbying Coalitions and Associations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Revolving Door Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Past Executive or Legislative Branch Employment, Current
Employment Negotiations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Spouse and Other Family Members of Senators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Post Employment Restrictions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Floor Privileges for Former Members Who Lobby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
House Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Disclosure of Lobbyist Contributions and Payments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Campaigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Honors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Gifts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
Penalties for LDA Noncompliance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
Disclosure of Contact with Lobbyists Representing State Sponsors of
Terrorism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Lobbying and Campaigns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Other Employment Rights . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
LDA Administration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Oversight of Ethics and Lobbying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Further Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Lobbying . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Congressional Ethics Rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Congressional Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Campaign Finance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26

Lobbying Disclosure and Ethics Proposals
Related to Lobbying Introduced in the 109th
Congress: A Comparative Analysis
Introduction
The regulation of lobbying activities by lobbyists, and the actions that certain
members of the executive and legislative branches may take in their interactions with
lobbyists, are governed by laws and congressional rules. These include
! the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA),1 as amended by the
Lobbying Disclosure Technical Amendments Act of 1998.2 LDA
requires lobbyists who are compensated for their 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.
! House Rule XXV, Limitations on Outside Earned Income and
Acceptance of Gifts. Sections of the rule govern the acceptance of
gifts by Representatives, Delegates, the Resident Commissioner of
Puerto Rico, their staffs, and other employees of the House.
! House Rule IV, The Hall of the House. Sections of the rule govern
who may have access to the floor of the House.
! Senate Rule XXXV, Gifts. The rule governs acceptance of gifts by
Senators, their staffs and Senate employees.
! Senate Rule XXIII, Privileges of the Floor. Sections of the rule
govern who may have access to the floor of the Senate.
! 18 U.S.C. 207, which specifies limitations on lobbying activities by
former executive branch officials, Members of Congress, and
congressional staff.
Concerns related to the efficacy of current lobbying disclosure practices have
also been linked to other activities carried out by lobbyists. These include campaign
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).

CRS-2
finance practices governed by the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (FECA),3
as amended,4 and the inclusion of earmarks advocated by lobbyists in legislation.5
This report provides context, comparison, and discussion of the proposals
contained in the various legislative proposals, as introduced in the 109th Congress.
Committee and floor consideration of three measures, H.Res. 648, S. 2349, and S.
2128 is discussed in CRS Report RL33293, Lobbying and Related Reform
Proposals: Consideration of Selected Measures, 109th Congress, by R. Eric
Petersen. For further background and analysis of the current proposals, please
consult CRS Report RL33065, Lobbying Disclosure Reform: Background and
Legislative Proposals, 109th Congress, 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.
House Proposals
Several proposals have been introduced in the 109th Congress to revise these
laws and congressional rules regarding lobbying activities and the disclosure of those
activities by lobbyists and Members of Congress. In the House, these measures
include the following:
! H.R. 4975 the Lobbying Accountability and Transparency Act of
2006, introduced by Representative David Dreier;6
! H.R. 5036, the Full Disclosure in Lobbying Act introduced by
Delegate Madeleine Z. Bordallo;
! H.R. 4948, the Ethics Reform Act of 2006, introduced by
Representative Earl Blumenauer;
3 2 U.S.C. 431.
4 See CRS Report RL32954, 527 Political Organizations: Legislation in the 109th
Congress, by Joseph E. Cantor and Erika Lunder; and CRS Issue Brief IB87020, Campaign
Finance, by Joseph E. Cantor.
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.
6 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. “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=/cqonline/prod/data/docs/html/transcripts/newsmaker/109/newsmake
rtranscripts109-000002036139.html@committees&metapub=CQ-TRANSCRIPTS&sear
chIndex=1&seqNum=15], and Kenneth P. Doyle and Nancy Ognanovich, “Hastert Pushes
for New Lobbying Reform to Cope With Fallout From Abramoff Plea,” BNA Daily Report
for Executives, Jan. 10, 2006, p. A-18.

CRS-3
! H.R. 4920, the Accountability and Transparency in Ethics Act,
introduced by Representative Michael Castle;
! H.R. 4799, to establish a legislative branch office of public integrity,
introduced by Representative Christopher Shays;
! H.R. 4787, the Truth-in-Lobbying Disclosure Act, introduced by
Representative John Doolittle;
! H.R. 4738, the Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress
Act of 2006, introduced by Representative Mark Udall;
! H.R. 4696, the Restoring Trust in Government Act, introduced by
Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan;
! H.R. 4682, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of
2006, introduced by Representative Nancy Pelosi;
! H.R. 4671, the Keep Lobbying Clean Act, introduced by
Representative Scott Garrett;
! H.R. 4670, the Clarity in Lobbying Act, introduced by
Representative Scott Garrett;
! H.R. 4667, the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of
2006, introduced by Representative Michael Fitzpatrick;
! H.R. 4658, to prohibit former Members of Congress from engaging
in certain lobbying activities, introduced by Representative Mark
Kennedy;
! H.R. 4575, the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of
2005, introduced by Representative Christopher Shays;
! H.R. 3623, to increase to five years the period during which former
Members of Congress may not engage in certain lobbying activities,
introduced by Representative Robert Andrews;
! H.R. 3177, the Lobby Gift Ban Act of 2005, introduced by
Representative George Miller;
! H.R. 2412, the Special Interest Lobbying and Ethics Accountability
Act of 2005, introduced by Representative Martin Meehan;
! H.R. 1302 and H.R. 1304, both entitled the Stealth Lobbyist
Disclosure Act of 2005, introduced by Representative Lloyd
Doggett; and

CRS-4
! H.Res. 81, directing the Clerk of the House to post on the Internet all
lobbying registrations and reports filed with the Clerk under LDA,
introduced by Representative Mark Green.
Proposals Adopted by the House. 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.7
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.
7 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
become lobbyists have been introduced in the 109th Congress. H.Res. 646, introduced on
Jan. 31, 2005, by Representative Walter B. Jones, would deny admission to the Hall of the
House to former Members who are lobbyists. H.Res. 663, introduced on Jan. 31, 2005, by
Representative 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 which are operated for the exclusive
use of Members and former Members. H.Res. 659, introduced by Representative David
Obey on Jan. 31, 2006, would require former officials with floor privileges to sign a
statement that they 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. H.R. 4682, the Honest Leadership
and Open Government Act of 2006, introduced Feb. 1, 2006, by Representative 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. H.R. 4696,
introduced by Representative Mike Rogers of Michigan on Feb. 1, 2005, and described
below, would also suspend floor privileges to former Members who are registered as
lobbyists.

CRS-5
Senate Proposals
Measures related to lobbying issues introduced in the Senate include
! S. 2349, the Legislative Transparency and Accountability Act of
2006, introduced by Senator Trent Lott;
! S. 2265, the Pork Barrel Reduction Act, introduced by Senator John
McCain;
! S. 2261, the Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act of 2006,
introduced by Senator Barack Obama;
! S. 2259, the Congressional Ethics Enforcement Commission Act of
2006, introduced by Senator Barack Obama;
! S. 2233, the Lobbyist Reform Act of 2006, introduced by Senator
Dianne Feinstein;
! S. 2186, the Commission to Strengthen Confidence in Congress Act
of 2006, introduced by Senator Norm Coleman;
! S. 2180, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2006,
introduced by Senator Harry Reid;
! S. 2128, the Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act of 2005,
introduced by Senator John McCain;
! S. 1972, the Terrorist Lobby Disclosure Act of 2005, introduced by
Senator Rick Santorum; and
! S. 1398, the Lobbying and Ethics Reform Act of 2005, introduced
by Senator Russell Feingold.
Current Status of Proposals Passed by the Senate. The Senate passed
S. 2349 by a vote of 90-8 on March 9, 2006. On May 23, the Senate disagreed to the
House amendments to the measure, requested a conference, and appointed conferees.8
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.
8 Ibid., p. S5027.

CRS-6
Issues Background
In the decade since enactment of LDA, concerns have been raised about the
capacity of Congress to oversee the activities of professional lobbyists through
existing institutional arrangements. The oversight of lobbying, and the transparency
intended by congressional rules, LDA, and other related laws may be impaired by the
actions of lobbyists and others who seek to participate in public policy activities
through the formation of coalitions and associations whose members may not be
identifiable, or the use of grassroots campaigns that attempt to mobilize citizens to
advance the message of a lobbyist’s client. 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 disclosure and
related ethics rules focus on external and internal participants in the public policy-
making process. External groups include lobbyists, their clients, entities that provide
services, such as mass mailing or phone banks, and affiliated political committees
that might have a peripheral role in lobbying activities through campaign finance
activities. Legislative approaches to address external groups include proposals to
amend lobbying disclosure, and in some cases campaign finance laws to require
lobbyists to identify themselves, their clients, and activities on behalf of those clients
in a more comprehensive manner than currently required by LDA. Internal groups
include executive branch officials, Members of Congress, their staffs, and other
legislative branch officials who might interact with lobbyists in the course of their
official duties. Legislative proposals addressing internal groups include amendment
of House and Senate rules regarding interactions with lobbyists by Members and
congressional staff, as well as increased waiting periods on certain types of
employment these officials may undertake after they leave office or public service.
Legislation affecting current law or congressional rules have been proposed to
address the following issues:
! specification of lobbying participants and certain lobbying activities
subject to disclosure law and rules;
! lower thresholds at which lobbying activities or the receipt of
contributions or other considerations must be disclosed;
! increased disclosure requirements for lobbyists, Members of
Congress, and congressional staff, requiring more frequent reports
and more detailed information; and
! increased oversight of activities carried out by lobbyists.

CRS-7
Issues Addressed Under Current Proposals
Specific details of current laws or rules, and legislative proposals addressing
underlying lobbying, ethics, and some campaign finance issues are provided in
subsequent sections of this report. The issues described are based on at least one
pending legislative proposal, as introduced, as described in each section.
Definition of Client and Specification of Client Activities
Under LDA, a “client” is defined as any person or entity that employs and
compensates another person to conduct lobbying activities on their behalf. The law
also requires that groups that carry out lobbying activities on their own behalf must
also register with the Clerk of the House (the Clerk) and the Secretary of the Senate
(the Secretary).
H.R. 4682 and 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. Both measures would provide 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 under H.R. 4682, or $1,000 per any
semiannual period under H.R. 1302, to the lobbying activities of the coalition.
H.R. 4667, H.R. 2412 and S. 1398 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 measures would require 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 proposals would treat nonprofit entities that
are tax exempt under Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code as clients. Entities
that contribute less than $500 to the coalition would be exempt from disclosure.
S. 2128, as introduced, and H.R. 4575 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 measures would require 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. Finally, the proposals would treat nonprofit entities
that are tax exempt under Section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code as clients.
S. 2180 would require the disclosure of any entity, other than the client who
participates in the planning, supervision, or control of lobbying activities. The
measure 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.

CRS-8
Discussion. 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
the current LDA definition of a client might allow interested entities to shield their
lobbying activities through the use of ostensibly separate, independent coalitions and
associations.9 Clarifying the responsibilities of coalition participants as lobbying
clients could afford greater transparency of government activity and greater
accountability in the political system. Others have noted that anonymous or indirect
lobbying efforts are not new, and that expanding disclosure could have a potential
adverse impact on constitutionally protected rights of assembly, association, and to
petition the government, particularly the longstanding tradition of carrying out these
activities without the necessity of self-identification. Moreover, under guidance
issued by the Clerk of the House and Secretary of the Senate, members of informal
coalitions who each pay at least $5,000 in lobbying or membership fees to be a part
of a coalition or association may be viewed as separate clients for disclosure
purposes.10
Broader and More Frequent Disclosure
Timing of Registration and Frequency of Disclosure Reports. LDA
requires lobbyists to register with the Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of the House
within 45 days of an initial lobbying contact with a covered official,11 and to make
semiannual reports of their activities until that registration is terminated. H.R. 4575,
S. 2180 and S. 2128, as introduced, would reduce the registration period to 20 days
following an initial lobbying contact. H.R. 1304 would require any coalition or
association identified as an LDA client to notify the Secretary of the Treasury of its
existence within 72 hours after its lobbyists make an initial lobbying contact. H.R.
4975, H.R. 4948, H.R. 4920, H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 2412, H.R. 4575, S. 2180,
9 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.
10 Office of the Clerk of the House of Representatives and Office of the Secretary of the
Senate, Lobbying Disclosure Act Guidance and Instructions, undated, p.11.
11 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-9
S. 2128, as introduced, and S. 1398 would amend LDA to require quarterly
disclosure.
Lobbying Disclosure Expense Thresholds and Estimates. If the total
income for matters related to lobbying activities on behalf of a client represented by
a lobbying firm exceeds $5,000, or total expenses in connection with the lobbying
activities by an organization whose employees engage in lobbying activities on its
own behalf exceeds $20,000, then LDA registration and disclosure are required.
H.R. 4975, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, and S. 2128, as introduced, would reduce
expense thresholds requiring LDA registration and disclosure to $2,500 for a
lobbying firm and $10,000 for an organization that lobbies in its own behalf.
In semiannual disclosure reports, LDA requires 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. Expenditures may be
estimated at less than $10,000 or in increments rounded to the nearest $20,000.
H.R. 4975, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, H.R. 2412, S. 2128, as introduced, and S.
1398 would amend LDA to reduce estimated expense increments to less than $5,000
and $10,000, respectively. H.R. 4682 and S. 2180 would require estimated
expenditures rounded to the nearest $1,000.
Grassroots Lobbying. Grassroots lobbying, lobbyists, firms, or activities
are not specified or considered in LDA.
Under H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, and S. 2128, as introduced, LDA
would be amended to define the term “grassroots lobbying” as any attempt to
influence the general public to engage in lobbying contacts, whether or not those
contacts were made on behalf of a client. The measures would exclude any lobbying
effort directed to its members, employees, officers or shareholders, unless such
attempt is financed with funds received from by a retained registrant.
The measures also propose that
! the term “grassroots lobbyist” would mean any individual who is
retained by a client for financial or other compensation for services
to engage in grassroots lobbying;
! the term “grassroots lobbying firm” would mean a person or entity
with one or more employees who are grassroots lobbyists on behalf
of a client, or a self-employed individual who is a grassroots
lobbyist; and
! the term “grassroots lobbying activities” would mean grassroots
lobbying and related support efforts, including preparation and
planning activities, and coordination with the lobbying activities or
grassroots lobbying activities of others.

CRS-10
S. 2180 would require the disclosure of lobbying activities to stimulate
grassroots lobbying, and defines “grassroots lobbying” as “the voluntary efforts of
members of the general public to communicate their own views on an issue to federal
officials or to encourage other members of the general public to do the same.”
The measure also proposes
! disclosure of paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying; and
! identification of a “grassroots lobbying firm” as an entity that is
retained by a client in paid efforts to stimulate grassroots lobbying,
and is paid or spends $50,000 or more in grassroots lobbying
activities in any quarterly period.
H.R. 4682, H.R. 4575, S. 2128, as introduced, and S. 2180 would require good
faith estimates of the proportion of the total amount spent on grassroots lobbying
activities, and within that amount, an estimate of the total amount specifically
relating to grassroots lobbying through paid advertising. When a grassroots lobbying
firm receives income of, or spends an aggregate amount of, $250,000 or more on
grassroots lobbying activities for a client or group of clients, it would be required to
file a report within 20 days; and additional reports within 20 days after each
subsequent time an aggregate amount of $250,000 is spent on grassroots lobbying
activities.
In the disclosure of a grassroots lobbying firm, H.R. 4682, H.R. 4575, and S.
2128, as introduced, would require
! a list of the specific issues upon which the registrant engaged in
grassroots lobbying activities, including, to the maximum extent
practicable, a list of bill numbers and references to specific
executive branch activities;
! the total disbursements made for grassroots lobbying activities, and
a subtotal for disbursements made for grassroots lobbying through
paid advertising;
! identification of each person or entity who received a disbursement
of funds for grassroots lobbying activities of $10,000 or more during
the period and the total amount each person or entity received; and
! if such disbursements are made through a person or entity who
serves as an intermediary, identification of each such intermediary,
identification of the person or entity who receives the funds, and the
total amount each received.
H.R. 2412 and S. 1398, which do not define grassroots activities, would require
the disclosure of grassroots lobbying communications by paid lobbyists and itemized
disclosure of expenditures on grassroots lobbying activities.

CRS-11
Third Party Lobbying. LDA requires the disclosure of any person or entity
that contributes more than $10,000 toward the lobbying activities of a registrant,
plans, supervises, or controls those lobbying activities.
H.R. 5036 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.
Disclosure by Recipients of Federal Funds. Recipients of federal funds
are not required to make any disclosure related to efforts to acquire those funds under
LDA.
S. 2265 and S. 2261 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.12
Contact with a Covered Official. LDA requires a statement of the houses
of Congress and the federal agencies contacted by the lobbyist on behalf of a client.
H.R. 2412 and S. 1398 would require 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.
Electronic Filing of Lobbying Registration and Disclosure Reports.
LDA does not require electronic filing of registration and disclosure reports. In the
House, the Office of the Clerk in December 2004 inaugurated a voluntary electronic
filing system for those required to file under LDA. Pursuant to a directive issued by
Representative Bob Ney, chairman of the Committee on House Administration, the
Clerk required all registrants to file LDA materials electronically after January 1,
2006.13 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.14
12 S. 2261 would also make to Senate procedures regarding the inclusion and consideration
of appropriations earmarks. S. 2265 would also make changes to Senate procedures for
considering appropriations legislation, and conference reports. Additionally the measure
would prohibit the obligation 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. See CRS Report RL33295, Comparison of
Selected Senate Earmark Reform Proposals, by Sandy Streeter.
13 Bob Ney, chairman, Committee on House Administration, “Electronic Filing of
Disclosure Reports,” dear colleague letter, June 29, 2005, at [http://www.house.gov/
cha/ dear col l eaguej une29-05.htm]; see also t he Cl er k’ s websi t e at
[http://clerk.house.gov/pd/index.html].
14 Senate Office of Public Records, “Frequently Asked Questions,” at
[https://opr.senate.gov/faq.html].

CRS-12
H.R. 4975, H.R. 4948, H.R. 4682, H.R. 4799, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, H.R. 2412,
S.2180, S. 2128, as introduced, and S. 1398 would amend LDA to require electronic
filing.
Making LDA Disclosure Information Available Via the Internet.
Neither LDA nor chamber rules require the provision of LDA disclosure information
via the Internet.
H.R. 4975 would require the Clerk and the Secretary to create and maintain a
searchable, sortable, and downloadable database containing LDA registration and
disclosure information, and make it available through the Internet. H.R. 4920, would
require the creation of such a database by the House committee on Standards of
Official Conduct. H.R. 4948 and H.R. 4799 would require newly established offices
charged with LDA administration to make LDA registrations and disclosure reports
available via the Internet. H.Res. 81 would require the Clerk of the House to post on
the Internet lobbying registration and reports filed with the Clerk under LDA. S.
2180 would also require the Secretary and the Clerk to provide public access to
disclosure reports through the Internet, and to make those reports publicly available
within 48 hours of filing. Currently, the Senate makes LDA registration and
disclosure reports available through the Internet at [http://sopr.senate.gov/].
Discussion. For many years, observers have noted a steady increase in the
number of interest groups using direct mail, public relations, newspaper
advertisement, and other marketing techniques to generate public interest. 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.15
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.16 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 bona fide
connection to the general public is lacking, sometimes refer to such efforts as
“astroturf” lobbying.17
Those supporting more detailed disclosure through more frequent or detailed
disclosure, or the inclusion of grassroots lobbying efforts under LDA 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
15 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.
16 West and Loomis, The Sound of Money, pp. 45-64.
17 Nicholas Confessore, “Meet the Press,” Washington Monthly, Dec. 2003, available at
[http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/features/2003/0312.confessore.html].

CRS-13
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
of assembly, association, and to petition the government. Additionally, opponents
might assert that such a change could increase the administrative burden associated
with reporting on their lobbying efforts under LDA, or lead to imposition of greater
penalties for noncompliance should registrants fail to disclose every contact on every
issue.
Linking Lobbying Disclosure Information with
Federal Election Commission Reports
Neither LDA nor the Federal Election Campaign Act of 197118 (FECA) require
the linking of information collected under either law.
H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, H.R. 2412, S. 2128, as introduced, and S.
1398 would require the Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of the House to establish
and maintain lobbying disclosure information in an electronic data base which
directly links that information to the information disclosed in reports filed with the
Federal Election Commission (FEC) under FECA. The measures would also require
that the linked information be made available to the public free of charge through the
Internet. Finally the measures authorize appropriations to cover the expenses of these
activities.
Discussion. Under LDA, registrants must register and files reports with the
Secretary and the Clerk, maintain independent, parallel intake procedures, and
separate electronic databases. The linking of information maintained by FEC, and
the Clerk and Secretary, could raise data administrative, and data management
concerns. These concerns might include consideration of the relative costs and
benefits of linking parallel databases containing essentially similar information with
another database system, or the technical challenges of linking potentially
incompatible datasets.
Tax Treatment of Lobbying Coalitions and Associations
The treatment of lobbying coalitions and associations is not specified or
considered in LDA.
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
18 2 U.S.C. 431.

CRS-14
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.
Revolving Door Provisions
LDA requires registrants to disclose whether they have served as a covered
legislative branch or executive branch official in the two years preceding their
registration. Relatedly, 18 U.S.C. 207 requires that a Member of Congress may not
communicate with or appear before a Member, officer or employee of either
chamber, or any legislative branch office, with intent to influence official action on
behalf of anyone else for a period of one year after leaving office. Similarly a “very
senior staff member” of the legislative branch19 may not communicate with or appear
before the individual’s former employer or office with intent to influence official
action on behalf of anyone else for a period of one year after terminating
congressional employment. Similar prohibitions apply to officials and senior level
employees of the executive branch.20
House Rule IV and Senate Rule XXIII provide floor privileges to former
Members of the respective chambers.
LDA and House and Senate rules are silent on the discussion of employment
negotiations by Members of Congress.
Past Executive or Legislative Branch Employment, Current
Employment Negotiations. H.R. 4975 would require registered lobbyists to
disclose all of their past executive branch and congressional employment for the
seven years preceding registration. A Member of the House who is negotiating for
prospective employment in which he or she has a conflict of interest, or for which
19 “Very senior staff member,” or “highly paid staff” appear to be generic terms that are
sometimes used by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to identify
individual congressional and legislative branch staff who are subject to outside income
limitations, required to file under financial disclosure regulations, or subject to post
employment restrictions due to their level of compensation. According to guidance issued
in 2005 by the committee, an employee is subject to post employment restrictions if, for at
least 60 days during the one-year period preceding the termination of employment, a staffer
was paid at a rate equal to or greater than 75% of the basic rate of pay for Members. The
basic rate of pay for Members is $165,200. The 2006 post-employment threshold for
employees who leave their congressional jobs is $123,900. See Joel Hefley, Chairman, and
Alan B. Mollohan, Ranking Minority Member, “The 2006 Outside Earned Income Limit,
and the Salary Levels at which the Outside Earned Income and Employment Limits, the
Financial Disclosure Requirement, and the Post-Employment Restrictions Apply in 2006,”
memorandum issued by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, Feb. 8,
2006, available at [http://www.house.gov/ethics/m_salary06.htm].
20 Similar prohibitions apply to officials and senior level employees of the executive branch.
See CRS Report 97-875, “Revolving Door,” Post-Employment Laws for Federal Personnel,
by Jack Maskell.

CRS-15
there is the appearance of a conflict of interest, would be required to make a
statement within five days after commencing such negotiations to the Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct.
H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, H.R. 2412, S. 2180, S. 2128, as introduced,
and S. 1398 would require registered lobbyists to disclose all of their past executive
branch and congressional employment.
H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, H.R. 2412, S. 2349, as introduced, S. 2180,
S. 2128, as introduced, and S. 1398 would require a Member of Congress to file with
the Clerk of the House or Secretary of the Senate, as appropriate, 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.21 The disclosure would be required to file a disclosure within three
days of commencing such negotiation or arrangement.
Spouse and Other Family Members of Senators. S. 2349, as
introduced, would require a Senator whose spouse or immediate family member22 is
a registered lobbyist or employee 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.
Post Employment Restrictions. 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.
H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, H.R. 2412, S. 2180, S. 2233, S. 2128, as
introduced, and S. 1398 would increase to two years the cooling off period during
which former senior executive personnel, former Members of Congress, and certain
legislative branch personnel, would be prevented from lobbying the entity in which
they previously served. H.R. 4920 would prohibit all former Members, officers, and
employees of Congress from lobbying any current Member, officer, or employee for
a period of one year after they leave office or terminate employment. H.R. 4696 and
S. 2233 and 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. H.R. 4696 would also establish a four-year ban on former
federal employees lobbying Congress on behalf of foreign governments after they
terminate their government employment. H.R. 3623 would prohibit Members of
21 The provisions of S. 2180 regarding the disclosure of employment negotiations would also
apply to Senate staff who earn more than 75% of the salary paid to Senators. The basic rate
of pay for Members is $165, 200. S. 2180 also provides for the review of employment
negotiations by members of the executive branch by the Office of Government Ethics.
22 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-16
Congress and chamber officers23 from engaging in currently proscribed lobbying
activities for a period five years after they leave office.
S. 2349, as introduced, would amend Senate rules to prohibit for one year any
former Senate senior-level employee24 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.
Floor Privileges for Former Members Who Lobby. S. 2349, as
introduced, would 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.
S. 1398 would eliminate floor privileges in both chambers for former Members
who become lobbyists. H.R. 4682 and H.R. 4696 would rescind House floor
privileges from former Representatives who become lobbyists. S. 2180 would
rescind Senate floor privileges from former Senators who become lobbyists.
House Action. On January 31,2006, Representative David Dreier, chairman
of the Committee on Rules, introduced H.Res. 648 to 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 also denies access to Member exercise facilities to any former Member,
officers, or their spouses, who is a registered lobbyist. On February 1, 2006, the
House adopted the measure under suspension of the rules, by a vote of 379 - 50, 1
present.
Discussion. House and Senate rules, LDA disclosure requirements, and the
“cooling off” prohibitions mandated by 18 U.S.C. 207 were designed to bring
attention to, and reduce the effect of, what some called the “revolving door,” through
which legislators and public officials could leave positions of authority and influence
in government only to return shortly thereafter to the same circles as lobbyists or
other representatives seeking favorable action on behalf of private interests.
23 Officers in the House are the Clerk, Sergeant at Arms, Chief Administrative Officer and
Chaplain. In the Senate the Sergeant at Arms and Secretary are officers. Officers are
elected by the respective chamber.
24 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-17
Efforts to curb the effects of lobbying by former public officials appear to grow
out of a widespread belief that lobbying activities advance special interests at the
expense of a more general public interest. Lobbying activities carried out by
individuals with special access to government decision makers due to previous
professional interaction, are sometimes said to exacerbate this perceived problem.
Proponents of lobbying activities counter that lobbying is “a legitimate activity
protected by the First Amendment to the Constitution,” and that all interests are
represented.25 Some maintain that further efforts to extend the duration of the
lobbying ban could have the effect of keeping individuals who might wish to pursue
lobbying as a career from entering public service, and may deprive the public (as well
as Congress) of access to and the availability of the particular expertise of former
legislators and staff.
Disclosure of Lobbyist Contributions and Payments
The disclosure of campaign contributions is governed by FECA. The
acceptance of gifts, travel, or other considerations by Members of Congress are
governed by House Rule XXV, Limitations on Outside Earned Income and
Acceptance of Gifts, and Senate Rule XXXV, Gifts.
Campaigns. H.R. 4975, H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, S. 2180, and S.
2128, as introduced, would require each LDA registrant, their employees, and any
affiliated political committee, as defined in FECA,26 to disclose the name of each
federal candidate, officeholder, leadership PAC, or political party committee to
whom a contribution was made, or for whom fund raising event was held, including
the date and amount of such contribution.
Travel.27 H.R. 4975 would suspended privately funded travel and would
prohibit registered lobbyists from traveling in corporate aircraft on which a Member
of the House travels. The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct would
be required to develop guidelines regarding the use of such travel in the House by
December 15, 2006.
S. 2349, as introduced, would
! 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
25 Website of the American League of Lobbyists, “Resources,” at [http://www.alldc.org/
resources.htm], visited Jan. 13, 2006.
26 2 U.S.C. 431(4). FECA defines political committee. FECA, LDA, S. 2128, as
introduced, and H.R. 4575 do not specify or define “affiliated.”
27 See 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-18
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;
! 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; and
! 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.
H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 2412, S. 1398, and S. 2180 would require that
congressional travel be certified as not having been planned, organized, arranged, or
financed by a registered lobbyist or foreign agent. The measures would impose a
series of escalating civil fines for first and subsequent offenses. Finally, the measures
would require the ethics committees of the respective chambers to establish
guidelines regarding reasonable travel expenses.
H.R. 4575 and S. 2128, as introduced would require each LDA registrant, its
employees, and any affiliated political committee, as defined in FECA, to disclose
the name of each covered legislative branch official or covered executive branch
official for whom the registrant provided any payment or reimbursements for travel
and related expenses in connection with the covered official’s duties. For each
covered official the registrant would be required to disclose
! an itemization of the payments or reimbursements provided to
finance the travel and related expenses for the covered official, and
to whom the payments or reimbursements were made;
! the purpose and final itinerary of the trip, including a description of
all meetings, tours, events, and outings attended;
! the names of any registrant or individual employed by the registrant
who traveled on any such trip;
! the identity of official or listed sponsor of travel; and

CRS-19
! the identity of any person or entity, other than the listed sponsor of
the travel, which directly or indirectly provided for payment of travel
and related expenses at the request or suggestion of the registrant or
the employee.
H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, and S. 2128, as introduced, would amend
chamber rules in which the measures originated to require Members and
congressional staff to disclose private travel, including the date, destination,
passenger manifest, and purpose of the trip, and would require reimbursement of the
full cost of such air travel. The measures would also require the ethics committees
of the respective chambers to establish guidelines regarding reasonable travel
expenses.
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.
S. 2180 would require Senators and Senate officers and employees to disclose
noncommercial air travel taken in connection with their official duties. S.2180
would require Senators and Senate officers and employees to disclose
noncommercial air travel taken in connection with their official duties.
S. 2233 would prohibit the acceptance by Senators and Senate staff of privately
funded travel by lobbyists or entities that are affiliated with any group that lobbies.
Honors. H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, and S. 2128, as introduced, would
require each LDA registrant, its employees, and any affiliated political committee,
as defined in FECA, to 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.

CRS-20
Gifts.28 H.R. 4975 would require lobbyists to disclose any gifts that count
toward the annual gift limit established by House rules. S. 2349, as introduced,
would 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.
H.R. 4575 and S. 2128, as introduced, would require each LDA registrant, its
employees, and any affiliated political committee, as defined in FECA, the disclosure
of the date, recipient, and amount of any gift,29 that, under the rules of the House of
Representatives or Senate counts towards the $100 cumulative annual limit
prescribed in each chamber, is valued in excess of $20 given by a registrant to a
covered legislative branch official or covered executive branch official. H.R. 4975,
H.R. 4575, H.R. 4667, and S. 2128, as introduced, would require tickets for sporting
and entertainment events that are given as gifts to covered officials to be valued at
face value. Tickets without a face value would be valued at the highest published
rate.
H.R. 4682, H.R. 3177, S. 2180, and S. 1398 would prohibit lobbyists from
giving gifts to Members of Congress with certain exemptions, and would amend the
rules regarding the acceptance of gifts in the chambers in which the measures
originated. S. 2233 would prohibit the acceptance of gifts from lobbyists by Senators
and Senate staff. S. 1398 would also impose a civil penalty of up to $50,000 for
noncompliance.
H.R. 4682 and S. 2180 would require LDA registrants to certify that they have
not provided a gift, including travel to a Member or employee of Congress in
violation of Senate Rule XXXV. H.R. 4920 would 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. H.R. 4671 would require LDA registrants to
disclose any gifts given to a covered legislative branch official.
Discussion. Proposals to link campaign finance and lobbying activities, and
to enhance current rules regarding the interactions between Members of Congress
and lobbyists could serve to provide a clearer picture of who participates in public
affairs and the scope of the activities that characterize that participation. Proponents
of such efforts 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 government
accountability, and help to maintain the integrity and legitimacy of the broader
political system. Those opposing changes to current lobbying disclosure practices
28 See CRS Report RS22231, The Acceptance of Gifts of Free Meals by Members of
Congress, by Jack Maskell.
29 S. 2128, as introduced, and H.R. 4575 would define gift would include a gratuity, favor,
discount, entertainment, hospitality, loan, forbearance, or other item having monetary value.
The term would also encompass gifts of services, training, transportation, lodging, and
meals, whether provided in kind, by purchase of a ticket, payment in advance, or
reimbursement after the expense has been incurred.

CRS-21
might maintain that expanding lobbying disclosure to include those who make
campaign contributions, but who may not have any direct participation in lobbying
activities, could have a an adverse affect on the accuracy of LDA disclosure data due
to a potential increase in registrants who conduct no lobbying but who must register
due to affiliations with entities that retain lobbying services. Additionally, opponents
might assert that such a change could increase the administrative burden associated
with reporting on their activities under LDA, or curb rights of participation through
giving campaign donations, or the right of association, due to the increased burden
of LDA disclosure.
Other issues that Congress might address include consideration of the meaning
of “affiliated” in the context of FECA political committees and their interactions with
entities that secure lobbying services that must be disclosed under LDA.
Penalties for LDA Noncompliance
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 comply with the requirements of LDA, may be liable for a civil fine
of up to $50,000.30
H.R. 4795, H.R. 4682, H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, H.R. 2412, S. 2180, S. 2128, as
introduced, and S. 1398 would increase the maximum penalty to a $100,000 civil
penalty. H.R. 4682, H.R. 4696, and S. 2180 would establish criminal penalties.
Under H.R. 4682 and S. 2180, 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. 4696 would amend LDA to impose a prison term of up
to one year for failing to comply with disclosure requirements.
H.R. 4670 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 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.
Discussion. The increase in potential penalties for noncompliance with LDA
could increase the level of compliance. Those supporting the approach might argue
that a more comprehensive and detailed disclosure process could afford more
openness of government activity and greater accountability. Due in part to the lack
of publicly available information regarding the number of penalties assessed since
LDA became effective on January 1, 1996, however,31 it may not be possible to
30 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.
31 Kenneth P. Doyle, “DOJ Refuses to Disclose Settlements With Those Who Violate
(continued...)

CRS-22
assess the benefits of increasing the penalty. Those opposing changes to the current
statute might maintain that there would be a negative impact on constitutionally
protected rights of assembly, association, and petition of the government, particularly
the longstanding tradition of carrying out these activities without the necessity of
self-identification. Additionally, opponents might assert that if other changes to LDA
relating to clients are enacted, increasing the potential penalties for noncompliance
could potentially subject registrants to liability in the event that the client association
or coalition withholds complete membership information.
Disclosure of Contact with Lobbyists Representing
State Sponsors of Terrorism
Contact with lobbyists representing any client are subject to the same disclosure
requirements under LDA or the Foreign Agents Registration Act of 1938, as
amended,32 as appropriate.
S. 1972 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.
Lobbying and Campaigns
S. 2233 would prohibit registered lobbyists from serving on political committees
authorized by FECA.
Other Employment Rights
LDA and chamber rules confer no employment rights.
H.R. 4667, H.R. 4575, and S. 2128, as introduced, would amend the Indian
Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act33 to ensure that an individual who
was formerly a government official and who is an employee of an Indian tribe
employed to perform services formerly performed for the United States, may
communicate with and appear before any department, agency, court, or commission
31 (...continued)
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.
32 22 U.S.C. 611.
33 25 U.S.C. 450i.

CRS-23
on behalf of the Indian tribe with respect to any matter, upon providing notification
to the head of the appropriate entity of the extent of their previous involvement with
the matter as a government official.
LDA Administration
LDA is administered the House by the Clerk of the House through the
Legislative Resources Center, and in the Senate by the Secretary of the Senate,
through the Senate Office of Public Records.
H.R. 4948 would create an independent ethics commission within the legislative
branch and transfer authority to receive LDA registration and reports to it from the
Clerk and the Secretary.
H.R. 4920 would transfer LDA administration in the House to the Committee
on Standards of Official Conduct.
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 State
Attorney for the District of Columbia for disciplinary action.
S. 2180 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.
H.R. 4799 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 financial disclosure and other reports filed by Members, congressional
officers, and their staff under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978,34 and reports
filed by registered lobbyists under LDA. The office would be authorized to
investigate any alleged violation, of any rule or other standard of conduct, and 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. H.R. 4799 would authorize the office to provide information and
guidance to Members, congressional officers, and their staff regarding any rules and
other standards of conduct applicable in their official capacities. The office would
also provide informal guidance to lobbying registrants of their responsibilities under
LDA, have authority to refer potential violations of LDA to the Department of
Justice, and audit LDA registrations and disclosure reports.
34 Ethics in Government Act of 1978, 5 U.S.C. Appendix Sec. 401.

CRS-24
H.R. 4696 would create an independent commission on lobbying 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. The commission would develop 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. Registrant would be required
to file with the commission monthly reports in electronic form that cover lobbying
activities that relate to Congress.
Oversight of Ethics and Lobbying
There are no explicit oversight requirements in LDA. The Committee on House
Administration and the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration have
jurisdiction over the Clerk of the House and the Secretary of the Senate, respectively,
and may have some oversight authority of LDA provisions the Clerk and the
Secretary must implement. Ethics in Congress are overseen by the House Committee
on Standards of Official Conduct and the Senate Committee on Ethics.
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.
S. 2259 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, conduct
research concerning governmental ethics, and report annually to the Senate Select
Committee on Ethics and the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct on
the commission’s activities. 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.
H.R. 2412, H.R. 4667, S. 1398, S. 2128, as introduced, and H.R. 4575 would
require the Comptroller General to review semiannually the activities of the Clerk
and Secretary under Section 6 of LDA, emphasizing their effectiveness in securing
compliance by lobbyists with the requirements of LDA and whether the Clerk and
the Secretary have the resources and authorities needed for effective oversight and
enforcement of the act. H.R. 2412 would also authorize and direct the Committee
on House Administration and the House Committee on the Judiciary to conduct
hearings on each semiannual report. H.R. 2412 would create in the House a
bipartisan ethics task force with equal representation of the majority and minority
parties. The panel would make recommendations on strengthening ethics oversight
and enforcement in the House, and on providing the resources necessary to
accomplish that goal.
H.R. 4799 and S. 2186 would establish a bipartisan, 10-member commission
appointed by the majority and minority leadership of each chamber. The commission
would be charged to

CRS-25
! evaluate and report the effectiveness of current congressional ethics
requirements, if penalties are enforced and sufficient, and make
recommendations for new penalties;
! 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.
Further Resources
Lobbying
CRS Current Legislative Issues page on Lobbying, Ethics and Related Procedural
Reform, at [http://beta.crs.gov/cli/cli.aspx?PRDS_CLI_ITEM_ID=2405].
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 RL33293, Lobbying and Related Reform Proposals: Consideration of
Selected Measures, 109th Congress, by R. Eric Petersen.

CRS-26
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.
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.