Posts Tagged ‘Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton’

Lobbyist Campaign Contributions

Monday, September 20th, 2010 by Vbhotla

This story about Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-District of Columbia) that ran on Big Government ran with an emphasis on the “heavy-handed” method with which Holmes Norton approached the unnamed lobbyist. But the bigger issue is that members of Congress are prohibited from soliciting campaign contributions in connection with official actions and duties.

Big Government points out that:

“More serious… is her frequent mention of her seniority and her Chairmanship of a subcommittee. She is attempting to solicit funds based on her past actions taken in her official capacity in Congress. She is implying to the lobbyist that, should he decline to donate, he will be turning down a senior member of Congress who Chairs a subcommittee highly relevant to his ‘sector’.”

Because Big Government did not release the name of the individual for whom Holmes Norton left this voicemail, it is impossible to state with conviction that Holmes Norton’s actions were directed toward a federally-registered lobbyist. (The lobbyist to whom the article’s authors are referring may be a “government relations” person, not registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act).

Some lobbyists simply decline to make any kind of political contributions at all, claiming this helps them to not only remain in compliance with the law, but also gives them leverage when members or staffers try to pressure them into contributions. You may want to follow suit. If you are a lobbyist and you are approached by a member of Congress (or a member’s staffer) for campaign funds or other types of solicitations, don’t walk, run, for several reasons.

First, as a lobbyist, it is your job to attempt to influence (on behalf of your clients), official action. There is no prohibition against such action; it is a Constitutionally-protected right to advocate for your chosen position.

Second, because your professional life is a series of attempts to influence official actions, any professional contact with members or staffers is probably in the context of influence.

Therefore, your professional actions and influence are closely connected. Your professional life is closely linked with your personal life, and making a campaign contribution to a member of Congress with whom you have daily/weekly/ monthly contact regarding official actions just looks bad.

In this situation, being above reproach with help you tremendously. It may not be against the law to contribute – and you should certainly feel free to do so if you believe that there is no harm in doing so, and your efforts are not connected to official actions. But it may help you enormously to consider stopping all direct political contributions while you remain a federally-registered lobbyist. A better course of action, if you feel that donations are something you want to do regardless, might be to donate to PACs unconnected to members, or to party committees.

Do note that members are strictly prohibited from soliciting gifts from lobbyists.

Weekly Lobbying News Round-Up

Friday, September 17th, 2010 by Vbhotla

After last week’s surprise upset in Alaska (Joe Miller over Lisa Murkowski in the GOP Senate primary), Roll CallWeekly newsreports that lobbyists were quick to shift their financial and fundraising support from Murkowski to Miller. Article here.

The New York Times report on John Boehner’s lobbyist ties is examined a little more fully in our post, here. Boehner also responded via the Washington Examiner.

Pepsi and Coke both have new lobbyists in DC… maybe this will spark the huge Pepsi v. Coke epic battle we’ve all been waiting for. (Although I won’t lie, as a Michigander, I prefer Faygo).

John Doolittle, who earlier this year complained that the (cleared) ethics investigations against him were making supporting work difficult, has found a job lobbying for Colfax City, California.

Lots of ethical dilemmas and strong words being traded back and forth regarding House ethics.. Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), one of the Ethics Committee members,  faces his own ethics and disclosure issues. Various public interest groups try to get Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner to publicly agree to support the OCE in the next Congress.

Ross Garber comments on Public Corruption charges post Skilling (discussion of Kevin Ring case included). See our posts about Kevin Ring and Skilling.

Following up on our report earlier this week that lobby shops are looking to up their GOP quotient ahead of the midterms, Roll Call reports on the Democratic job prospects on K St.

We anxiously await word on the fate of DISCLOSE.

Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-District of Columbia) was recorded leaving a voicemail on an unnamed lobbyist’s phone, asking for campaign contributions, and doing it in a manner that implied a reminder of Holmes Norton’s power status in the lobbyist’s “sector.” More on this story in our Monday post on lobbyist campaign contributions.

From the Canadian Society of Association Executives, a post on “Enhancing Grassroots Advocacy Through Social Media.” Worth a read.

The LA Times has an article on Kevin Spacey’s role as  Jack Abramoff in the upcoming “Casino Jack.”

Reports abound that Paul Magliocchetti is changing his “not guilty” plea in his 11-count indictment.

Three Obama administration employees never deregistered as lobbyists before taking their new jobs, according to OpenSecrets blog.

Quote(s) of the week:

“There may be a new gang in town after November,” said Hellmann, a former aide to then-Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.). “The climate will be better for the business community on taxes.” (Roll Call, 9/13/2010)

“A lot of people want to have coffee now.” – Gordon Taylor, Ogilvy Government Relations, about staffers seeking advice on how to navigate the job market (Roll Call, 9/14/2010)

“Once he’s done with his house arrest, he may decide to speak out about the lobbying industry… He’d be credible if he takes responsibility for what he did, which he has, and exposes the hypocrisy he was a part of.” Kevin Spacey on Jack Abramoff (LA Times, 9/14/2010)