Posted on 12/15/2006 6:03:14 PM PST by Jim Robinson
House Speaker-to-be Nancy Pelosi (D.-Calif.) has pledged to take up a lobbying reform proposal that would impose new regulations on speech by grassroots organizations, while providing a loophole in the rules for large corporations and labor unions.
The legislation would make changes to the legal definition of “grassroots lobbying” and require any organization that encourages 500 or more members of the general public to contact their elected representatives to file a report with detailed information about their organization to the government on a quarterly basis.
The report would include identifying the organization’s expenditures, the issues focused on and the members of Congress and other federal officials who are the subject of the advocacy efforts. A separate report would be required for each policy issue the group is active on.
“Right now, grassroots groups don’t have to report at all if they are communicating with the public,” said Dick Dingman of the Free Speech Coalition, Inc. “This is an effort that would become a major attack on the 1st Amendment.”
Under the bill, communications aimed at an organization’s members, employees, officers or shareholders would be exempt from the reporting requirement. That would effectively exempt most corporations, trade associations and unions from the reporting requirements—but not most conservative grassroots groups, which frequently are less formally organized.
Larger, well-funded organizations are also currently eligible for a “low-dollar lobbyist exemption” that Pelosi’s bill does not give to grassroots organizations. If an organization retains a lobbyist to contact lawmakers directly at a cost of $2,500 per quarter or less, or employs a full-time lobbyist at a cost of $10,000 per quarter or less, the organization does not have to report to the government.
Public Citizen, a liberal “government watchdog,” is taking credit for helping Pelosi craft the legislation and expects the final draft of the bill to closely resemble Pelosi’s Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2006, which contains these provisions.
Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen, said the changes would help “streamline” how grassroots organizations are regulated by the IRS and other laws. Public Citizen would like Congress to adopt the IRS’s definition of “lobbying,” which includes communication that encourages the general public to contact a member of Congress on pending legislation or public policy.
“The IRS has a definition that requires all organizations, including non-profits, to file as a part of our tax returns,” Holman said. “When it comes to the election code and the lobbying disclosure act, they have no definition of grassroots lobbying. It’s excluded from everything. The IRS has a definition of grassroots lobbying, but their information is not publicly reported. It’s just our tax returns to the IRS.”
Suzanne Coffman, director of communication for Guidestar.org, which makes IRS 990 forms available on the Internet, said any secular, non-profit organization that has more than $25,000 in income per year is required by law to make the last three years worth of tax forms available upon request. “We get them directly from the IRS, and we have more than two million 990s online” said Coffman. “For non-charitable organizations, like private charities or private foundations, we have fewer because the IRS began scanning those only in April 2005. They focused on charitable organizations, which make up the bulk of exempt organizations, because those are the ones that accept tax-deductible contributions. The need for accountability is much higher with them than with other types of organizations which are sort of subsidized by the taxpayer because they federally are tax exempt, but not like a charity is.”
Public Citizen’s public IRS 990 disclosure forms show that it raised more than $3 million in 2005. That year, the group spent $297, 431 on mail and $178,182 on consulting and professional fees.
A coalition of grassroots organizers, including David Keene of the American Conservative Union, Larry Pratt of Gun Owners of America and Terrence Scanlon of the Capitol Research Center, have written an open letter calling on Public Citizen to renounce its efforts, which they called “flawed to the point of hypocrisy.”
“This bill would apply to those who have no Washington-based lobbyists, who provide no money or gifts to members of Congress, and who merely seek to speak, associate and petition the government,” it said. “Regulating the speech, publishing, association and petitioning rights of citizens is not targeted at corruption in Washington, as Public Citizen and its supporters would believe. Instead, it is targeted directly at the 1st-Amendment rights of citizens and their voluntary associations.”
The Lobbying Transparency and Accountability Act, which made some of these changes, was actually approved by both the House and the Senate in the 109th Congress, but failed to make it through a conference committee.
To help dramatize the bill this time around, Pelosi is planning to assign sponsorship of various amendments to incoming freshman, which they will promote in their maiden House floor speeches.
Current law prevents former members of Congress and senior staff as well as senior executive staff from lobbying for one year. Pelosi’s proposal would extend that to two years and completely ban members and staff from accepting gifts, meals and privately sponsored travel.
Miss Carpenter is Assistant Editor for HUMAN EVENTS. She is the author of "The Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy's Dossier on Hillary Rodham Clinton," published by Regnery (a HUMAN EVENTS sister company).
I think that was promised by the people elected and put into power in 94. They failed and now they "failed" to get reelected to power.
Me too, I also have to have had lots of rest and a clear head, or else I start answering them back in German.
When Mr. Bush signs the legislation requiring this :p
He signed CFR, I have no reason to believe he would look at this differently.
"The legislation would make changes to the legal definition of “grassroots lobbying” and require any organization that encourages 500 or more members of the general public to contact their elected representatives to file a report with detailed information about their organization to the
government on a quarterly basis. "
How does she define "organization" ? And are details to include any/all who have touched base with this organization?
Can FR become a cyber chimera to avoid such evil? What if grass roots are just individuals reacting a la political chaos theory ? Do the readers of any news source become an "organization" under this? The idea of this occurring while the *possible* Clinton campaign starts up is bone chilling.
Time to sound the alarm.
McCain-Feingold, prescription drug "benefit," "no child left behind," open borders and amnesty, etcetera, ad nauseum. More growth of FedGov and government spending than in Billary's wildest wet dreams...
Anything more I can answer for you?
Good luck with that wandering in the desert thing.
No matter how disgusted I was by DeWine's weakness, the alternative..........a Marxist.........was unthinkable.
To me it would have been irresponsible, as a hardcore conservative, for me to have done anything else other than to put that sign in my yard. I never made specific calls or door to doors for DeWine (just for the general ticket), but I wrote letters regarding the danger of a Sherrod Brown as our Senator, because he is so far to the left.
Unfortunately, the voters were stuck on stupid (just like the 'vote out the RINO's, vote in the communists' pseudo-cons here on FR), and we're stuck with a left-wing extremist.
As far as I'm concerned this election separated the wheat from the tares.
And there are plenty of tares on this forum pretending to be wheat.......
I could mention a few by name, but frankly, I don't LIKE pseudo cons, and I don't want to have to ping any of them. They're just like liberals, and both kinds make me sick......
I notice there is no refutation... just snide remarks. Which is no more than I have learned to expect from someone who loves to beat up non-pubbie conservatives, then DEMANDS they vote for the candidates of YOUR choice...
BUMP! Thanks for your comments, ohioWfan. Spot on!
Now, if "law makers" fixed leaks rather than caused them, and if plumbers, rather than lawyers, made laws, things might improve.
Here's a clue for you: we've been wetnursing you people for the last eight or nine years. We're sick of being blackmailed by you.
Don't like what the GOP has to offer? Find another party and leave us to our "moderate" choices.
I am a registered Independent, yet according to the likes of you, I OWE my vote to whoever the Pubbies run in the general election. No matter who or how despicable it is... So solly, Cholly!
According to me, I don't CARE whether you vote or not.
The CFR kowtow started the fissure. I'm not sure he's got it in him to veto anything ... weak.
I'm sure reimposing the Fairness Doctrine is only weeks away.
I agree and thank you for this thread.
Your quesstion was:
"Will somebody PLEASE tell me again how Republicans aren't any different than Democrats?"
Your answer is here:
http://news.com.com/SenatorIllegalimagesmustbereported/2100-1028_3-6142332.html?tag=nefd.lede
Under the guise of "for the children," McCain will make it impossible for web sites to have unmoderated comments, forcing them to shut down. His intent is not to stop child pornography, but to stop the free speech of American citizens.
And yeah...he's a Republican.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.