House Democrats introduced a lobbying reform bill Tuesday night that requires more disclosure of links between lobbyists and lawmakers, but stops short of the toughest reforms floated in the wake of the Jack Abramoff scandal.
The bill would require members to disclose K Street job offers, ban them from lobbying former colleagues for two years, and demand greater disclosure of fundraising on behalf of members.
It also imposes fines and a possible 15-year prison sentence on anyone who uses their position to force a lobbying shop or business to hire – or not hire – someone because of their partisan political affiliation…
But the reform bill would not create an independent investigator to conduct ethics inquiries or require detailed disclosure of lobbyist bundling for lawmakers.
House leaders decided to take up the bundling issue separately, a move that makes it much more vulnerable to defeat.
Bundling is the practice by which a lobbyist aggregates donations from many individuals and presents it to a lawmaker in one ‘bundle.’ In that way, a single donor might be able to deliver tens or even hundreds of thousands for a lawmaker. Flush with cash after their first taste of the majority in years, Democrats are reluctant to do anything that would put a chill on their fundraising machine. Roll Call reports that this weak the legislation has already come under attack from House Democrats–for going too far:
Two groups causing particular concern are the Congressional Black Caucus and the conservative Blue Dog Coalition. Both maintain generally friendly relations with business lobbyists, and senior members of each faction have raised objections to proposals that would double to two years the cooling-off period for lawmakers and staff taking lobbying jobs and require lobbyists to disclose campaign checks they bundle for candidates…
As prospects for the overhaul teeter, outside reform advocates said they are unsure whether House Democratic leaders can pull their Members together. “I’m worried about it, absolutely,” said Craig Holman of Public Citizen. He said leaders and freshmen, many of whom campaigned on cleaning up the process, will have to overcome “the old bulls of the Democratic Caucus, who don’t want to see much change…”
The measure does not call for a new independent office to replace the ethics committee and help enforce the laws, a top priority for reformers. Instead, a bipartisan task force is examining the issue and will deliver its findings this month. Democratic freshmen have rallied behind a proposal to outsource ethics policing duties and will try to offer it as an amendment to the reform bill.
It’s clear that the ethics package needs serious improvements if Democrats really want to gain the public trust. In particular, they will never be able to convince voters that they’re truly adhering to a commonsense code of conduct as long as sitting Members of Congress are left judging each other’s ethics. This is the ultimate case of the fox guarding the hen house. Republicans ought to push for the strictest ethics reform possible. And they ought to back the creation of an outside body to review allegations of misconduct. In this case, it’d be both good policy and good politics.
