08-02-07
WHAT'S NEW IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS
Ethics legislation moved back to the fast track this week as the House passed new ethics and lobbying rules, reports the Los Angeles Times. But many lobbyists are unconcerned about the impact of the changes -- often at their own peril, says Roll Call. These stories and more in this edition of the Public Affairs News Monitor.
HEADLINES AT A GLANCE
"House Easily Passes Ethics Overhaul"
"For Lobbyists, Ethics Bill a Yawn"
"Why Good Companies Still Get Sued"
"Google Goes to Washington With Own Brand of Lobbying"
"Anxious Republicans Fear Another Beating"
"Can Business Solve the Immigration Mess?"
"Big Labor Flexes Its Muscles in Congress--With Mixed Results"
"U.S., EU Business Groups Lobby for Uniform Rules"
UPCOMING CONFERENCES
Public Affairs Management in Asia/Professional Development Institute [1]
August 20-22, 2007 - Hong Kong
The Professional Development Institute is designed to help you and your staff to navigate complex political issues, refine your global management strategies, and build a network of contacts across the region. This seminar, which is cosponsored by Australian Centre for Corporate Public Affairs and the Public Affairs Council, covers all aspects of public affairs management in Asia.
Membership Orientation [2]
Sept. 11, 2007 - Public Affairs Council - Washington, DC
Learn how to get the most out of your Council membership during this free lunchtime session. We'll review all the Council's major services, including information assistance, conferences, communications, benchmarking, networking and online services.
Political Involvement Legal Overview [3]
September 17, 2007 - Las Vegas, NV
This meeting is essential for anyone involved in your organization's government relations or public affairs programs. The program was designed for professionals at the state and federal levels who are seeking guidance on campaign finance, lobbying laws, gift restrictions and other legal considerations. Our speaker, Ken Gross, the country's leading authority on campaign finance legal issues and Public Affairs Council legal adviser, will answer your political legal inquiries and review hot-button issues and common mistakes made by political programs.
COUNCIL SERVICES
Did you know that Council staff experts are available to answer your questions on public affairs issues and share customized information, research and other resources? Learn more at www.pac.org/counseling [4]
copyright 2007 INFORMATION, INC. [5]
Public Affairs News Monitor may be reproduced in hard copy form or electronically for internal circulation to Public Affairs Council member companies and associations.
"House Easily Passes Ethics Overhaul"
Los Angeles Times (08/01/07) P. A1; Simon, Richard
A bill to restrict lobbyists' influence through a retooling of ethics rules was overwhelmingly passed by the House of Representatives on Tuesday. "If there was one message that was abundantly clear based on the results of last year's election, it was that the American people want us to end the culture of corruption that has enveloped the legislative process," declared House Judiciary Committee Chairman Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.). The legislation would require lobbyists to disclose the campaign checks they solicit from different donors, including clients and friends, and would strip congressional pensions from lawmakers found guilty of felonies. Disclosure of the names of legislators behind special-interest appropriations requests would also be required under the bill. Furthermore, lobbyists would have to detail their dealings more frequently, pay up to $200,000 in fines for willful violations, and face up to five years in jail for "knowingly and corruptly" breaking rules. Lawmakers would also be forbidden from pressuring businesses to hire lobbyists according to their political affiliation, and the House banned the practice of members traveling on corporate-owned jets. "It was kind of a surprise to us that it passed as overwhelmingly as it did, as quickly as it did," said Common Cause Director Bob Edgar, a former congressman. "They want Congress to clean up its act."(www.latimes.com)
"For Lobbyists, Ethics Bill a Yawn"
Roll Call (08/01/07) P. 9; Ackley, Kate
Lobbyists are greeting a congressional overhaul of ethics rules with little concern, but experts warn that lobbyists harbor this attitude at their own peril. "I think people don't understand the implications of the new liability provisions under this law, both civilly and criminally," says Ken Gross with Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. "I just don't know how much attention people are paying." If signed into law, the measure will mark the first time that lobbyists have to certify on their forms that they have not violated any of the gift rules. "The lobby reports, I think, still contain a lot of errors, people are not properly reporting overhead of in-house personnel, or their trade association dues," Gross adds. Not only will they be subject to penalty under the new law, but the number of referrals made from the Senate to the Department of Justice will be made public. "That may bring additional pressure not only to refer cases, but for the U.S. attorney to be more responsive to the referrals," he says. Lobbyists are pleased that Members will have to shoulder the administrative burden of disclosing which registered lobbyists bundle contributions totaling at least $15,000. Clark & Weinstock lobbyist Sandra Kaplan Stuart reports that her office has been mentally preparing for the lobbying reform bill for quite some time, and operates as if much of the measure has already passed. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington Executive Director Melanie Sloan contends that lobbyists are being burdened with too many obligations under the new bill, and in some cases are being treated unfairly. "Lobbyists have to certify they haven't given any gifts or travel that would violate House or Senate rules," she notes. "Members should have to say they didn't accept any."(www.rollcall.com)
"Why Good Companies Still Get Sued"
The Conference Board Review (08/07) Vol. 44, No. 4, P. 40; Krohe Jr., James
Large companies can take a major financial hit when numerous lawsuits without clout on their own are merged into class-action lawsuits. While many class actions are filed by consumers or shareholders, a growing number are filed by employees, mainly regarding discrimination, workplace safety, and wages or pensions. Class-action lawsuits have been filed against 90 percent of Fortune 500 companies by current or former workers for such things as unpaid overtime, sex discrimination, and poor pension investments. Given that national companies have over four thousand employment and labor laws to adhere to and that federal and state laws are often very different from one another, experts note even companies that believe they are in compliance should be worried about litigation. Not only are these laws complicated, but they also are changed frequently by lawmakers. The potential for new legislation and plaintiffs' attorneys increasingly targeting such things as company dress codes and weight limits as illegal bias lead experts to believe more class actions are on the horizon. Many companies agree to settle out of court--sometimes for hundreds of millions of dollars--because it holds down legal costs, prevents them from having to address future employee claims on the matter, and does not force them to admit wrongdoing or make dramatic changes in management. Additionally, companies have grown so big in recent years that multi-million dollar payouts are no longer crippling. Moreover, a 2003 study by George Washington University Law School professor Michael Selmi reveals that stock prices do not take a hit when companies are slapped with employment-discrimination class actions or agree to settle them.(www.conference-board.org)
"Google Goes to Washington With Own Brand of Lobbying"
Wall Street Journal (07/20/07) P. A1; Delaney, Kevin J.; Schatz, Amy
Google is offering a raft of services to Congress--holding workshops on how its products can aid the election of politicians, for instance--in an effort to expand its sphere of influence in Washington. Targeting political ads to people who live within a specific geographic range, allowing candidates to post videos for free, and enhancing campaign sites with Google maps are just a few examples of the services the Internet giant can deliver. And a July 23 debate between Democratic presidential contenders was partially sponsored by YouTube. Google's dealings are facing increased scrutiny amid concerns of unfair competition and copyright infringement, to name just two issues. "We're more and more under the microscope," notes Director of Policy Communications in Google's Washington office Robert Boorstin. "It would be disingenuous to say we weren't trying to have influence with decision makers and people who try to influence them." In general, Google is not running afoul of federal regulations on campaign-contribution restrictions because most of the services it is offering are free and widely accessible. Google is hiring people experienced in lobbying and campaigning, such as former political consultant Peter D. Greenberger, to oversee its D.C. operations.(www.wsj.com)
"Anxious Republicans Fear Another Beating"
The Hill (07/27/07) Vol. 14, No. 92, P. 1; Snyder, Jim
A GOP resurgence in 2008 seems unlikely, according to experts who cite such factors as President Bush's plummeting approval ratings, opposition to the war in Iraq, and the cumulative effect of congressional scandals. "The only thing that has changed is that everything that was bad got worse," reports Bernadette Budde--political director of the Business Industry Political Action Committee, which backs mostly Republican business-friendly candidates. Not all prospects of a Republican comeback have been squashed, however, with supporters seeing hope in the Democratic Congress' failure to fulfill its campaign promises. Still, a Washington Post-ABC News poll found that while 60 percent of respondents were disappointed with Congress' performance, Republicans fared worse than Democrats. As long as the Iraq war and its toll remains central in voters' minds, a GOP majority win next year is remote, according to people such as Americans for Tax Reform director Grover Norquist. Rutgers University political science professor Ross Baker expects a "no confidence" vote in 2008, explaining that the president's low approval numbers are more significant than low ratings for Congress. (www.thehill.com)
"Can Business Solve the Immigration Mess?"
Business Week (07/31/07); Chang, Chi-an
U.S. states and cities are turning to the private sector to tackle the immigration challenge the federal government has failed to meet with the defeat of its immigration reform package. Politicians are asking companies to play the role of arbiter in the determination of legal and illegal residents, particularly as they hire new workers; some local governments are taking further steps, an example being the city of Hazleton, Pa.'s ordinance, recently declared unconstitutional, requiring landlords to verify the legal residency of their tenants. Businessmen balk at the responsibility of confirming their employees' legal status, arguing that it is government's job to curtail illegal immigration and that they should be allowed to devote more time to their businesses. "Instead of the government stepping up and dealing with [the immigration issue], they are expecting businessmen to become document specialists and to be their enforcement tool," complains Arizona Farm Bureau President Kevin Rogers. "It's not fair to punish businesses." The governor of Arizona signed a strong anti-illegal immigration bill that imposes heavy penalties, including the temporary and permanent revocation of business licenses, on violators. Arizona businessmen find themselves in a double bind, in which they risk breaking the Arizona law on the one hand or running afoul of discrimination law for rejecting applicants on the other. A coalition of Arizona business leaders is seeking a preliminary injunction to prevent the enactment of the new law, on the grounds that it is anti-constitutional and violates the right to due process. There is also concern that immigrant workers will leave Arizona if they think jobs will be scarcer because of the new law, thus causing an already tight labor market to shrink even more.(www.businessweek.com)
"Big Labor Flexes Its Muscles in Congress--With Mixed Results"
The Hill (07/24/07); Swanson, Ian
The role labor unions played in the election of the Democratic congressional leaders appears to be paying off, with Congress' renewed interest in pro-union measures such as House-approved check-card legislation and the postponement of free-trade agreements opposed by labor, to name a few examples. "Issues that have been long ignored are getting the attention they deserve," declares top AFL-CIO lobbyist Bill Samuel. The AFL-CIO anticipates a drive for reforms to bankruptcy law along with bills that negate a National Labor Relations Board ruling that broadly classified workers deemed to be supervisors, which could make many more employees eligible for collective bargaining rights. On the other hand, House Republican Conference Chairman Rep. Adam Putnam (R-Fla.) observes that these developments illustrate "a blatant return to the old stereotype of Big Labor bosses pulling the strings of Democrats," and warns that the strategy could backfire on Democrats in next year's elections, considering that labor unions comprise only a small percentage of America's private workforce. Despite the traction gained by numerous union proposals, only one pro-union bill--a minimum wage hike--has so far been passed into law. Samuel acknowledges the frustration his organization feels that labor issues have stalled in the Senate.(www.thehill.com)
"U.S., EU Business Groups Lobby for Uniform Rules"
The Hill (07/18/07) Vol. 14, No. 87, P. 22; Young, Jeffrey
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has formed an alliance with BusinessEurope, a Belgium-based coalition of trade associations, to lobby the Transatlantic Economic Council, a new U.S.-European Union entity that is charged with reconciling trans-Atlantic business regulations. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and BusinessEurope formed the alliance, which is known as the Global Regulatory Cooperation Project, as a way to integrate their efforts to promote business-friendly policies in a number of fields, including intellectual property, antitrust enforcement, investment rules, and regulatory standards. The Global Regulatory Cooperation Project plans to take a number of actions to promote uniform business standards, including lobbying the White House to take a more active role in international regulatory issues, in part by creating an office that will coordinate the efforts of several federal agencies. In addition, the Global Regulatory Project plans to detail the rules implemented by some countries to restrict free trade--rules that it calls "de facto barriers to trade"--and outline their costs. (http://www.thehill.com/ [6])