Thread: Dems continue to fight Grassrooters

Waxman's ‘1984' Law Would Impede Citizen Lobbying
Dave Eberhart, NewsMax
Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Opponents of a new executive branch lobbying reform bill working its way through the U.S. House of Representatives warn that it will impede an ordinary citizen's absolute right to communicate with government officials.

Conservatives groups have expressed outrage over the proposed law — one that targets not just lobbyists but organizations trying to effect public policy.

When Rep. Henry A. Waxman, chairman of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform of the House, introduced H.R. 984, the Executive Branch Reform Act, last month, he promised it represented "good government" reform.

Critics, however, think it should be renumbered "H.R. 1984" because of the looming specter of an Orwellian "Big Brother."

As advertised, the legislation, among a host of other provisions, stops the practice of "secret" meetings between lobbyists and executive branch officials by requiring all political appointees and senior officials in federal agencies and the White House to report the contacts they have with lobbyists and other private parties seeking to influence official government action.

The reports, which will be filed quarterly and maintained on a searchable database at the Office of Government Ethics, must disclose the dates of meetings, the parties involved, and the subject matters discussed.

Reportedly, the Waxman bill, approved 28-0 by his committee on Feb. 14, may be incorporated into a broader "ethics reform" bill, on which the House may act at any time.

The Senate passed its version of "ethics reform" legislation, S.1, in January, but it got stripped of any provision comparable to H.R. 984's reporting requirements.

There are many concerns over the language in the controversial H.S. 984.

"Not later than 30 days after the end of a calendar quarter, each covered executive branch official shall make a record of, and file with the Office of Government Ethics a report on, any significant contacts during the quarter between the covered executive branch official and any private party relating to an official government action. If no such contacts occurred, each such official shall make a record of, and file with the Office a report on, this fact, at the same time."

Susan T. Muskett, an attorney with the National Right to Life Committee cringes at what she perceives as the overly broad verbiage.

Muskett explains that under H.R. 984, thousands of executive branch officials would be required to file quarterly reports containing the timing and substantive details of "any significant contact" they receive on a policy matter — not only from lobbyists, but from any "private party" — a term defined in the bill to include "any person or entity" other than other government officials, or representatives of such officials such as congressional staff persons.

The bill, she further explains, defines a "significant contact" as any "oral or written communication (including electronic communication) . . . in which such private party seeks to influence official action by any officer or employee of the executive branch of the United States."

Opines Muskett: "The requirement would apply to communications whether they were one-way or two-way, and whether they were solicited or unsolicited. Every e-mail, fax, letter, or voicemail expressing a view on a policy matter would have to be reported.

"Every conversation in which any ‘private party' expressed herself to an official on a policy matter would have to be reported — whether the conversation took place in a formal meeting, or on the phone, or in a random encounter at a church or synagogue, or in a private conversation with a spouse."

Rev. Louis P. Sheldon, chairman and founder of the Traditional Values Coalition in Washington, D.C. is also up in arms about the Waxman bill.

"H.R. 984 creates an elaborate and unneeded reporting system for executive branch officials — more than 8,000 — who will be required to file complicated reports four times a year," Shelton says.

"Making a mistake can result in a $50,000 fine. Every contact made by executive branch employees must be recorded under Waxman-Davis [a Republican on the committee, Rep. Tom Davis of Virginia], even by the Armed Forces. "This is completely unreasonable . . .," argues Shelton. "The president would be bound up in reports."

In February, Traditional Values Coalition was an integral part in successfully stripping Section 220 from S.1. when the Senate tried to pass a grass-roots lobby reform bill similar to the Waxman House bill.

Muskett agrees with Shelton's fear of government executives being bond up in reports: "If an advocacy group anywhere on the ideological spectrum could obtain the voicemail or e-mail address of a covered government official, the group could essentially paralyze the official's office by using the Internet to generate tens of thousands of unsolicited ‘significant contacts,' each voicing boilerplate disagreement with an agency's policy on any matter — each of which would have to be individually logged and reported," she says.

But if critics like Shelton and Muskett see the bill as too broad and sweeping, Waxman refers to it as necessarily "comprehensive."

"It would end the secret meetings between special interests and government officials that characterized the operations of Vice President Cheney's energy task force. And it would expose the activities of influence-peddlers like Jack Abramoff to public scrutiny," Waxman argues.

"This bill may be the most significant open-government legislation since the enactment of the Freedom of Information Act," he concludes.

During Committee on Oversight and Government Reform hearings, James A. Thurber, distinguished professor and director and founder of the Center for Congressional and Presidential Studies at American University in Washington, D.C. buttressed Waxman's concerns.

"One very public and striking example of the lack of transparency in executive branch lobbying was Vice President Cheney's Energy Task Force," Thurber testified.

"Vice President Cheney — himself a former energy industry executive — met with top energy company officials to write the administration's energy plan. Despite repeated requests for transparency, through the disclosure of the names of these private interests and the minutes of the meetings, Government Accountability Office requests, and a court case, those meetings have remained secret," he added.

"Less attention has been paid to the hundreds of secret meetings that happen each week between government executives and lobbyists for private interests who are seeking federal contracts or contract extensions, or who are seeking to influence changes in federal rules or regulatory policy."

In addition to the reporting requirements, the Waxman bill:

Creates a federal ban to prevent lobbyists who enter government from handing out favors to their former clients. In addition, government officials will be prohibited from negotiating future employment with private interests who are affected by their official actions. Officials who leave government to become lobbyists would not be able to lobby their former colleagues for two years (current law has only a one-year ban).

Bars executives who worked for private contractors from awarding contracts to their former employers when they enter government. The bill also closes multiple loopholes in the law governing when government procurement officials can be hired by companies to whom they awarded contracts.

Eliminates the use of unregulated "pseudo-classifications" such as "sensitive but unclassified" or "for official use only." The legislation would require the development of regulations and standards governing the use of any information control designations by federal agencies.

Addresses the issue of government-sponsored covert propaganda by requiring the federal government to disclose its role in funding or disseminating messages to the American public.
Meanwhile, Shelton and his Traditional Values Coalition are wary of another bill — this one dealing with reporting requirements regarding citizen communication with the legislative branch.

Language in the House Grassroots Lobby bill will make any person or group who alerts 500-plus people as to any issue to reporting four times a year on every single letter, phone call, e-mail, plus the cost, which they send out.

Says Shelton: "It is clear that Speaker [Nancy] Pelosi intends to include in the measure a provision like Sec 220 that violates the First Amendment rights of citizens to freely petition their government which we stripped from the Senate bill."


© NewsMax 2007. All rights reserved.

"It would end the secret meetings between special interests and government officials that characterized the operations of Vice President Cheney's energy task force. And it would expose the activities of influence-peddlers like Jack Abramoff to public scrutiny," Waxman argues.

It's amazing to me that the Dem's absolute hatred of this administration has them creating some of the most destructive legislation around. Of course, the Dems never do anything like what Cheney did, with his secret meetings, etc. That was monopoly money found in Rep. Jefferson's freezer, not real dough. I hope the voters that allowed these loons to take over the Congress last year are proud of their votes.

one that targets not just lobbyists but organizations trying to effect public policy.

I'll tell you what---when I make my little calls and visits, I ALWAYS REPRESENT MYSELF AS A SINGLE CITIZEN! There is no need to complicate the tiny numbskulls of our elected officials with all sorts of monikers of organizational handicap, is there?

I always adhere to the KISS principle---Keep It Simple, Stupid! This organization is merely an umbrella that let's us simple citizens swap ideas, rhetoric, and re-energize our INDIVIDUAL battles to redress our grievances to our government!

I will got to the wall with any politicians who claims otherwise!