| Page 2 of 3 < > |
Why BlackBerry When You Can Take the Bus?
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Does that mean -- gasp! -- that Yarmuth actually is cozying up to "special interests"? After all, aren't labor unions interest groups, too? And aren't corporate PACs really nothing more than pooled contributions from corporate executives?
Technically, yes. But Yarmuth's campaign says he is making an important distinction. Corporate PACs exist to improve the profitability of a company or industry, it says -- in other words, to promote a special interest. "But an individual's interest is not limited to his or her profession," said Yarmuth campaign spokesman Christopher Hartman. "So we've drawn the line between an individual and an individual's place of work."
Labor unions, he added, "often represent" working families, which Yarmuth says he supports.
Ah. That clears it up. Thanks.
Sighs of Relief
As we reported a couple weeks ago, lobbyists have been hyperventilating over the prospect of filling out the newest disclosure form for Congress, LD-203.
Well, they can calm down. Some of the most onerous requirements have been toned down.
Congress's "new guidance dramatically reduces the scope of the required disclosures, particularly as they relate to trade association and charitable activities," said Mike Zolandz of the law firm Sonnenschein Nath & Rosenthal.
"It's a pretty dramatic change," agreed Robert K. Kelner of Covington & Burling.
Fred Wertheimer, of the watchdog group Democracy 21, said the changes will not reduce the effectiveness of the lobbying law that passed last year.
Under the new guidance, lobbyists do not have to disclose every time they buy a table at an event at which a lawmaker or congressional staffer is honored. Nor do associations have to reveal every time they hold a breakfast at which a lawmaker drops by to speak.
But disclosure still would be required when lobbyists or associations bankroll entire events at which a congressional member or aide receives an award.
The New Washington
Monument Policy Group is giving new meaning to the term "Washington lobbyist."



