LOBBY REFORM: STILL NOT READY FOR MARK-UP

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP77M00144R000800150014-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 24, 2001
• Sequence Number: 14
• Publication Date: December 20, 1975
• Content Type: OPEN

Lobbies A2pproved For Release 2001/08/30 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800150014-6
Virtually no one can be described as opposing a change
in the 1946 law, but many objections have been raised to
Common Cause's proposed revisions.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, for example, opposes
on constitutional and practical grounds any attempt to
make lobbying laws apply to grassroots lobbying. It favors
Rep. Olin E. Teague's bill (HR 1112), which is limited to
direct lobbying. (Chamber of Commerce lobby, Weekly
Report p. 2457)
Taking a slightly different approach, Ralph Nader's
different organizations question the constitutionality of
making grassroots lobbying a "trigger" mechanism for
registration, but they believe such activities should be
reported by those lobbyists who must register on the basis
of other criteria.
The AFL-CIO is opposed to proposed requirements that
lobbyists log the contacts they make with members and
staff. It also opposes, as does Nader, efforts to require that
financial reports be broken down by issues. The federation
considers this an excessive burden for groups who lobby on
a wide range of issues.
Detailed reporting requirements are criticized by
smaller groups, such as environmental organizations, who
worry that they do not have sufficient financial resources
or staff to comply. '
Despite the difficulties, Senate staffers generally are
satisfied with the work done this year and are optimistic
about the prospects for a measure being approved in 1976.
Both Stafford and Kennedy were pleased by the Govern-
ment Operations Committee's work.
The committee's redraft is expected to have sufficient
backing to permit the committee to begin mark-up early
next year.
On the House side, the jurisdictional issue between the
ethics and the Judiciary committees is unresolved. Staff
meetings have been held and the parliamentarian has been
asked for advice. But no final decision has been made
Without an agreement, a lobby bill could be snagged in tlx:
Rules Committee.
Railsback told Congressional Quarterly he "had hope(
a new law would be on the books by now." However, Ire
still rates the chances for enactment of a lobby bill a.-
"very good."
In addition to the main lobbying hills, two related
measures also are pending:
? S 1289, introduced by Sen. Kennedy, would require ex-
ecutive branch employees to log the communications they
receive. Kennedy's Judiciary Administrative Practices Sub
committee has held hearings on the measure and plans a
redraft. There also have been discussions of the possibility
of merging it, with the Senate Government Operations Com
mittee lobbying bill.
Committee staff members who have worked on various ? 11J2 8021, introduced by Rep. Barber B. Conable Jr. (i,
lobby regulation bills uniformly agree that they are ex N.Y.), would clarify the tax laws as they apply to non-prof
tretnely difficult to draft. The First Amendment's organizations that lobby. A-lany groups are concerned that
guarantees of free petition greatly limit the requirements compelled to register under new lobbying bills, their t.;
Congress can impose on lobbyists. Committee staffs have status will be threatened. The Conable bill is to-he a part w
had difficulty finding a formulathat provides useful infor- a second round of House Ways and Means Committee ta.:
mation but does not infringe on constitutional rights. reform work,
---Ry Al Gordo;
OCTOBER REGISTRATIONS
Agriculture
NATIONAL INDEPENDENT DAIRIES ASSOCIATION,
Washington, D.C. Lobbyist-Herbert Liehenson, Washington,
D.C. Filed 10/2/75. Legislative interest--"All legislation pertain-
ing to independent dairies."
Business and Professional
10/9/75. Legislative interest-"Legislation related to developm.:
of the nuclear industry."
AMERICAN APPAREL MANUFACTURER.
ASSOCIATION INC.,Arlington, Va. Lobbyist-Fred B. Shippo
Arlington, Va. Filed 10/6/75. Legislative interest-"Opposed
lilt 11, S 200, lilt 76; surveillance of ]IR 7575, HR 7155, FIR 6s,
and S 644."
AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF MARRIAGE ANt
FAMILY COUNSELORS, Claremont, Calif. Lobbyist--Richar
D. Siegal, member with the law firm of McNees, Wallace& Nurick_
Washington, D.C. Filed 10/9/75. Legislative interest-'Defeat r+i
legislation to limit or prohibit. benefits under civilian health a;ni
medical program of the uniformed services for services of pastora'
counselors, family and child counselors and marital counselors"
THE AD [IOC GROUP ON LIFE INSURANCE AMERICAN BANKERS ASSOCIATION, Washington.
COMPANY TAXATION OF I"ENSION FUNDS, Washington, D.C. Lobbyist-Fred J. Mutz, Washington, D.C. Filed 10/6/7
}).C. Lobbyist--Theodore It. Groom, a partner with the law firm of Legislative interest.--"Legislation affecting or of interest to th-
Groom and Nordberg, Washington, D.C. Filed 10/30/75. banking industry."
Legislative interest-"Federal legislation affecting Title 26 of the AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY, New York City. Lob-
United States code." byist.--Ilugh H. Smith P.C., Washington, D.C. Filed 10/3/75.
ALA13AMA GAS CORPORATION, Birmingham, Ala.; Legislative interest.--"All legislative matters affecting the finan-
ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY, Atlarta, Ga.; CITIZENS cial institutions of the country; the activities of foreign banks and
GAS & COKE UTILI'T'Y, Indianapolis, Ind.: CONNECTICUT' of foreign hank holding companies; affecting the utilization of
NA'1'URAL GAS CORI'ORATI.ON, llartford, Conn.; credit card,,' and affecting many aspects of foreign commerce."
ELIZABETHTOWN PLAZA, Elizatethtown, N.J.; AMERICAN GAS ASSOCIATION, Arlington, Va. Lob-
WASHINGTON GAS LIGHT COMPANY, Washington, D.C. hyists---William T. Murphy Jr., Arlington, Va., filed 10/10/75;
Lobbyist--Timmons and Company Inc., Was} ington, D.C. Filed Beverly Bernstein Brilliant, Arlington, Va., filed 10/25/75.
10/21/75. Legislative interest-"Interests invi lye legislative ac- Legislative interest "The American Gas Assn. will be interested
tivity relat.ing to the regulation of natural gas,, uch as S 692 and S in reporting to its members the progress through Congress of such
2310. legislation as may relate to member companies' interest."
ALLIED-GENERAL NUCLEAR SERVICES, Barnwell, AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, Chicago, Ill. Lob-
S.(;. Lobbyist--Jerold Vinson 11alvorsen, BeGresda, bid. Filed bymets-Janice E. Drake amid Morris A. Riley, Washington, DX
Approved For Release 2001/08/30 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800150014-6
PAGE 2798--Dec. 20, 1975
 Approved For Release 2001/08/30 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800150014-6
Lobbies
LOBBY REFORM: STILL NOT READY FOR MARK-UP
After four rounds of committee hearing- and several and Rep. Rob rt W. Kastenmeier (D Wis.) had nearly 150
months of staff work, Congress is a little closer to acting on cosponsors.
a new lobby registration law. But none of the three coni-
mittees working on the issue is ready to mark up a bill yet..
There had been some expectation that the Senate
Government Operations Committee might mark up a hill
this year. The panel got the earliest start with three days of
hearings in May. The committee staff developed a new bill
(S 2477) which was introduced Oct. 6 by Chairman
Abraham Ribicoff (D Conn.). (Background on hcan'?Igs,
Weekly Report, p. 1137; background on S '1r77, Weekly
Report, p. 2108)
However, after three additional days of hearings ,Nov.
4-6, during which S 2477 drew little support, toe committee
appeared to be unsatisfied with the measure.
The staff now expects that another draft i will he
necessary before the committee can proceed to a markup
session-perhaps next January.
On the House side, the Judiciary Subcommittee on Ad-
ministrative Law and Governmental Relations, chaired by
Rep. Walter Flowers (D Ala.), held five days of hearings in
September on lobby reform. The subcommittee's staff is
working on a preliminary draft of a lobby registration bill,
but no sessions of the subcommittee have hen scheduled
for consideration of lobbying measures. (Background,
Weekly Report, p. 2065)
The latest addition to the list of committcas working on
lobby registration this year is the House Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct, which held three days of
hearings Dec. 2-4. The panel, generally referred to as the
"House Ethics Committee," has joint juri ;diction over
lobby registration legislation in the House.
Background
The ethics committee actually has been at work on
changes in the registration law the longest. The committee
began a study of lobbying activities in 1970 which
culminated in the drafting of a bill the committee reported
to the House Dec. 10, 1971 (HR 11453-H Rept. 92-741).
(Backgrouund, 1971 Alrnartac p. 823)
The measure was not sent to the Rules Committee until
shortly before the summer recess in 1972 and Congress
never acted on the measure before adjournment. The bill
has been introduced in subsequent Congresses, but has not
advanced. (Background, 197,2 Almanac, p. 1079)
While there is broad agreement that the 1946 Federal
Regulation of Lobbying Act (Title III of the 1946 Legislative
Reorganization Act-PL 79-601) does not work very well,
there has been much disagreement about proposed
remedies.
The hope of proponents of the measures pending this
year was that the post-Watergate political climate would
make Congress m)re receptive to such legislation thi, tear.
The lobby registr; Lion hill (S 815 ) introduced in the Senate
by Sen. Robert T Stafford (R Vt.) and Sun. Edward M.
Kennedy (D Mass.) drew 20 cosponsors. The measure (HR
Common C. Tom R;.ilsback (It I11.1 far between
approved For Release 2001/08/30 CIA-RDP77M00144R000800150014-6
Dec. 20, 1975 -P iA G E 279`i