Doing the right thing on lobbying reform

A couple of weeks ago, I urged congressional Dems to get their act together and pursue a meaningful lobbying reform measure. At the time, there were rumors that lawmakers, after campaigning specifically on helping clean up the system, were balking on a legislative remedy.

As it turns out, the rumors appear to have been overstated. Dems did the right thing.

Prodded by Democratic leaders and by freshmen elected partly on promises to clean up Washington, the House approved new ethics legislation yesterday that would penalize lawmakers who receive a wide range of favors from special interests, and would require lobbyists to disclose the campaign contributions they collect and deliver to lawmakers.

Party leaders and new lawmakers worked until the day before the vote to sway some longtime members who had balked at the proposals. It took weeks of persuasion by Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and other key lawmakers to convince recalcitrant Democrats — among them some members of the speaker’s inner circle.

The new proposals, which in the end passed overwhelmingly, would expand the information available about how business is done on Capitol Hill and make it available online. They would provide expanded, more frequent and Internet-accessible reporting of lobbyist-paid contributions and sponsorships, and would for the first time impose prison terms for criminal rule-breakers. They would also require strict new disclosure of “bundled” campaign contributions that lobbyists collect and pass on to lawmakers’ campaigns. Yesterday’s legislation passed 396 to 22.

Good. Dems didn’t have a good week when it came to war funding, but on lobbying reform, their progress was encouraging.

The WaPo’s editorial on the subject was largely spot-on.

It wasn’t easy, it wasn’t pretty and the battle isn’t over, but the House managed yesterday to pass a credible ethics bill that would require lobbyists to disclose the bundles of campaign checks they round up for lawmakers. The lopsided 382 to 37 vote belied the ferocious behind-the-scenes opposition to the bundling provision. Few lawmakers were willing to cast a public vote to oppose letting their constituents know what the lawmakers themselves are already keenly aware of: just how much they are indebted to which lobbyists. In private, however, many Democrats fought to prevent the vote. It was only the steadfastness of Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), Caucus Chairman Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.) and Reps. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Martin T. Meehan (D-Mass.) that brought the measure to the floor. House Judiciary Committee Chairman John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.) served a key role in offsetting the opposition of some members of the Congressional Black Caucus.

It’s critical now that the bundling provision not be killed in the quiet of a conference committee. The Senate version of lobbying reform contains a slightly different bundling provision, which can easily be reconciled with the House measure.

All of this represents real progress after 12 years of … well, we saw what DeLay Rule meant for Capitol Hill.

There’s hope for these guys yet. They haven’t figured out quite how to take on Bush on Iraq, but they’re advancing a legislative and reform-driven agenda. Slowly but surely.

in the senate mcconnell will probably block it with a filibuster threat…….

  • Where’s the roll-call? I want to know the names of the noes (whether it’s 22 or 37)

  • Yes, this was good. But I wish they’d pushed through the anti-revolving door provision (waiting two years before going from Congress to K Street). Didn’t happen, unfortunatetly I believe thanks to Conyers.

    Murtha really is a pig, btw. He’s admirable on the war, but otherwise a stereotype of corruption.

  • Message: No, the two parties are not identical. Let’s remember this and repeat it to anyone who tries to argue otherwise.

  • Comments are closed.