Lawmakers Get Started on Bills Aimed at Lobbyist Influence
One of the centerpiece bills would bar state officials, including lawmakers, from letting a lobbyist pay for their transportation, lodging, recreation or entertainment, and limiting gifts from lobbyists to $250 in value each year.
October 26, 2021 at 01:30 PM
4 minute read
LobbyingPennsylvania's state House of Representatives on Monday began advancing a package of bills aimed at lobbyist influence, including limiting gifts from lobbyists and prohibiting lobbyists from trying to influence an elected official for whom they also worked as a campaign strategist.
The bills won passage in the House State Government Committee, and require floor votes in both the House and Senate to get to Gov. Tom Wolf.
One of the centerpiece bills would bar state officials, including lawmakers, from letting a lobbyist pay for their transportation, lodging, recreation or entertainment, and limiting gifts from lobbyists to $250 in value each year.
Wolf in 2015 banned employees under his jurisdiction from accepting gifts of any amount, but lawmakers still allow themselves to accept gifts in unlimited quantities from anyone seeking to influence them.
That has prompted demonstrators from MarchOnHarrisburg to interrupt legislative voting sessions in recent years, protest at lawmakers' offices and mount a "stop taking bribes" campaign aimed at lawmakers.
Gift-ban legislation has been introduced before and died.
But MarchOnHarrisburg's executive director, Michael Pollock, said he is optimistic that the group can get enough key members of House and Senate Republican leadership on board this time to win passage of what the group sees as an essential anti-corruption measure.
MarchOnHarrisburg's members have sought, without success, to get a commitment from Senate President Pro Tempore Jake Corman. They also showed up at his golf course fundraiser earlier this month and, on Monday, tried to talk to him about it in the Capitol.
"He got out of the conversation as quickly as he could with a 'no comment,'" Pollock said.
Corman's office separately declined comment on whether he supports a gift ban.
Lawmakers and other candidates for state office in Pennsylvania can still accept campaign contributions in any amount from any person, including lobbyists and people who get contracts from state agencies or the Legislature.
Lobbyists, their clients and trade associations in Pennsylvania also routinely provide lawmakers with free meals, travel and tickets to sporting events, destination conferences or entertainment venues.
Most other states have laws limiting the extent of gifts that lawmakers may accept, according to the National Conference on State Legislatures.
Lawmakers in Pennsylvania have made no move to impose so-called pay-to-play rules or limit campaign contributions, although both chambers approved internal chamber rules banning most types of cash gifts to members in 2014 following a scandal.
Another centerpiece bill is aimed at lobbyists or lobbying firms that also provide campaign management services, legislation sought since at least 2015 by a handful of Republican state senators complaining about the growing influence of such firms connected to top GOP lawmakers.
Under it, a lobbyist would be prohibited from trying to influence a state official, or an employee on the official's staff, after having served as a campaign consultant to the official.
The prohibition lasts for that elected term and also applies to a lobbyist who had a financial interest in a firm that provided campaign services.
A separate bill targets the revolving door between lobbyists and the Legislature's staff. It would prohibit a legislative employee from being lobbied for a year by colleagues at their former lobbying firm.
Several bills address transparency.
One would require lobbyists to bolster their reporting to the state by disclosing their ownership stake in a lobbying firm. A second would require lobbying firms to disclose instances when they ask a client to waive a conflict of interest that the lobbying firm has with another client.
Another bill bans lobbyists, lobbying firms and their clients from giving or receiving referral fees.
Yet another bill would bar a state entity from hiring lobbyists or campaign consultants to influence another state entity.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLaw Firms Funnel Millions to Congressional Races, Though Skew Toward Dems
4 minute readFrom Many to One: McNees Wallace Rebrands Government Relationships Groups
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Gibson Dunn Sued By Crypto Client After Lateral Hire Causes Conflict of Interest
- 2Trump's Solicitor General Expected to 'Flip' Prelogar's Positions at Supreme Court
- 3Pharmacy Lawyers See Promise in NY Regulator's Curbs on PBM Industry
- 4Outgoing USPTO Director Kathi Vidal: ‘We All Want the Country to Be in a Better Place’
- 5Supreme Court Will Review Constitutionality Of FCC's Universal Service Fund
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250