The Kean Plan to Clean Up Congress

Recent scandals involving highly unethical conduct by Members of Congress and lobbyists underscore the need for major change, both in House and Senate rules and in the requirements registered lobbyists must meet with regard to disclosure and conflicts of interest.

I fully support legislation Senator John McCain has proposed that would tighten existing rules governing lobbyist conduct:

More transparency. Senator McCain's bill would require lobbyists to disclose their clients and incomes more frequently (on a quarterly basis, rather than twice a year). Lobbyists would report all contributions made to campaigns and Political Action Committees, along with contributions made to non-political organizations that honor public officials or entities the official controls. These areas remain the most unreported and unregulated conflicts of interest. When a reputable charity chooses to honor a public official, supporters of the official, including lobbyists, are often asked to contribute to the event. Although the reputable charities and nonprofits report their sources of funds, no connection is ever made in the public mind between the lobbyist, who may seek to influence an official through these donations, and the official. The same holds true in the funding of institutions established in the public official's name.

More disclosure. Lobbyists would have to list all fundraisers they sponsor, on whose behalf, and the amount of funds they raised. Senator McCain's bill would, for the first time, subject "grassroots" lobbying firms to reporting requirements. All disclosures would be made available electronically.

Slowing the "revolving door." The McCain bill would slow the "revolving" door between public service and lobbying, by doubling the moratorium on former public officials lobbying ex-colleagues from one year to two.

Gift disclosure. Senator McCain's bill would also require disclosure of all gifts, travel, and event tickets by dollar amounts.

As beneficial as this legislation would be, I would go even further.

Curbing patronage. First, I would make it a federal crime for federal officials to "steer" business to lobbyists. The practice of a public official attempting to set up a former aide in business, by encouraging donors or political allies to throw business a certain lobbyist's way, is appalling.

Regulating Congressional travel. Second, I would restrict funding of Congressional travel to two sources: the government and nonprofit organizations expressly approved by Congress's ethics oversight bodies. No person or group with legislative interests before Congress should be allowed to pay for a Member of Congress's personal travel. If travel is important either to the national interest or to help Members do their jobs more effectively, the government should pay the costs. If trips are for humanitarian or other charitable purposes, a well-established organization—known to all—that has taken this cause as its mission may be able to finance it. (There is a clear difference between a well-known environmental or educational foundation and a shell nonprofit set up by the likes of Jack Abramoff. This legislation would reflect that.) I would forbid registered lobbyists from participating in these nonprofit financed trips.

Gift ban. Third, I would ban the giving of gifts of any value to Members of Congress or their staffs. Public servants should pay for their own meals, wine, luxury goods and entertainment, just as their constituents do.

Reform ethics oversight. Fourth, Congress should recognize its inability to police or discipline its own members. It should establish an entirely independent entity to hear ethics complaints and enforce the Lobbying Disclosure Act. The independent body would report its findings to Congress and recommend a course of action. Congress could then vote the recommended penalty up or down. It could, of course, increase or reduce the sanction. But Congress's ethics watchdog should conduct its business in open public view. That would greatly deter members from cutting ethical corners.

Making "earmarks" transparent. Fifth, I would abolish the current practice of Members adding "earmarks" to legislation after appropriation bills have cleared both houses. While earmarks are often justified and necessary, this particular practice makes a mockery of the appropriations process. In addition, Rep. Jeff Flake wants to prohibit federal agencies from funding earmarks not contained in a bill's actual legislative language, also known as "tacit earmarks." If his legislation fails to become law this year, I intend to sponsor an identical version of it in the U.S. Senate next year.

Ending special privileges for former Members of Congress engaged in lobbying. Finally, I would ban registered lobbyists who once served in Congress from access to the House and Senate floor or Member gymnasiums.

http://www.tomkean.com/today/index.cfm?e=user.media.article&messageID=254