News
Mar 15 2007
Loophole in Gift Ban Allows Government-Funded Freebies
Bill to Be Offered Ending Exemption
When Democrats took control of Congress in January, they passed a sweeping set of ethics rules, including a ban on gifts that prohibits lobbyists from buying a lawmaker as much as a hamburger.
But the gift ban left in place a loophole: It doesn't apply to government agencies and public institutions. That exemption, which dates back more than a decade, leads to a stark disparity when it comes to public and private universities, which compete fiercely for federal money.
While private universities are banned from giving gifts, public universities can offer members of Congress free tickets to some of the country's most sought-after sporting events. That includes the upcoming NCAA men's basketball tournament, in which 43 of the 65 teams represent public schools.
Nor do those gifts have to be disclosed, according to the rules.
That makes no sense, say critics, including Rep. Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican who says he will introduce a bill today to eliminate the exemption.
"It's just always bugged me that we treat taxpayer-funded lobbyists differently than those lobbying for the private sector," Flake said. "In fact the whole earmark culture really grew out of public-sector lobbyists."
Flake was referring to the increasingly common practice of companies or institutions securing funds for specific projects through a single lawmaker, often with the help of lobbyists.
Colleges, universities and other higher-education groups spent at least $75 million on federal lobbying efforts in 2005, according to a USA TODAY analysis of lobbying reports compiled by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.
"If it's corrupt for a corporate lobbyist to shower gifts on lawmakers, it's just as corrupt for a government lobbyist," said Ed Frank, a former Republican congressional staffer who is vice president of public affairs for Americans for Prosperity. A non-partisan government watchdog group, it has launched a campaign to close the loophole in the law.
Asked why House Democrats did not revisit the exemption when they recently rewrote the ethics rules, Nadeam Elshami of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office said "the original rule was ... intended to facilitate intergovernmental cooperation and assistance."
Elshami agreed, however, that the exemption to the gifts ban should be reconsidered. "The House should examine whether to ban such gifts altogether" or cap them at $50.
"It is one thing to allow members and staff to travel to attend a conference sponsored by a state government, but it's quite another for them to accept tickets to sporting events and other tangible gifts from state and local governments and their agencies," Elshami said.
Universities aren't the only government agencies with a stake in congressional decisions. Public officials and government agencies, including cities, counties and states, spent about $65 million lobbying Congress last year, according to an analysis of lobbying records by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Because there are no disclosure rules for government-funded freebies, it is difficult to learn which lawmakers have accepted them. It was only because of state law requirements, for example, that the University of Oklahoma reported providing Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., with $300 worth of football tickets last year.
In an interview, Coburn said he gave those tickets to friends and bought his own. He pointed out that he is a foe of the earmark system. Rather than focusing on gift bans, he said, ethics rules should mandate strict disclosures, including for earmarks. He wouldn't prohibit free sports tickets, he said, as long as they were disclosed promptly to the public.
"Somebody can't buy me a $20 meal, but they can give $5,000 to my campaign, and I can give them a $2 million earmark," he said, speaking rhetorically. "The problem is us. Make us report, make us be transparent and it's going to totally change the behavior up here."
Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., attended two football games for free last year, spokesman Dan McLaughlin said -- one at the University of Florida and one at Florida State, both public institutions.
"I don't think he necessarily views being invited to watch a football game by a university as anything at all sinister," McLaughlin said.
But the gift ban left in place a loophole: It doesn't apply to government agencies and public institutions. That exemption, which dates back more than a decade, leads to a stark disparity when it comes to public and private universities, which compete fiercely for federal money.
While private universities are banned from giving gifts, public universities can offer members of Congress free tickets to some of the country's most sought-after sporting events. That includes the upcoming NCAA men's basketball tournament, in which 43 of the 65 teams represent public schools.
Nor do those gifts have to be disclosed, according to the rules.
That makes no sense, say critics, including Rep. Jeff Flake, an Arizona Republican who says he will introduce a bill today to eliminate the exemption.
"It's just always bugged me that we treat taxpayer-funded lobbyists differently than those lobbying for the private sector," Flake said. "In fact the whole earmark culture really grew out of public-sector lobbyists."
Flake was referring to the increasingly common practice of companies or institutions securing funds for specific projects through a single lawmaker, often with the help of lobbyists.
Colleges, universities and other higher-education groups spent at least $75 million on federal lobbying efforts in 2005, according to a USA TODAY analysis of lobbying reports compiled by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.
"If it's corrupt for a corporate lobbyist to shower gifts on lawmakers, it's just as corrupt for a government lobbyist," said Ed Frank, a former Republican congressional staffer who is vice president of public affairs for Americans for Prosperity. A non-partisan government watchdog group, it has launched a campaign to close the loophole in the law.
Asked why House Democrats did not revisit the exemption when they recently rewrote the ethics rules, Nadeam Elshami of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's office said "the original rule was ... intended to facilitate intergovernmental cooperation and assistance."
Elshami agreed, however, that the exemption to the gifts ban should be reconsidered. "The House should examine whether to ban such gifts altogether" or cap them at $50.
"It is one thing to allow members and staff to travel to attend a conference sponsored by a state government, but it's quite another for them to accept tickets to sporting events and other tangible gifts from state and local governments and their agencies," Elshami said.
Universities aren't the only government agencies with a stake in congressional decisions. Public officials and government agencies, including cities, counties and states, spent about $65 million lobbying Congress last year, according to an analysis of lobbying records by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Because there are no disclosure rules for government-funded freebies, it is difficult to learn which lawmakers have accepted them. It was only because of state law requirements, for example, that the University of Oklahoma reported providing Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., with $300 worth of football tickets last year.
In an interview, Coburn said he gave those tickets to friends and bought his own. He pointed out that he is a foe of the earmark system. Rather than focusing on gift bans, he said, ethics rules should mandate strict disclosures, including for earmarks. He wouldn't prohibit free sports tickets, he said, as long as they were disclosed promptly to the public.
"Somebody can't buy me a $20 meal, but they can give $5,000 to my campaign, and I can give them a $2 million earmark," he said, speaking rhetorically. "The problem is us. Make us report, make us be transparent and it's going to totally change the behavior up here."
Sen. Bill Nelson, D-Fla., attended two football games for free last year, spokesman Dan McLaughlin said -- one at the University of Florida and one at Florida State, both public institutions.
"I don't think he necessarily views being invited to watch a football game by a university as anything at all sinister," McLaughlin said.
