K Street in Brief

New lobbying forms trickle in 

There are ways to get oneself into a lawmaker’s good graces other than by raising money for a political campaign. You can also donate money on his or her behalf.

Thanks to the lobbying and ethics law Congress passed last year, the public now gets to see some of these donations. Firms have to file the new form, known as the LD-203, by the end of this month, but several have already sent reports to the Senate Office of Public Records, which maintains a searchable database of the records.

{mosads}Filed every six months, the LD-203 lists information like how much firms have donated to political campaigns, how much they spent to host events, how much they gave in honorary gifts and how many dollars they dropped to help build presidential libraries. The form itself signifies one of the more significant changes for K Street under the new ethics legislation passed in response to the Jack Abramoff scandal.

Some examples: chemical company Celanese reported filing $500 to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on behalf of Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), according to the documents. Gregory Wang of the Ferguson Group cut a $1,000 check to the National Park Trust on behalf of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.). And Wexler and Walker Public Policy Associates gave $1,000 to the U.S. Capitol Historical Society in the name of the Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.) Portrait Committee.

So far, no donations to presidential libraries have been submitted. But they are sure to attract attention, considering reports alleging that Stephen Payne, a Republican lobbyist, was soliciting donations to President George W. Bush’s library in exchange for access to senior administration officials.

The White House has denied any access was given for library donations. But the episode has piqued Rep. Henry Waxman’s (D-Calif.) interest. He wrote Monday to the lobbyist about the press reports, requesting additional documents of the kind not covered by even the new LD-203s.

Kevin Bogardus

A big hole

More than gas prices are rising. The Associated General Contractors of America reported Tuesday that high diesel fuel, asphalt, steel and other material costs are “clobbering construction budgets,” in the words of AGC chief economist Ken Simonson.

The producer price index calculates the costs of construction materials rose 10.4 percent over the past 12 months. Those rising costs have further stressed an already strained highway trust fund, which pays for public construction projects like road repair and bridge construction. A dollar doesn’t go as far as it used to. What’s more, there are fewer dollars in the pot. A gas tax supports the fund, but receipts don’t go up with prices at the pump. In fact, they go down, as consumers try to use less gas to save money.

The combination equals about an $8 billion shortfall, which AGC is pushing to fill. Sens. Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Max Baucus (D-Mont.) and Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) have a fix but are awaiting the appropriate vehicle, or, to shift metaphors: “It’s a Band-Aid and we are looking for a piece of skin to get it on,” Simonson said.

Inflation in the construction industry and the shortfall are already forcing states such as North Carolina and Missouri to curb construction. Elsewhere, contractors are working through a backlog of already paid-for projects, but the slack in the system could soon be used up. Unless Congress appropriates more money, Simonson said, “this is going to lead to a lot of layoffs in the next few months.”

Jim Snyder

Scaling new heights 

What have you done for your client lately? Nancy Buermeyer, a lobbyist at the Raben Group , went beyond the typical lobbying duties recently. She raised $5,000, trained for six months, and then climbed to the top of Mount Shasta in northern California to promote the cause of the Breast Cancer Fund.

“I’ve hiked all my life but never have done anything like this before,” she said.

It takes nine hours — using crampons and ice picks to keep from slipping off icy precipices — to reach the 14,000-foot peak from base camp.

“You leave at, like, 2 in the morning,” she said.

“It takes mental discipline to keep going. … It’s super-steep and ice and snow all the way up.”

But she made it, and the trek left her with a sense of pride of accomplishment. Still, Buermeyer has no plans to do it again.

“I think I might quit while I’m ahead,” she said.

Back in Washington, Buermeyer is doing more traditional lobbying work for her client. She is trying to secure support for a ban on phthalates, a chemical that is used to make plastics more flexible. Critics say phthalates are a health hazard, and Buermeyer is lobbying the conference committee negotiating the particulars of a consumer product safety bill.

J.S.

Farm groups worried 

Lobbyists for several agriculture groups are shifting their attention from Capitol Hill to Geneva, where trade negotiators hope to strike a new global trade deal next week.

Producers of sugar, wheat, soybeans, cotton and other commodities are worried U.S. negotiators might agree to a deal that would limit U.S. farm subsidies in exchange for tariff reductions by China, India and other countries.

In a letter to President Bush sent Monday, several farm groups said they were alarmed by the prospect the administration may make concessions. A draft deal negotiators will use as a starting point for talks “gives us scant hope” of a good outcome for U.S. agriculture, the groups said.

Underlying the fear is the upcoming lame-duck phase of Bush’s presidency. Farm groups think the administration might agree to a bad deal in order to burnish the legacy of the president, who has consistently advocated for a global trade deal. The current round of World Trade Organization talks was launched just two months after the Sept. 11 attacks, but has stalled repeatedly since. This could be the last major meeting of trade negotiators while Bush is president.

The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative has repeatedly said it will not agree to a global deal that does not provide significant gains for U.S. exporters of goods and services. It has called on countries such as China to open their markets by reducing tariffs.

Ian Swanson

Source protection 

With a long-delayed Senate vote on the federal shield law set to happen before the August recess, according to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), some journalists switched hats last week and lobbied the Hill for support.

The House passed its version of the bill in a landslide vote of 398-21. But the Senate’s draft of the Free Flow of Information Act has been delayed since September.

Opposition from the Justice Department and a threatened presidential veto made some senators hesitant to support the legislation, which provides journalists more protection against being compelled by a judge to release the names of confidential sources.

The administration’s main concern is that a federal shield law will lead to journalists’ sources being protected to the detriment of national security.

But advocates say another issue is at stake.

“It’s important to note that this is not about protecting journalists,” said Laurie Babinski, an associate at Baker & Hostetler who represents the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), a big backer of the bill.

“It’s about protecting the public’s right to information. We don’t want to jeopardize national security either.”

The Justice Department has sent a number of letters to the Senate explaining its concerns. It also launched a website devoted to detailing how a federal shield statute would detract from its ability to investigate crimes.

Despite the opposition, SPJ President Clint Brewer said that he and his group have been heartened by the public support of Republican nominee Sen. John McCain (Ariz.), as well as the additions of Sens. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) and Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) as co-sponsors of the bill.

“The White House should listen to its own party’s nominee,” Brewer said.

Though favoring the House draft, which defines a journalist in broader terms and protects both confidential and non-confidential sources, Babinski indicated that the SPJ is comfortable with the changes that have been made to the Senate version.

Rebecca Brown