HomeMy WebLinkAbout99-1027 Frankel1999.
Larry Frankel
Executive Director
ACLU of Pennsylvania
125 South 9th Street
P.O. Box 1161
Philadelphia, PA 19105 -1161
Re: Lobbying, Principal, Lobbyist, American Civil Liberties Union, Press Briefing, General
Assembly, Department of Corrections, Constitution, Right, Policy Change, Regulatory
Change, Agency Officials, Policy, Prison Conditions, School, Expense.
Dear Mr. Frankel:
OPINION OF THE COMMISSION
Before: Daneen E. Reese, Chair
Austin M. Lee, Vice Chair
Julius Uehlein
Louis W. Fryman
John J. Bolger
Frank M. Brown
Susan Mosites Bicket
DATE DECIDED: 11/23/99
DATE MAILED: 12/7/99
99 -1027
This Opinion is issued in response to your advisory request received on October 4,
I. ISSUE: Whether an organization which advocates on civil rights issues at a press
briefing and meets with state officials and employees in an effort to effectuate policy and
regulatory changes is engaged in lobbying, such that the related expenses must be reported
under the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
II. FACTUAL BASIS FOR DETERMINATION: As the Executive Director and a
registered lobbyist for the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania (ACLU), you
request an advisory opinion with regard to three scenarios.
In the first scenario, you are considering holding a press briefing on the issue of
teaching creationism in the schools and why the ACLU believes such to be unconstitutional.
You intend to invite reporters who cover the General Assembly as well as reporters and
editorial writers who focus on educational issues. You plan to provide breakfast for those
who attend. You plan to bring in a speaker from your national office in New York. You ask
whether the costs for the invitations, the food and beverages, the travel expenses and one-
Frankel, 99 -1027
December 7, 1999
Page 2
day salary for the guest speaker, as well as your own time spent on this specific activity,
would be reportable under the Lobbying Disclosure Act (Act).
Under the second scenario, the ACLU writes to the Department of Corrections (DOC)
about what the ACLU considers to be unsafe and unhealthy conditions in the state prisons.
The ACLU believes the conditions may violate the prisoners' constitutional rights. In the
letter to the DOC, the ACLU requests that DOC personnel meet with the ACLU to discuss
policy changes that could lead to improved prison conditions. The DOC agrees to the
meeting, and at the meeting, policy changes are discussed. You ask whether the time the
ACLU spends preparing for the meeting and actually meeting with DOC personnel would
constitute lobbying activity for which any related expenses -- specifically staff time - -would be
reportable under the Act.
The third scenario which you present similarly involves meeting with the DOC
regarding prison conditions. Under this scenario, the DOC rather than the ACLU would
initiate the contact, even though the ACLU would not have threatened to sue. You ask
whether the ACLU would be required to report expenses for meeting with DOC employees to
discuss proposed policy and regulatory changes that would affect prison conditions if the
contact would be initiated by a DOC policy maker, rather than by the ACLU.
By letter dated November 2, 1999, you were notified of the date, time, and location of
the public meeting at which your request for an Opinion was to be considered.
III. DISCUSSION: It is initially noted that pursuant to Section 1308(c) of the Act in
conjunction with Sections 1107(10) and 1107(11) of the Ethics Act, 65 Pa.C.S. § §1107(10),
(11), advisories are issued to the requestor based upon the facts which the requestor has
submitted. The Commission does not engage in an independent investigation of the facts, nor
does it speculate as to facts which have not been submitted, in issuing advisories. It is the
burden of the requestor to truthfully disclose all of the material facts relevant to the inquiry.
An advisory only affords a defense to the extent the requestor has truthfully disclosed all of
the material facts.
In order to decide the issues which you have raised, this Commission must review the
pertinent definitions and substantive provisions of the Act and related Regulations.
Section 1303 of the Act defines "lobbying" as follows:
"Lobbying." An effort to influence legislative action or
administrative action. The term includes:
(1) providing any gift, entertainment, meal, transportation or
lodging to a State official or employee for the purpose of
advancing the interest of the lobbyist or principal; and
(2) direct or indirect communication.
65 Pa.C.S. §1303.
The key terms "legislative action," "administrative action," "direct communication," and
"indirect communication" that are within the definition of "lobbying" are themselves defined as
follows:
"Legislative action." An action taken by a State official or
employee involving the preparation, research, drafting,
introduction, consideration, modification, amendment, approval,
passage, enactment, tabling, postponement, defeat or rejection of
legislation; legislative motions; overriding or sustaining a veto by
Frankel, 99 -1027
December 7, 1999
Page 3
the Governor; or confirmation of appointments by the Governor or
of appointments to public boards or commissions by a member of
the General Assembly.
"Administrative action." Any of the following:
(1) An agency's:
(i) proposal, consideration, promulgation or
rescission of a regulation;
(ii) development or modification of a guideline or a
statement of policy; or
(iii) approval or rejection of a regulation.
(2) The review, revision, approval or disapproval of a regulation
under the act of June 25, 1982 (P.L.633, No.181), known as the
Regulatory Review Act.
(3) The Governor's approval or veto of legislation.
(4) The nomination or appointment of an individual as an officer
or employee of the Commonwealth.
(5) The proposal, consideration, promulgation or rescission of
an executive order.
"Direct communication." An effort, whether written, oral or by
any other medium, made by a lobbyist or principal, directed to a
State official or employee, the purpose or foreseeable effect of
which is to influence legislative action or administrative action.
"Indirect communication." An effort, whether written, oral or
by any other medium, to encourage others, including the general
public, to take action, the purpose or foreseeable effect of which
is to directly influence legislative action or administrative action.
The term includes letter- writing campaigns, mailings, telephone
banks, print and electronic media advertising, billboards,
publications and educational campaigns on public issues. The
term does not include regularly published periodic newsletters
primarily designed for and distributed to members of a bona fide
association or charitable or fraternal nonprofit corporation.
65 Pa. C. S. § 1303.
The terms "principal" and "lobbyist" are defined in the statute as follows:
"Principal." Any individual, firm, association, corporation,
partnership, business trust or business entity:
(1) on whose behalf a lobbyist influences or attempts to
influence an administrative action or a legislative action; or
(2) that engages in lobbying on the principal's own
behalf.
Frankel, 99 -1027
December 7, 1999
Page 4
Id.
"Lobbyist." Any individual, firm, association, corporation,
partnership, business trust or business entity that engages in
lobbying on behalf of a principal for economic consideration.
The term includes an attorney who engages in lobbying.
An effort to influence "administrative action," as that term is defined above, includes an
effort to influence an agency's development or modification of a guideline or statement of
policy. Although the terms "guideline" and "statement of policy" are not defined in the Act, per
the Lobbying Disclosure Regulations (51 Pa. Code §31.1 (definition, "administrative action "),
they are as defined in 1 Pa. Code §1.4, specifically:
Guideline - A document, other than an adjudication, interpretation or
regulation, which announces the policy an agency intends to implement in
future rulemakings, adjudications or which will otherwise guide the agency in
the exercise of administrative discretion. The document may not amend, repeal
or suspend a published regulation or otherwise effectively circumscribe
administrative choice, but shall establish a framework within which an agency
exercises administrative discretion. If authorized by statute, the documents
may be incorporated into or published as regulations. The term includes, but is
not limited to:
(1) Plans for agency operation and administration which establish
important policies to be utilized in the future exercise of
administrative discretion.
(2) General policies and plans for the award and administration of
discretionary grants of public monies.
(3) Announcements of principles and standards to be applied in
future adjudications.
Statement of policy - A document, except an adjudication or a regulation,
promulgated by an agency which sets forth substantive or procedural personal or
property rights, privileges, immunities, duties, liabilities or obligations of the public or a
part thereof. The term includes a document interpreting or implementing a statute
enforced or administered by an agency. The term includes, but is not limited to,
guidelines and interpretations.
1 Pa. Code §1.4. See also, related definition of "statement of policy" in 45 P.S. §1102.
In applying the above provisions of law to the first scenario and question which you
have submitted, involving the proposed press briefing, the answer to your question as to
whether the related expenses would be reportable under the Act would hinge upon the nature
of the briefing. If the press briefing would merely set forth the viewpoint of the ACLU on the
issue of teaching creationism in schools - -and nothing more - -then such activity would not
constitute lobbying under the Act. On the other hand, if the press briefing would be an effort
to encourage others to take action, the purpose or foreseeable effect of which would be to
directly influence legislative action or administrative action, it would constitute "indirect
communication" and therefore lobbying. In the latter instance, the related expenses would be
reportable under the Act.
Frankel, 99 -1027
December 7, 1999
Page 5
We now turn to your second inquiry concerning an ACLU - initiated meeting with DOC
personnel regarding prison conditions. We determine that if the ACLU's actions would
constitute an effort to influence "administrative action" as defined above, such as the
modification of a "guideline" or a "statement of policy" as those terms are defined above, then
such action would constitute lobbying. You are advised that to the extent the ACLU would be
engaged in lobbying activities, both the preparation time and the meeting time expenses
would have to be reported under the Act as included within the "single aggregate good faith
estimate of the total amount spent for personnel and office expenses related to lobbying,"
which category represents a "grand total" of expenditures for lobbying. See, 65 Pa.C.S.
§1305(b)(2)(i). However, only the meeting time expenses, and not the preparation time
expenses, would have to be included within the breakout for the "single aggregate good faith
estimate of the total amount spent for direct communication." See, 65 Pa.C.S. §1305(b)(2)(ii).
As to your third inquiry of whether the result would be different if the contact between
the ACLU and the DOC would be initiated by a DOC policy maker, rather than by the ACLU,
the answer is that the result would not differ. The question was first addressed in Roth,
Opinion 99 -1006, wherein this Commission held:
[T]he source of the initiation of the activity, whether the principal /lobbyist or the state
official or employee, is not dispositive as to whether the activity is lobbying. Rather, it
is the nature of the activity itself which controls. Thus, where there would be an effort
to influence legislative or administrative action in any given contact, the activity would
be lobbying even though the contact may have been initiated by a state
official /employee. Lobbying expenses are required to be included within the totals in
reports filed pursuant to the Act.
Id. at 9.
The propriety of the proposed conduct has only been addressed under the Act and
derivatively the Ethics Act to the extent applicable; the applicability of any other statute, code,
ordinance, regulation or other code of conduct has not been considered in that they do not
involve an interpretation of the Act.
IV. CONCLUSION: An organization that holds a press briefing on civil rights issues is
engaged in indirect communication and therefore lobbying if such activity is an effort to
encourage others to take action, the purpose or foreseeable effect of which is to directly
influence legislative action or administrative action. An organization that meets with state
official(s) or employee(s) in an effort to influence legislative action or administrative action is
engaged in lobbying regardless of whether the organization or state personnel initiated the
contact. An effort by an organization to effectuate changes to an agency guideline or
statement of policy is an effort to influence administrative action. Any lobbying and lobbying
related expenses would be reportable under the Act.
Pursuant to Section 1308 of the Act, a requestor who truthfully discloses all material
facts in a request for an advisory and who acts in good faith based upon a written opinion of
the Commission issued to the requestor shall not be held liable for a violation of the Act.
This Opinion is a public record and will be made available as such.
Finally, a party may request this Commission to reconsider its Opinion. The
reconsideration request must be received at this Commission within thirty days of the mailing
date of this Opinion. The party requesting reconsideration must include a detailed explanation
of the reasons as to why reconsideration should be granted in conformity with 51 Pa. Code
§39.1.
By the Commission,
Frankel, 99 -1027
December 7, 1999
Page 6
Daneen E. Reese
Chair
Commissioner Louis W. Fryman concurs as to the result regarding the press briefing and
ACLU contacts of the Department of Corrections but dissents as to the decision regarding
contact initiated by the Department of Corrections.