WHAT'S NEW IN PUBLIC AFFAIRS

It was probably inevitable, but according to the National Journal "blogging" has come to Capitol Hill. To get feedback on his position on legislation expanding broadband coverage in rural areas, Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) posted a summary of that position on two blogs - one liberal, one conservative - and got back more than 500 comments. It remains to be seen whether, as Durbin thinks, blogging promises to enhance the public's role in crafting federal legislation, or whether, as some skeptics think, it's a passing fad. Meanwhile, what seems to be anything but a passing fad is an increase in financial contributions to state political parties. According to the Wall Street Journal, the National Institute on Money in State Politics reports that as more limits are put on contributing to individual campaigns, wealthy contributors, businesses, advocacy groups and even labor unions are giving more money to state parties, which generally don't have such limits. In 2006, state parties raised $117 million from such donations, compared to $90 million in 2002. These stores and more in this edition of the Public Affairs News Monitor.

HEADLINES AT A GLANCE

"Blogging On"
"Rich Donors Make State Party Coffers Bulge"
"In First Test, Congress Narrows Scope of Ethics Reform"
"Republicans Grow Skeptical on Free Trade"
"Business Groups Fear Overreaction From Congress Over Safety Threat of Imports"
"Tax-Cut Supporters Ready for 'World Series of Lobbying'"
"An Airlift of Private Planes to Darfur, Not the Hamptons?

UPCOMING CONFERENCES
www.pac.org/conferences

Public Affairs in China
October 19, 2007 - Washington, DC
This program is geared towards mid- and senior-level professionals seeking best practices and innovations for conducting public affairs in China. Our experienced faculty will share which public affairs tactics and techniques work in China and which do not. Our presenters boast years of experience on the ground in China, effectively collaborating with government officials, media outlets, NGOs, community programs and others to effectively conduct public affairs on behalf of their organizations. Plus, hear how business groups communicate priorities back to HQ, senior management and other corporate contacts.

Fall Board Meeting
October 24-26, 2007 - La Jolla, CA
Two Board meetings are held annually - one in Washington, D.C., each April and one in the western United States each October. The April meeting is a one-day forum that gives senior executives the opportunity to hear nationally renowned speakers address emerging issues. Online registration is not available for this meeting. Please follow the link below for detailed information.

Teleconference: Public Affairs in the EU
October 30, 2007
The European Union is one of America's greatest economic and political partners, and economic and political competitors. The EU is also seen by many as the gateway to the East, whose rise economically and politically is a global reality. Therefore, decisions made by the EU can affect much of the rest of the globe, making public affairs within the EU of critical importance. Join us as we uncover some of the best practices for working with the European Union in the public affairs arena.

COUNCIL SERVICES

Did you know that you can find job postings on the Council's Web site? Learn more at www.pac.org/jobs

"Blogging On"
National Journal (10/06/07) Vol. 39, No. 40, P. 24; Vaida, Bara

Blogs are gaining ground in the legislative arena, although it remains difficult for lobbying firms to determine how much influence they have and whether they are a new tool for drumming up interest in particular issues or a passing fad. Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Ill.) recently generated more than 500 comments when he posted his position on a bill to expand broadband coverage in rural areas on the blogs Open Left and RedState, and the comments will be reviewed by his aides as part of the bill-drafting process. "The reality is that most people feel that unless you can hire an expensive lobbyist, you can't get to the table to write a bill," says Durbin. "This is a 'small d' democratic approach [to legislation], and I think it is a valuable approach that we ought to try more and more." More than a dozen members of Congress have entered the blogging arena, reports National Journal's Beltway Blogroll. Some believe blogs can foster relationships among government officials, companies and opinion leaders, as well as generate media attention. However, Business Roundtable President John Castellani says it remains to be seen whether blogs generate support for an issue outside the realm of activists.(www.nationaljournal.com)

"Rich Donors Make State Party Coffers Bulge"
Wall Street Journal (10/02/07) P. A6; Farnam, T.W.

The National Institute on Money in State Politics reports that donations to state parties by wealthy individuals is on the rise, and recorded an increase from $9 million given by the 10 leading state party contributors in the 2001-2002 election season to $24.6 million in the 2005-2006 season. Eight of the top 10 state party donors are Republicans, six hail from California, and seven are in the real estate business. A top national donor is billionaire media mogul Jerrold Perenchio, who gave hefty sums to the pro-Republican group Progress for America and to an independent committee that concentrated on California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's ballot initiatives. A 2000 California ballot initiative restricted the size of donations to individual candidate committees, but placed no limits on the contributions the state's parties could accept. "The role of the party has been permanently elevated by putting contribution limits on individual campaigns," says California Republican Party Chairman Ron Nehring. "By donating to the party, people can continue to participate and continue to support the party." According to the National Institute on Money in State Politics study, the 100 state parties raised $117 million from 60,000 individuals last year, versus $90 million from 80,000 individuals in 2002. State party contributions from businesses, their advocacy groups, and labor unions also experienced growth.(www.wsj.com)

"In First Test, Congress Narrows Scope of Ethics Reform"
Christian Science Monitor (10/05/07) P. 1; Chaddock, Gail Russell

The congressional push for more earmark transparency has hit a speed bump as the most comprehensive ethics-reform bill since the Watergate era faces its first challenge as legislators move to finalize authorization and spending bills for fiscal year 2008. Key changes promised in debates have yet to be put into practice, with Sunlight Foundation fellow Bill Allison remarking, "We have more disclosure about earmarks than we've ever had before, but among the more frustrating things we've seen is a simple word change that really delays disclosure until it's almost meaningless." A major abuse area is the practice of adding measures after a bill has passed both chambers but before it has gone back to the House and Senate for a final vote. The new earmark reform legislation exclusively applies to spending bills, according to clarification from Senate Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.), leaving members with no chance to challenge specific projects on the House or Senate floor. A call for stronger earmark disclosure requirements was made by a recent rally of House Republicans and conservative activist groups. In a letter to Reid and Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) wrote, "While we have had numerous disagreements about the ethics bill, I believe we share a common desire to restrict the practice of adding earmarks to bills behind closed doors." Reid and Feinstein wrote back that "sound policy reasons" exist for treating authorization and spending bills differently, noting that stronger protections are suitable when Capitol Hill actually spends taxpayer money, while the passage of an authorization bill constitutes the expression of a goal. Republicans demanding more transparency in earmark disclosure may have an ally in freshmen Democrats who campaigned on halting corruption in Washington, and thus may be sympathetic to their cause.(www.csmonitor.com)

"Republicans Grow Skeptical on Free Trade"
Wall Street Journal (10/04/07); Harwood, John

A new poll reveals that 60 percent of surveyed Republican voters think free trade hurts the U.S. economy. The 2007 Wall Street Journal and NBC News Poll's free trade query was designed as two statements, the first asserting that foreign trade has produced more American jobs, economic growth, and more consumer choices. The second statement said that foreign trade has decreased demand for American goods, cut American jobs, and yielded potentially unsafe goods. Among the Republican respondents, 59 percent chose the second statement as the closest to their own viewpoint. In contrast, only 31 percent of Republicans believed trade deals had harmed the U.S. economy when surveyed in 1999 by the Wall Street Journal and NBC News. New free-trade pacts pushed by President Bush have stalled lately as well. Not only does the 2007 survey reveal a major shift in Republican opinion from eight years ago, but also the results imply that trade deals could face large hurdles under a new president, due to the growing alignment in Republican and Democratic views on free trade. Democrats have criticized the effect of trade on American jobs for years, but eroding support among Republicans signifies a fresh warning for those who benefit from emerging markets abroad. Nevertheless, leading Republican candidates continue to endorse free trade. The Wall Street Journal-NBC News survey also reveals an overall unraveling of Republican Party tenets and the changing makeup of the Republican electorate. Indeed, the only candidate stance eliciting robust agreement from most Republicans surveyed was resistance to abortion rights, according to the survey; post-9/11 security fears have dislodged some of the Republican Party's standard economic concerns shaped by Ronald Reagan as well. (www.wsj.com)

"Business Groups Fear Overreaction From Congress Over Safety Threat of Imports"
The Hill (10/04/07) Vol. 14, No. 116, P. 16; Swanson, Ian

U.S. business groups fear that recent product recalls and alerts will yield protectionist legislation, and Congress' approach to managing the safety of foreign imports is currently the subject of heated debate. Business groups fear that protectionist measures will draw a response that will jeopardize U.S. exports, and they argue that trade barriers are not an effective solution to safety concerns. Safety scares over pet food, seafood, toothpaste and toys imported from China have thrown a spotlight on China's regulatory environment and currency policies. The seafood industry is a good example of the long-standing debate between domestic producers, such as the Southern Shrimp Alliance (SSA), and importers. In June 2007, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) limited imports of seafood from China after discovering unauthorized antibiotics in certain shipments. The SSA contends that, in comparison to other country's standards, the FDA's food-safety controls are too feeble and "serve as a welcome mat for unscrupulous companies," according to SSA Executive Director John Williams. SSA calls for more import inspections and better testing facilities, and it has suggested that seafood be allowed into the country only at selected ports. Importers within the National Fisheries Institute (NFI) counter that such recommendations would be costly and ineffective, although NFI is lobbying for rules requiring importers to prove they have satisfied the security standards of their home countries. NFI is also requesting more funding for the FDA. Still, both groups concur that if consumers fret about the safety of imported seafood, they may stop purchasing seafood, regardless of its source.(www.thehill.com)

"Tax-Cut Supporters Ready for 'World Series of Lobbying'"
Washington Post (10/02/07) P. A17; Birnbaum, Jeffrey H.

The Tax Relief Coalition is being reanimated by corporate trade groups to fight Rep. Charlie Rangel's (D-N.Y.) promised "mother of all [tax] reforms," which in the eyes of Washington business lobbyists means a tax increase. The coalition was organized five years ago to help President Bush move his tax cut through Capitol Hill, and it did so with great success. It is speculated that Rangel's proposal will involve a repeal of Bush's tax cuts and the possible placement of a surtax on upper-income individuals, which the coalition is firmly against. The group's 1,000 members collectively speak for 1.8 million businesses, and much of the coalition's strength resides in its ability to inundate members of Congress with calls, letters, and visits. "Major tax bills are the World Series of lobbying as far as I'm concerned," stated coalition leader Dirk Van Dongen, president of the National Association of Wholesaler-Distributors. The last campaign the coalition supported was one to permanently repeal the estate tax. The effort was ultimately unsuccessful, but the group has no intention of failing to defeat Rangel's proposal. "The real trick is to keep [lawmakers] from dividing and conquering us," Van Dongen explained. "It's not a natural act for the business community to hang together."(www.washingtonpost.com)

"An Airlift of Private Planes to Darfur, Not the Hamptons"
New York Times (10/03/07); Dash, Eric

Corporate philanthropy has taken a new turn, with executives from four investment banks partnering with the humanitarian relief organization Bridge Foundation for the Darfur Project. The banks will devote $2 million to the chartering of planes to transport antibiotics and other medical supplies to Darfur. PNC Financial Vice Chairman William Demchak, BlueMountain Capital Management Founder and CEO Andrew Feldstein, Merrill Lynch President Gregory Fleming, and Goldman Sachs Co-President Jon Winkelried plan to send four planes to the war-torn region by the end of the year, with an additional four flights planned by April. The executives hope to contribute money for flights in the future, with Feldstein hoping to eventually send one plane per month. According to FSG Social Impact Advisors Managing Director Mark Kramer, "Corporate philanthropy is often driven by the interests of your customers and a desire to strengthen your reputation. It is rare to see them working on an area that is a tough, unpleasant issue and that is pretty far removed from their core customer base."(www.nytimes.com)