Earlier today, the House Judiciary Committee approved two lobbying reform bills — The Lobbying Transparency Act (H.R. 2317) and The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 (H.R. 2316). A proposed amendment offered by Rep. Martin Meehan (D-MA) on grassroots lobbying disclosure, however, was rejected by the Committee. The Committee approved H.R. 2316 after Chairman John Conyers (D-MI) successfully added a Manager's amendment, which resulted in three key changes to the bill:

1. Stripped from the bill the proposed extension of the revolving door ban from one to two years;
2. Changed the details of a provision requiring members and congressional staff to disclose any employment negotiations. Instead of mandating that members and staff notify the House Clerk's office, the bill now requires them to notify the Ethics Committee, effectively allowing their negotiations to remain secret; and
3. Exempted nonprofits from a coalition disclosure provision that would require disclosure of members and donors contributing over $500, as reported by Alexander Bolton in The Hill this morning.

Rep. Meehan's amendment would have required any for-hire lobbying firm spending more than $100,000 on a grassroots communication campaign in a quarter to disclose the identity of their clients, as well as the amount of money the lobbying firm received for executing the grassroots campaign. In arguing for his proposed amendment, Rep. Meehan cited the case of the "Harry and Louise" television ads which helped to defeat President Clinton's health care reform initiative. The Health Insurance Association of America paid for the ads. If Meehan's amendment were to become law, lobbying firms would then have to reveal the identity of such clients. The amendment, however, met strong opposition from both Democratic and Republican Committee members, including Chairman Conyers who said he opposed the amendment on the advice of the American Civil Liberties Union ,the National Rifle Association, and the National Right to Life Committee and because he believed the amendment would discourage citizens from contacting their representatives. Rep. Artur Davis (D-AL) also opposed the amendment, contending that the "traditional concern with lobbing is about what happens behind closed doors" and that "grassroots activity is transparent — the arguments are out there in the open." Rep. Daniel Lungren (R-CA) argued against the amendment, saying that it would "chill activity at the local level to encourage people to contact their representatives."