Requires notification and reporting relative to certain communications made for the purpose of influencing the passage or defeat of legislation (OR +$14,000 GF EX See Note)
The passage of HB 187 will have significant implications for state laws pertaining to lobbying and communication with legislative bodies. By imposing strict reporting requirements on those engaged in lobbying, the bill aims to increase accountability and transparency in political influence. Any person who spends over $1,000 annually on lobbying efforts must file monthly reports detailing their communication activities, the sources of funds, and payments made. Such measures are designed to deter unethical practices and ensure legislative processes remain free from undue influence.
House Bill 187 is aimed at regulating lobbying activities associated with the passage or defeat of legislation in Louisiana. The bill requires individuals or entities engaging in or causing 'communication activities' to notify the Board of Ethics within 24 hours of initiating such activities. Communication activities are defined under the bill as a series of over 50 automated calls intended to influence legislation, requiring detailed reporting and transparency in funding and spending associated with these efforts. The primary goal of HB 187 is to enhance ethical practices in lobbying by mandating timely communication to the ethical oversight body.
The sentiment around HB 187 has been generally supportive among advocacy groups focused on political ethics and transparency. Proponents argue that the bill helps safeguard democratic processes and supports a more informed electorate by clarifying funding sources behind lobbying efforts. However, there may be contention from some lobbyists and businesses, who could view these requirements as overly burdensome or restrictive, potentially stifling legitimate advocacy efforts.
Notable points of contention surrounding HB 187 include concerns about the potential for increased compliance costs for organizations engaged in lobbying. Critics may argue that the bill's stringent requirements could inadvertently suppress grassroots activism and discourage small-scale advocacy due to the elevated administrative burden. Additionally, the imposition of a civil penalty for non-compliance, which could reach up to $10,000 per violation, raises questions about fairness and the practicality of enforcement in various lobbying scenarios.