Congressional ethics. Let me just start off by saying that I know putting the word "Congress" anywhere near the word "ethics" seems to be a bit of an oxymoron in today's society. But since I have had the pleasure of working for two different, very ethical Members of Congress, I can attest that there are a few good ones working here in Washington. The 110th Congress has recently taken steps to make sure that other, less ethical Members of Congress stay on the right track with new rules.

The new rules contain many new provisions that will ultimately make DC a better place. I think that the biggest improvement is making sure that Members "own" money that they request for projects back home. Gone are the days of Congressmen screaming about bloated federal spending while secretly asking for taxpayers to foot the bill for enormous projects in their backyards. Although unlikely, I am hoping this will get rid of some of the hypocrites in DC, or at least silence them. The new rules also ensure that people can't go straight from the Congressional payroll into a new job where they will lobby their former bosses without any type of "cooling off" period. These types of rules have been needed in DC for years and I applaud the Congressional leadership for putting them in place.

Unfortunately, even with all of this good, there is still a fundamental flaw in the new ethics package — it makes it even harder for nonprofits to compete with the big corporate bad actors. The rules package bans Congressmen and their staff from accepting gifts, travel and meals from lobbyists. On its surface this sounds terrific. You might say, "Yeah, no more golf trips to Scotland for those scumbags!" Unfortunately, I have some news for you — banning a little thing, like lunch, is not going to stop special interest influence. In fact, all it does is lessen the ability of nonprofits to influence the legislative process.

The fat cats on K Street are going to be just fine because they can still donate to the campaign coffers of their favorite public official. Nonprofits are banned from making political donations, so we have often depended on relationships with Congressmen or their staffs to influence the process. The best way to build a relationship is to get someone off of the Hill. When I worked for Congress, most people were lucky to get 15 minutes for a meeting. That is hardly enough time to develop a level of trust or to talk about dramatic policy changes. Lunch, coffee, or even an educational trip not only gets someone away from their blackberry (the Arctic has no cell phone service), it can give people a chance to bond and discuss ways to work together. One of my most valuable Congressional relationships began during a staff trip to a dump in Los Angeles. What we saw at that landfill was important (and stinky), but the professional friendship that we started has been invaluable.

What is more powerful than the all-mighty dollar — especially in DC? If Congress really wants to control special interest influence, it will not only cut out lunches, it will also consider cutting out certain political donations. I never asked either of my former boss' to vote a certain way because of $20 lunch or a trip. I did, however, find out during those lunches who my boss could trust — and believe me, the guys who spent the most didn't always see a return on their investment. These new rules just make the all-mighty campaign dollar even more powerful while the rest of us are stuck begging for just a few minutes of a staffer's time.   

NRDC will continue to be one of the most effective organizations out there. It is tough to argue with the facts that we present because our work is based on reality. All we ask for is a level playing field.

Have a good day!

Heather

PS — I want to wish my mom well. She is a public school teacher and today is her first day with 20+ new third-graders in Cincinnati. Her school doesn't have any air conditioner so I am thankful that it is only 77 degrees there and I wish her a good school year.