CQ ($$) reports that with any luck, the House lobbying reform bill will be complete by the end of May. "Democrats hope a leadership-endorsed bill will be introduced by the end of this week, but even the chairmen involved in drafting it say they don't yet have a clear idea of what will be in the measure or when it will pass." The article describes the areas of contention that have slowed down drafting the measure, including grassroots lobbying disclosure.

Lobbyists and Democratic aides involved in drafting the bill say the grass-roots provision is likely to end up in the House legislation but may not survive a conference with the Senate, which stripped such regulations out of the bill (S 1) that passed in that chamber Jan. 18.

The Hill reports that many groups are growing weary in the time lapse between the Senate passed ethics and lobbying reform bill and the one yet to be introduced in the House. "Growing nervous over possible further delay, ethics reform groups have stepped up their pressure on the House to introduce its companion piece to the Senate's lobbying reform bill." In response, efforts to uphold Congress' and the public's attention on the issue are crucial to avoid a final bill that is weak. Originally the bill was planned for the end of March, and now hopefully there will be a floor vote within the next few weeks, stretching into May.

CongressDaily ($$) reports that Democratic leaders plan to move quickly on lobbying and disclosure legislation when the House returns from its recess, and a bill is expected to be introduced later in April.

One major flashpoint in the debate is whether to require individuals or groups to disclose attempts to motivate grassroots activity on issues. Opponents of the provision hope to replicate the success they had during the Senate debate, when they succeeded in stripping a provision requiring disclosure of so-called Astroturf lobbying.

Meanwhile, some are opposing legislations that has thus far moved quickly, the Executive Branch Lobby Reform Act, to require senior executive branch officials to keep track of all contacts with lobbyists and other individuals outside the government. As already known, the National Right to Life (NRLC) organization is adamantly opposed. In this afternoon's edition of CongressDaily, the NRLC Legislative Director Douglas Johnson was quoted as saying that the bill would more appropriately be "1984." We already live in a time when surveillance and data mining is unfortunately a reality, and yet some are more concerned that disclosure of lobbying activities is a more intrusive example of a big brother society. This is perplexing because such efforts simply aid the public, providing a transparent system that provides citizens with the valuable information of who is working behind the scenes.

An article in the National Journal ($$) explains the position of OMB Watch in the struggle to get a grassroots lobbying disclosure provision in the House lobby reform bill that has yet to be introduced. An approach that strictly requires grassroots firms to disclose is discriminatory in that only one type of group is targeted. All who equally engage in grassroots lobbying should report, this way the public will benefit by getting the most useful information.

OMB Watch, on the other hand, wants the House bill to cover not just outside firms hired by clients to run grassroots campaigns but all entities that must register under existing lobbying rules and that spend a certain threshold amount on grassroots activities, said Kay Guinane, OMB Watch's director of nonprofit speech rights.