The  registration and subsequent LD-2 reports must disclose:  the name of the organization, lobbying firm, or self-employed individual  that is lobbying on that client’s behalf;    a list of individuals who acted as lobbyists on behalf of the client during    whether any lobbyists served as covered executive branch or legislative  branch officials in the previous 20 years, known as a “covered official”  position;  the name of and further information about the client, including a general  description of its business or activities;  information on the general issue areas and corresponding issue codes  used to describe lobbying activities;    any foreign entities that have an interest in the client;    whether the client is a state or local government;  information on which federal agencies and house(s) of Congress the  lobbyist contacted on behalf of the client during the reporting period;  the amount of income related to lobbying activities received from the  client (or expenses for organizations with in-house lobbyists) during the  quarter rounded to the nearest $10,000; and    a list of constituent organizations that contribute more than $5,000 for  lobbying in a quarter and actively participate in planning, supervising, or  controlling lobbying activities, if the client is a coalition or association. Documentation Supporting Disclosure Reports Varied and Newly Registered Lobbyists Largely Met Reporting Requirements

		Lobbyists for Most LD-2 Reports Provided Documentation to Support the Amount of Income and Expenses Reported, but Provided Less Documentation to Support Other Elements of the LD- 2

While no specific requirements exist for lobbyists to create or maintain  documentation in support of the reports they file, LDA guidance issued by  the Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of the House recommends lobbyists  retain copies of their filings and supporting documentation for at least 6  years after their reports are filed. Lobbyists for an estimated 97 percent of LD-2 reports were able to provide  documentation for income and expenses for the fourth quarter of 2009 and  the first three quarters of 2010. As of March 2011, 12  of those 21 lobbyists had filed amended LD-2 reports. Of the 80 LD-203 reports sampled with  no contributions reported, 1 of the sampled reports failed to disclose  political contributions that were documented in the FEC database. We  estimate that among all reports a minimum of 2 percent failed to disclose  one or more political contributions. While the electronic filing system used for lobbying reports may reduce  the amount of time filers must spend on data entry, a few lobbyists stated  that they misreported on their LD-2 reports because they carried  information from old reports to new reports without properly updating  information. As a result, some lobbyists now have to amend their LD-2  reports to accurately reflect the lobbying activity for the quarter under  review. d  To enforce LDA compliance, the Office has primarily focused on sending  letters to lobbyists who have potentially violated the LDA by not filing  disclosure reports as required. Officials from the Office stated that  they have sufficient civil and criminal statutory authorities to enforce the  LDA. The Office has  developed a system to address that recommendation. The current system  provides a foundation that allows the Office to better focus its lobbying  compliance efforts by tracking and recording the status and disposition of  enforcement activities. In addition, the system allows the Office to monitor  lobbyists who continually fail to file the required disclosure reports. The Office  stated that they plan to formalize data review, refine summary data, and  institute procedures to ensure data are accurate and reliable in the next  few months. Agency Comments

We provided a draft of this report to the Attorney General for review and  comment. We met with the Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of  Columbia, who on behalf of the Attorney General responded that DOJ had  no comments. Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology

Consistent with the audit requirements in the Honest Leadership and Open  Government Act of 2007, our objectives were to:    determine the extent to which lobbyists are able to demonstrate  compliance with the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (LDA), as amended  by providing documentation to support information contained on reports  filed under the LDA;  identify any challenges that lobbyists report to compliance and potential  improvements; and    describe the resources and authorities available to the U.S. Attorney’s  Office for the District of Columbia (the Office), and the efforts the Office  has made to improve enforcement of the LDA, including identifying trends  in past lobbying disclosure compliance. To assess the extent to which lobbyists could provide evidence of their  compliance with reporting requirements, we examined a stratified random  sample of 100 LD-2 reports from the fourth quarter of calendar year 2009  and the first, second, and third quarters of calendar year 2010, with 25  reports selected from each quarter.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 requires that GAO annually (1) determine the extent to which lobbyists can demonstrate compliance with disclosure requirements, (2) identify any challenges that lobbyists report to compliance, and (3) describe the resources and authorities available to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Columbia (the Office), and the efforts the Office has made to improve its enforcement of the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 as amended (LDA). This is GAO's fourth report under the mandate. GAO reviewed a stratified random sample of 100 lobbying disclosure reports filed from the fourth quarter of calendar year 2009 through the third quarter of calendar year 2010. GAO also selected two random samples totaling 160 reports of federal political campaign contributions from year-end 2009 and midyear 2010. This methodology allowed GAO to generalize to the population of 55,282 disclosure reports with $5,000 or more in lobbying activity. GAO also met with officials from the Office regarding efforts to focus resources on lobbyists who fail to comply. GAO provided a draft of this report to the Attorney General for review and comment. The Assistant U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia responded on behalf of the Attorney General that the Department of Justice had no comments on the draft of this report.

What GAO Found

Lobbyists were generally able to provide documentation to support the amount of income and expenses reported; however, less documentation was provided to support other items in their disclosure reports. This finding is similar to GAO's results from prior reviews. There are no specific requirements for lobbyists to create or maintain documentation related to disclosure reports they file under the LDA. For income and expenses, two key elements of the reports, GAO estimates that lobbyists could provide documentation for approximately 97 percent of the disclosure reports for the fourth quarter 2009 and the first three quarters of 2010. According to the documentation lobbyists provided for income and expenses, we estimate the amount disclosed was supported for 68 percent of disclosure reports. After GAO's review, 21 lobbyists stated that they planned to amend their disclosure reports to make corrections on one or more data elements. As of March 2011, 12 of the 21 amended their disclosure reports. For political contributions reports, GAO estimates that a minimum of 2 percent of reports failed to disclose political contributions that were documented in the Federal Election Commission database. The majority of lobbyists who newly registered with the Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of the House of Representatives in the last quarter of 2009 and first three quarters of 2010 filed required disclosure reports for that period. GAO could identify corresponding reports on file for lobbying activity for 90 percent of registrants. The majority of lobbyists felt that the terms associated with disclosure reporting were clear and understandable. For the few lobbyists who stated that disclosure reporting terminology remained a challenge, areas of potential inconsistency and confusion in applying the terms associated with disclosure reporting requirements have been highlighted. Some lobbyists reported a lack of clarity in determining lobbying activities versus non-lobbying activities. A few lobbyists stated that they misreported on their disclosure reports because they carried information from old reports to new reports without properly updating information. The Office is responsible for enforcement of the LDA and has the authority to pursue a civil or criminal case for noncompliance. To enforce LDA compliance, the Office has primarily focused on sending letters to lobbyists who have potentially violated the LDA by not filing disclosure reports. For calendar years 2008 and 2009, the Office sent 1,597 noncompliance letters for disclosure reports and political contributions reports. About half of the lobbyists who received noncompliance letters are now compliant. In response to an earlier GAO recommendation, the Office has developed a system to better focus enforcement efforts by tracking and recording the status of enforcement activities. The system allows the Office to monitor lobbyists who continually fail to file the required disclosure reports. The Office stated that they plan to institute procedures to formalize data review, refine summary data, and ensure data are accurate and reliable in the next few months.