The revamped HB178 now goes to the Senate. But, as Becker points out, the Senate has failed to pass any so-called government reform measures in recent years. Senate GOP leaders said they have not looked at the new bill and had no comment on it.

As introduced, Becker's original HB178 was a gift ban bill. All kinds of gifts would be banned if they cost more than $5.

However, House Assistant Whip Brad Dee, R-Ogden, noted that Becker's bill had 17 exceptions. "And everyone will try to work around those disclosure" exceptions to still provide gifts to legislators, Dee said.

"Full disclosure of gifts" is a better way to go, said Dee, who had clearly lined up his GOP caucus' support for his substitute bill.

But as Becker countered, a large loophole remains by not including the hundreds of meals that individual legislators accept from all kinds groups. Becker's original bill would have banned most of those meals; Dee's substitute bill exempts most of them from being reported with legislators' names.

Some lawmakers, including Senate President John Valentine, R-Orem, has said he considers eating a meal on a lobbyist's dime is part of doing his legislative work because he is giving his time to the lobbyist.

Each legislator is already paid $54 a day in per diem during the 45-day session, a nontaxable dollar amount provided by the state for things like meals and out-of-pocket expenses.

House Majority Leader Dave Clark, R-Santa Clara, said that Becker's original HB178 was filled with problems.

He said no legislator runs or serves believing he'll make money. Instead, it costs legislators to serve. He added that one of his neighbors lobbies him on open space and trails. And if Becker's gift ban bill passed, he couldn't attend a traditional neighborhood Christmas party at her house because she is a lobbyist, and he couldn't accept a dinner from her.

Dee's amendments also change when and how lobbyists report. Under the substituted bill, lobbyists would not report 10 days after the Legislature ends, nor file a year-end report that includes all expenditures (and legislator's names, if need be).

Instead, lobbyists would file quarterly reports. But those reports would stand alone, and so there would not be one year-end report showing all giving and taking in a calendar year. Interested parties would have to add up all of a lobbyist's four reports to see how much he had given legislators during the year — a much more time consuming effort for media reporters or those challenging an incumbent legislator in his re-election.

---

E-mail: bbjr@desnews.com