February 21. 1974 

The Honorable Price Daniel, Jr. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives 

State Capitol Building 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Opinion No. H- 236 

Re: Information to be 

included in activities 

report filed under 

The Honorable Mark W. White, Jr. 

Secretary of State 

Office of the Secretary of State 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Article 6252-9c, 

V. T. C. S. 

Dear Speaker Daniel and Secretary White: 

House Bill 2 of the 63rd Legislature (Acts 1973, ch. 422, p. 1096; 

Article 6252-9~. V. T. C. S.) is an act “To preserve and maintain the 

integrity of the legislative process ” by requiring that “the identity, expenditures, and activities of certain persons who, by direct communication 

to such officers, engage in efforts to persuade members of the legislative 

branch or executive branch to take specific actions be publicly and regularly disclosed. ” Article 6252-9~. V. T. C. S. , Sec. 1. (emphasis added) 

Section S(a) of the Act commands that those required by Sec. 3 to 

register file a registration form. Sec. 5(b)(3) requires that the statement 

include: 

“the full name and address of each person who 

made a contribution or paid a membership fee in excess 

of $500 during the preceding 12-month period to the 

registrant or to the person by whom the registrant is 

reimbursed, retained, or employed regardless of 

whether it was paid solely to influence legislation. ” 

Section 5(b)(5) further requires: 

p. 1097 
. . 

- . 

The Honorable Price Daniel 

The Honorable Mark W. White, page 2 (H-236) 

“a specific description of the matters on which 

the registrant expects to communicate directly with 

a member of the legislative or executive branch to 

influence legislation, including, if known, the bill 

numbers and whether the registrant supports cr opposes 

each bill listed. ” 

The Secretary of State has asked: 

“Would the filing of ,a complete list of names 

and addresses of all persons who made a contribution 

or paid a membership fee during the preceding 12- 

month period to the registrant or to the person by 

whom the registrant is reimbursed, retained, or 

employed regardless of whether it was paid solely to 

influence legislation, without specifying which person 

paid in excess of $500.00 during the preceding 12- 

month period, constitute compliance with Sec. 5(b)(3), 

Article 6252-9c, V. A. C. S. ? ” 

The Speaker’s question is: 

“Is it sufficient, under Section 5(b)(5), for a 

registrant to state that he or she expects to communicate directly with a delegate on matters concerning the 

Texas Constitution, or, is the registrant required to 

state the specific Article and Section numbers of the 

present Constitution or the Constitutional Revision 

Commission’s recommended document and a description of any new subject matter concerning the Texas 

Constitution, about which the registrant expects to 

directly communicate with a delegate? ” 

The requirement of S 5(b) (3) that the statement list the full name and 

address of each person who has made a contribution in excess of $500 was 

intended to compel identification of those persons making a contribution or 

ps 1098 
The Honorable Price Daniel 

The Honorable Mark W. White, page 3 (H-236) 

paying a membership fee in excess of that amount. We have been pointed 

to no fact or circumstance which argues against according this language 

what appears to us to have been its plain purpose and thrust. In Attorney 

General Opinion H-18 (1973) we noted the “correlation between the value 

of interests to be protected and the amounts of money ordinarily spent in 

attempting to protect them. ” 

Chief Justice Warren. in discussing the purposes of the Federal 

Regulation of Lobbying Act (2 U. S. C. $ s 261-270) has said: 

“Present-day legislative complexities are such 

that individual members of Congress cannot be expected 

to explore the myriad pressures to which they are regularly subjected. Yet full realization of the American 

ideal of government by elected representatives depends 

to no small extent on their ability to properly evaluate 

such pressures. Otherwise the voice of the people may 

all too easily be drowned out by the voice of special 

interest groups seeking favored treatment while masquerading as proponents of the public weal. This is the 

evil which the Lobbying Act was designed to help prevent. 

“Toward that end, Congress has not sought to 

prohibit these pressures. It has merely provided for 

a modicum of information from those who for hire 

attempt to influence legislation or who collect or spend 

funds for that purpose. It wants only to know who is 

being hired, who is putting up the money, and how much 

” (emphasis added) United States v. Harriss, 

34-7 ;: S. 612, 625 (1954). 

In our opinion, the filing of a complete list of all those who contributed 

to the registrant without specifically identifying those who had paid in excess 

of $500 would not serve the purpose of the Act which was to let the Legislature 

and the people know the “how much” of which Chief Justice Warren spoke. We 

therefore answer the question of the Secretary of State that such a filing would 

not comply with f 5(b) (3) of Article 6252-9~. V. T. C. S. 

p. 1099 
- . 

The Honorable Price Daniel 

The Honorable Mark W. White, page 4 (H-236) 

Even though 5 5(b)(5) speaks in terms of communicating with a member 

of the “legislative branch” to influence “legislation, ” and the members of 

the Constitutional Convention sit as “delegates” and not strictly speaking as 

legislators, nevertheless it is our opinion that they are legislators, in the 

broadest, uncapitalized sense of that word since the product of their labors, 

by definition, is “legislation. ” Section 2(2) defines “legislation” to include 

“any matter pending in or which may be the subject of action by a constitutional convention. ” 

Rule XIV of the Rules of Procedures of the Constitutional Convention 

(Journal, January 8, 1974, p. 22) provides that suggested provisions be 

filed with the Secretary of the Convention and that each be numbered in 

consecutive order. 5 5. 

We believe, therefore, that the legislative intent in the adoption of 

S5(b)(5).was that, where the legislative body is the Constitutional Convention, 

the registrant should include in his statement “a specific.description of the 

matters on which the registrant expects to communicate directly with a 

member of the [Convention] to influence legislation, including, if known 

. . . . ” the proposal numbers and whether he supports or opposes each 

proposal listed. 

We therefore answer the Speaker’s question that it is not sufficient 

under 5 5(b)(5) of Article 6252-9c, V. T. C. S., for a registrant to state only 

that he or she expects to communicate directly with a delegate on matters 

concerning the Constitution. To the contrary, the registration statement 

must describe the matters or proposals in which he or she is interested and 

whether for or against them. 

SUMMARY 

Article 6252-9c, V. T. C.S., is designed to give 

those subject to the possible influence resulting from 

communication sufficient information to enable them to 

be fully aware of pressures being brought. The registrant, under 5 5(b) of the Act must,identify those conp. 1100 
I.. . 

L 

‘. 

? 

The Honorable Price Daniel 

The Honorable Mark W. White, page 5 (H-236) 

tributing $500 or more and must identify those 

proposals in which he is interested, stating whether 

he favors or opposes them. 

Very truly yours, 

JOHN L. HILL 

Attorney General of Texas 

AP&IOVED: 

Ji$Js*t 

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

I 

p. 1101