The New York Times is reporting that Congressional Democrats reached tentative agreement Friday night on a major overhaul of lobbying rules that would for the first time require lawmakers to identify lobbyists who assemble multiple donations and turn them over to candidates.

The disclosure of what is known in political circles as bundling would be a central element of the first major changes made in lobbying rules in the aftermath of the Jack Abramoff scandal and other Congressional corruption cases tied to lobbying.

Under the tentative proposal, Congressional contenders and the respective campaign committees would be required to notify the Federal Election Commission once one individual had delivered more than $15,000 in contributions within six months or $30,000 in one year.

But disclosure doesn't mean they won't take the money; for the most part our politicians act with impunity and while Dems claim that this measure is to stop the Abramoffs of the world, did they forget that he gave money to Senator Harry Reid, who has created quite a resume of questionable land deals and associations with the underside of Las Vegas politics and organized crime. It also doesn't mean that Dems won't take lots of money from special interests as the following Times story shows:

June was a busy month for Senator Charles E. Schumer. On the phone, at large parties and small gatherings around the nation, he raised more than $1 million from the booming private equity and hedge fund industries for the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, of which he is chairman.

But there is another way Mr. Schumer has been busy with hedge fund and private equity managers, an important part of his constituency in New York. He has been reassuring them that he will resist an effort led by members of his own party to single out the industry with a plan that would more than double the taxes on the enormous profits reaped by its executives.
Mr. Schumer has considerable say on the issue. In addition to being the third-ranking Democrat in the Senate leadership, he is the only Democrat serving on both of the major committees, Banking and Finance, that have jurisdiction in the matter.

He has long been a pro-business Democrat and a fund-raising machine for the party, as well as a vociferous supporter of Wall Street issues in Washington, much the way Michigan lawmakers defend the auto industry and Iowa politicians work on behalf of corn farmers.

But in the case of the tax proposals, the strategy behind Mr. Schumer's efforts is putting to the test another set of principles he is known for. He has regularly portrayed himself as a progressive politician who identifies with the struggles of the middle class and is sharply critical of the selfish "plutocrats" who he says control the Republican Party.

Sounds to me as if Dems don't need lobbyists when they go directly to businesses and solicit funds while apparently offering up a quid pro quo. And while Schumer claims to be for the middle class but working so hard to protect the exorbitant "earnings" of hedge fund managers, those same middle class constituents better be aware of changes in the tax legislation for next year decided this year by our Democratic Congress affecting the college savings plans of many parents as reported in the Nevada Appeal.

They are finding that their children with unearned income are suddenly being hit up for higher taxes. The Small Business and Work Opportunity Tax Act of 2007 ("2007 Small Business Tax Act") that was passed on May 25 has extended the kiddie tax to those who are 18 years old or who are full-time students under age 24. The expanded kiddie tax rules apply only to dependent children who have income on investments and whose earned income does not exceed one-half the amount of their support. This provision is effective for most families as of Jan. 1, 2008.

This tax change makes custodial accounts a less attractive way to save for college education and other long-term expenses. If you have custodial accounts set up for minors or are thinking of gifting appreciated securities to these accounts, be sure to talk with your tax advisors before year end to determine if you can take advantage of any potential tax benefits for 2007.

I guess "plutocrats" come in Republican and Democratic party flavors Mr. Schumer.