Representative Boehner was driving through Florida when he joined the conference call. He spoke from a cellular telephone in his car. John and Alice Martin, who lived in Florida, used a police radio scanner to eavesdrop on the conversation, in violation of 18 U.S.C. Anderson, 809 F. 1992) case opinion from the US District Court for the District of Columbia.

[toc]They did not agree much when serving in Congress together, but Sen. Harry Reid and Speaker John Boehner are teaming up for a new educational think tank at the University of Las Vegas (UNLV).

The new group is sponsored by MGM Resorts International and will be known as The MGM Resorts Public Policy Institute at UNLV.

It is the latest step in a growing effort from MGM to have a bigger presence in government.

Institute focuses on gaming and hospitality-related policies

Reid and Boehner will co-chair the new, bipartisan institute.

It will be a part of the existing School of Public Policy and Leadership within the Greenspun College of Urban Affairs.

Said UNLV President Len Jessup:

“Identifying solutions to complex public-policy issues can only be achieved through robust debate and our university – with its diverse expertise and capacity for community engagement – is a natural setting.

We look forward to working with the leadership of MGM Resorts and the Institute co-chairs to further define a compelling research and policy agenda.”

Reid has been a longtime supporter of casino endeavors being a senator for the Silver State.

Boehner brings a different point of view to the table. The Representative from Ohio is a staunch anti-online gambling advocate, though his supporters include Sands CEO Sheldon Adelson.

Despite their differences, Boehner and Reid are confident they will work well together on this educational endeavor. The issued a joint statement on their new roles as consultants for the program:

“While our public opposition on issues may be more storied than our private friendship, we have successfully collaborated on complex problems and signature ideas and look forward to doing so again.

As passionate and committed believers in the importance of public service, we are eager to work with MGM Resorts and UNLV to inspire a new generation to serve their country through public office.”

MGM continues to prioritize policy

The new educational institute is the latest move by MGM Resorts to have a larger presence in the government side of gaming affairs.

In January, the casino company launched a new office in D.C. https://apyellow.amebaownd.com/posts/22960740. led by former Reid aide Ayesha Khanna. The point of the office is to bring the Vegas-based company closer to political decision makers for lobbying purposes.

Right now there is minimal movement on the federal front when it comes to the hot-button issues like sports betting and online gaming. Meanwhile several states, like Pennsylvania and New York, are on the verge of regulation online gambling at the state level.

Chairman and CEO of MGM Resorts International Jim Murren championed the company’s new take-charge approach to policy in the announcement about the UNLV institute.

“I’m excited about the possibilities the Institute offers to proactively explore issues and develop bipartisan policy solutions – especially on topics that matter to our workforce, our communities and the industries in which we play a leading role,” Murren said.

The Institute is pending approval from the Board of Regents. Last Thursday Jessup spoke to the Student Affairs Committee about the proposal.

Image credit: Ken Wolter / Shutterstock.com

809 F. Supp. 138 (1992)John BOEHNER, et al., Plaintiffs,
v.
Donnald K. ANDERSON, et al., Defendants.Civ. A. No. 92-2427.

United States District Court, District of Columbia.

December 16, 1992.

*139 Jerry Boykin, Redmon, Boykin & Baswell, Alexandria, VA, John C. Armor, Washington, DC, for plaintiffs.

Michael Davidson, Senate Legal Counsel, Steven R. Ross, Gen. Counsel to the Clerk, House of Representatives, Washington, DC, for defendants.

Roger Witten, Ronald J. Greene, Washington, DC, for Amicus Common Cause.

Stuart Gerson, Asst. Atty. Gen., Civ. Div., Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC, for the President.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

SPORKIN, District Judge.

I. Standing

As the Court finds that at least some of the parties have standing in this case, the Court will address the merits of this case.

II. Validity of ratification of 27th Amendment

Because this issue was raised only by Common Cause, as amicus curiae, and not by any of the defendants in this case, any determination of this issue will have to await another case.

III. Constitutionality of Challenged provisions of Ethics Reform Act of 1989

Plaintiffs challenge two provisions of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (ERA) as violating the 27th Amendment^[1] to the U.S. Constitution: (1) the automatic pay increases (or 'COLAs') and (2) the quadrennial pay increases.

A. Quadrennial Commission Pay Raises. ERA provides for the establishment of a Citizens' Commission on Public Service and Compensation. This Commission is to make recommendations to the President every four years regarding the pay level of high-level Government officials, including Members of Congress. After receiving the Commission's recommendations, the President, in turn, is to submit a recommendation concerning the pay levels to Congress. To become effective, the President's recommendations must be approved by a recorded vote and enacted into law. The first Citizens' Commission is to be convened in fiscal year 1993; its first report to the President is due by December 15, 1993. The President is scheduled to transmit his first recommendation under the Ethics Reform Act to Congress in January 1994. Should the President recommend a pay increase and should the Congress approve it, the first Congressional quadrennial pay raise under the Act would come into effect January 1995. Ethics Reform Act of 1989, Pub.L. 101-194, § 701, 103 Stat. 1763-1767.

It is worth noting that the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 was not the first piece of legislation to create such a commission. The quadrennial review process extends back to the Postal Revenue and Federal Salary Act of 1967, 81 Stat. 642, which established a Commission on Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Salaries to review the salaries of high-level Executive, Legislative, and Judicial officials every four years. This Commission also was directed to make recommendations to the President concerning salary adjustments of high-level Government officials, and the President would in turn submit recommendations to *140 Congress. If both Houses approved a salary adjustment recommended by the President, such adjustment would take effect soon thereafter. The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 abolished this Commission, and replaced it with the Citizens' Commission, which is to have a different composition than its counterpart under the Salary Act.

B. COLA's.

Congress first provided for automatic annual adjustments to its Members' pay in the Executive Salary Cost-of-Living Act of 1975, Pub.L. 94-82. The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (ERA) simply establishes a different methodology for calculating the automatic annual adjustments, called COLAs. Under ERA, the COLA is calculated by comparing the percentage change in the Employment Cost Index and subtracting one-half of one percent. P.L. 101-194, § 704. The purpose of using this index is to maintain some comparability between governmental and private-sector salaries. See 5 U.S.C. § 5301(3). The first COLA under the ERA went into effect on January 1, 1991. P.L. 101-194, § 704(b).

The Court finds both challenged provisions

3d John Boehner Slots Free