|
LOBBYING REPORT |
Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995 (Section 5) - All Filers Are Required to Complete This Page
2. Address
Address1 | 42020 Village Center Plaza |
Address2 | Suite 120-200 |
City | Stone Ridge |
State | VA |
Zip Code | 20105 |
Country | USA |
3. Principal place of business (if different than line 2)
City | Chantilly |
State | VA |
Zip Code | 20152 |
Country | USA |
|
5. Senate ID# 91650-12
|
||||||||
|
6. House ID# 368070000
|
TYPE OF REPORT | 8. Year | 2015 |
Q1 (1/1 - 3/31) | Q2 (4/1 - 6/30) | Q3 (7/1 - 9/30) | Q4 (10/1 - 12/31) |
9. Check if this filing amends a previously filed version of this report
10. Check if this is a Termination Report | Termination Date |
|
11. No Lobbying Issue Activity |
INCOME OR EXPENSES - YOU MUST complete either Line 12 or Line 13 | |||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
12. Lobbying | 13. Organizations | ||||||||
INCOME relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period was: | EXPENSE relating to lobbying activities for this reporting period were: | ||||||||
|
|
||||||||
|
|
||||||||
Provide a good faith estimate, rounded to the nearest $10,000, of all lobbying related income for the client (including all payments to the registrant by any other entity for lobbying activities on behalf of the client). | 14. REPORTING Check box to indicate expense accounting method. See instructions for description of options. | ||||||||
Method A.
Reporting amounts using LDA definitions only
Method B. Reporting amounts under section 6033(b)(8) of the Internal Revenue Code Method C. Reporting amounts under section 162(e) of the Internal Revenue Code |
Signature | Digitally Signed By: Greg Mitchell |
Date | 10/20/2015 11:52:39 PM |
LOBBYING ACTIVITY. Select as many codes as necessary to reflect the general issue areas in which the registrant engaged in lobbying on behalf of the client during the reporting period. Using a separate page for each code, provide information as requested. Add additional page(s) as needed.
15. General issue area code FOR
16. Specific lobbying issues
On behalf of 61 organizations and individuals, including the client, who signed a multi-faith letter, made contacts in support of H.R. 1150, the Frank R. Wolf International Religious Freedom Act of 2015. We must work to create a context where people can live with their deepest differences. The recent turmoil in Syria, Iraq and Ukraine-including the alarming spike in incidents of violence and persecution of Christians, Muslim communities, and other religious minorities-offers the latest examples of what happens if we do not. The purpose of the bill is to update the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998 (IRFA) and improve the capacity of the U.S. government to advance religious freedom globally by giving the Administration and State Department new political tools to better counter violent extremism and sectarian violence, growing anti-Semitism and restriction on religious minorities (e.g., a tier system for IRF reports on countries of particular concern and a special watch list, annual actions on countries with severe IRF abuses, authority to sanction individuals responsible for committing severe violations of IRF or materially supporting terrorism or violent extremism, and the ability to designate non-state actors as part of the Country of Particular Concern list and a range of sanctions targeting individual members of such groups); expanding diplomatic training, counter-terrorism coordination, and foreign assistance efforts; and reauthorizing the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) through 2021. With the passage and implementation of H.R. 1150, a strengthened IRFA and a stronger IRF policy-as integrated into U.S. foreign policy and national security-the United States will send a clear and urgent message regarding the inherent dignity of every human being, as well as our common global security in the fight against persecution and religious extremism, and terrorism. Doing so is consistent with the best of our values, practically protecting our interests as a result.
On behalf of 112 organizations and individuals, including the client, who signed a multi-faith letter, made contacts to urge support and the swift passage of S. 1798, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) Reauthorization Act of 2015. We believe S. 1798 strengthens USCIRFs mandate and the tools at its disposal, while providing a much-needed six-year authorization at a critical time when assaults on religious freedom around the world are systemic and growing. In fact, the current state of international religious freedom is one of deepening crisis-according to the Pew Research Centers latest annual study on global restrictions on religion, 77% of the worlds population live in countries with a high or very high overall level of restriction on religion in 2013, up from 76% in 2012 and 68% in 2007.
At the same time, made contacts against S. 1860, the Further Independence of Religion for Security and Tolerance Freedom Act of 2015. We believe S. 1798 is better suited to advance freedom of religion or belief. While S. 1860 includes significant refugee-related provisions that many of us support, some of these provisions are part of an ongoing debate which is unlikely to be resolved prior to the rapidly-approaching expiration of USCIRFs current authorization. As such, we believe consideration of such provisions should be delinked from the current reauthorization process. Additionally, many of the USCIRF-related provisions in S. 1860 are deeply concerning and could potentially undermine USCIRFs vital work.
On behalf of 112 organizations and individuals, including the client, who signed a multi-faith letter, made contacts to urge support and the swift passage of S. 2078, the United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) Reauthorization Act of 2015. S. 2078 reauthorizes the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) through FY2019. S. 2078 passed the Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
On behalf of 34 organizations and individuals, including the client, who signed a multi-faith letter, made contacts to urge support and the swift passage of H. Res. 290, which calls for the global repeal of blasphemy laws. These laws punish expression deemed blasphemous (contemptuous of God or sacred things), defamatory of religion, or insulting to religion or religious symbols, figures, or feelings. Not only do they threaten the individual right to the freedoms of religion and expression, they also violate international standards, including Article 18 of the International Declaration of Human Rights, which affirms that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. These bans also inappropriately position governments as arbiters of truth or religious rightness as they empower officials to enforce particular religious views against individuals and minorities. H. Res. 290 calls on the President and the State Department to prioritize the repeal of blasphemy laws.
On behalf of 28 organizations and individuals, including the client, who signed a multi-faith letter, made contacts to urge the United States government to engage leaders of the Kazakhstan government and express deep concerns about the 2011 Law on Religious Activity and Religious Associations in light of the recent Report of the United Nations Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief on his Mission to Kazakhstan. Certain provisions of the 2011 Religion Law are inconsistent with both Kazakhstans Constitution and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The Special Rapporteur made several substantive, reasonable and fair recommendations to bring the Constitution and Kazakh law fully into line with Article 18 of the ICCPR and other relevant international human rights standards. The U.S. government could urge the Kazakh government to make these changes to the law.
17. House(s) of Congress and Federal agencies Check if None
U.S. SENATE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom
18. Name of each individual who acted as a lobbyist in this issue area
First Name | Last Name | Suffix | Covered Official Position (if applicable) | New |
Greg |
Mitchell |
|
|
19. Interest of each foreign entity in the specific issues listed on line 16 above Check if None
Information Update Page - Complete ONLY where registration information has changed.
20. Client new address
Address |
|
||||||
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
21. Client new principal place of business (if different than line 20)
City |
|
State |
|
Zip Code |
|
Country |
|
22. New General description of client’s business or activities
LOBBYIST UPDATE
23. Name of each previously reported individual who is no longer expected to act as a lobbyist for the client
|
|
||||||||
1 |
|
3 |
|
||||||
2 |
|
4 |
|
ISSUE UPDATE
24. General lobbying issue that no longer pertains
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AFFILIATED ORGANIZATIONS
25. Add the following affiliated organization(s)
Internet Address:
Name | Address |
Principal Place of Business (city and state or country) |
||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
26. Name of each previously reported organization that is no longer affiliated with the registrant or client
1 | 2 | 3 |
FOREIGN ENTITIES
27. Add the following foreign entities:
Name | Address |
Principal place of business (city and state or country) |
Amount of contribution for lobbying activities | Ownership percentage in client | ||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
|
% |
28. Name of each previously reported foreign entity that no longer owns, or controls, or is affiliated with the registrant, client or affiliated organization
1 | 3 | 5 |
2 | 4 | 6 |