Here

House leaders are revamping the rules for lawmakers and aides who travel overseas on official government business, forbidding them to fly in business class on shorter trips, use taxpayer funds to buy gifts or pocket unspent cash, among other changes.

The changes are the first significant made to the House’s travel rules in more than 30 years.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703950804575242751142413016.html?mod=djemalertNEWS

President Barack Obama’s latest nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court is a loyal Democratic campaign donor who played a leading role in one of the most important campaign finance-related cases in recent history.

The move to promote Solicitor General Elena Kagan to replace retiring Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens comes at a time when the Obama administration is criticizing the court’s January ruling in the high-profile campaign finance case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

As the federal government’s top litigator, Kagan herself led the government’s defense in Citizens United. In that case, she argued on behalf of the FEC that the government had a right to regulate the speech of corporations.

As OpenSecrets Blog reported when the case was argued last September, much of Kagan’s contention was centered on the idea that allowing corporations to spend money directly from their treasuries on political activity is unfair to the company’s shareholders.

“When corporations use other people’s money to electioneer, that is a harm not just to the shareholders themselves but a sort of a broader harm to the public that comes from distortion of the electioneering that is done by corporations,” Kagan told the justices.

The majority of the high court, however, was not persuaded. In a 5-4 ruling, the justices overturned the government’s ban on using corporate funds for independent expenditures.

Election law observers are expecting senators to raise questions about Citizens United during Kagan’s confirmation hearings — yet they warn that Kagan hasn’t left much of a paper trail on these subjects.
“We have no idea how much she will respond to questions [about Citizens United] on any substantive level,” Loyola Law School professor and election law expert Rick Hasen wrote on his blog.

“I am not aware of any writing of hers, or any remarks, that give any indication about her views on constitutional issues related to campaign financing, voting rights, redistricting, voter identification, or any of the other important election law issues that have been before the Court many times and that in all likelihood will return again,” Hasen continued.

Despite the paucity of evidence, others say reformers should be optimistic.

“We often do not have concrete evidence when a justice is nominated,” said Susan Liss, the director of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, a nonpartisan, nonprofit advocacy group that aims to reduce the role of big money in elections.

Liss went on to suggest that Obama — who has repeatedly criticized the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling and has vocally supported congressional efforts to add new disclosure requirements to corporate-funded independent expenditures — would not be interested in nominating someone who would read the First Amendment to advance corporate speech rights ahead of those of individuals.

“I expect that she would continue her defense of the need for campaign finance regulation that she began [in the arguments during Citizens United],” she said. “We should have hopes that progressives will be well-served by her nomination.”

Previously, Kagan taught law at Harvard Law School and served as the school’s dean for six years. She also worked in the Clinton White House, taught at the University of Chicago Law School and practiced law as an attorney with D.C. firm Williams & Connolly — information you can see in her profile in the OpenSecrets.org Revolving Door database.

While employed by Harvard, Kagan contributed $12,300 to federal politicians and committees, the Center for Responsive Politics found.

These include the legal maximum of $4,600 to Obama during the 2008 presidential election, a $2,000 contribution to Obama during his 2004 Senate campaign, $1,500 in contributions to Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.), $1,000 to 2000 Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore, $1,000 to the Democratic National Committee in 2000 and $750 to Hillary Clinton in support of her 2000 Senate bid.

Here is a full list of the federal campaign contributions made by Kagan:

”Recipient / Amount”

*Barack Obama $6,600
*John Kerry $1,500
*Al Gore $1,000
*Democratic National Committee $1,000
*Hillary Clinton $750
*Judith Feder $500
*Ira S. Shapiro $450
*Rahm Emanuel $250
*Jon Paul Jennings $250
*Total $12,300

Kagan reportedly made the short list of possible nominees last year, when Obama ultimately elevated Sonia Sotomayor to fill the slot once occupied by Justice David Souter.

When the Senate voted to confirm Kagan for her current post as solicitor general in March 2009, she received the support of seven Republican senators and the entire Democratic caucus.

Republicans who voted for her confirmation were: Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), Judd Gregg (R-N.H.), Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.). Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) and Olympia Snowe (R-Maine). None of theses senators have yet released statements as to whether they will support or oppose her nomination.

Sen. Arlen Specter of Pennsylvania, who left the Republican Party to become a Democrat about a month after this vote, did not support her nomination last year. Now he says he has an open mind.