Senate and House ethics panels are under pressure to stop movie industry lobbyists from offering free previews to members of Congress, staffers and administration officials.

Public Citizen, a nonprofit watchdog group that helped implement sweeping new congressional ethics reforms last year, says the screenings violate the ban on gifts from lobbyists.

Lawmakers and staff have long prized invitations to screenings of movies before they are out on general release; it allows them to rub elbows with Hollywood stars. Some senior lawmakers have attended many times.  

But that tradition may soon end, to the dismay of some Washington insiders. Several House members say they will now think twice about attending free movies.

Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), currently chairman of the Financial Services Committee, said he attended about “a half-dozen” screenings hosted by the MPAA while serving on the Judiciary Committee. That panel has jurisdiction over intellectual property law, an important issue for the film industry, which has made fighting piracy one of its top priorities.

“It’s silly to think that would have any influence on my vote,” said Frank, who could not remember the last time he attended. “It’s silly to think it has a corrupting influence.”

Nevertheless, Frank agreed that free previews were gifts.

Angela Belden Martinez, vice president of corporate communications at the MPAA, insisted the group has followed ethics rules.

“Regarding the issues raised by Public Citizen, we at the MPAA have worked over the years to ensure that all of our events are in compliance with the applicable government ethics rules, and we are confident that they are,” she said.  

Since Congress barred gifts from lobbyists and lobbying organizations last year, the MPAA has made a few changes in order to qualify for the so-called “widely attended event” exception to the gift ban. The group plans to hold about 10 screenings for lawmakers this year.

Now lawmakers must content themselves with gourmet appetizers instead of the full dinners the MPAA once served. But members of Congress can still have as many free drinks as they want.

The MPAA has also begun inviting at least 25 people from outside Congress to the screenings and has added short trailers discussing issues affecting the film industry.

In letters to the Senate and House ethics committees, Public Citizen officials argue that these tweaks are not enough to avoid the gift ban and ask that the MPAA and other lobbying organizations receive “clear and appropriate guidance concerning the requirements of the ethics rules as applied to these entertainment events.”

David Arkush, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch, and Craig Holman, a Public Citizen advocate, wrote: “The critical determinant of whether the widely attended event exception applies is whether the MPAA-sponsored event is a business or educational function that focuses on a legislative or regulatory matter relevant to the official duties of the public officials in attendance.

“The feature films — which are the key attraction to the MPAA-sponsored events, along with mingling with Hollywood celebrities — neither contribute to, nor constitute, a business or educational function relevant to a legislative or regulatory concern. They merely provide entertainment.”

The watchdog said food, drinks and free screenings offered as part of a lobbying strategy cannot be considered educational seminars but, instead, are like “dates” between the industry’s lobbyists and lawmakers.

Holman said he would file an ethics complaint against any lawmaker who attends a free screening. He would have filed an ethics complaint this week had he known of a lawmaker accepting the perk in the last few months.

House Democratic leaders are setting up an independent ethics office that could review complaints from outside groups. The Senate formally accepts ethics complaints from private citizens.

When first asked by a reporter, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee who represents Beverly Hills, where many Hollywood moguls live, said he would attend a free screening hosted by the MPAA. But when he realized there might be an ethics concern, he voiced reservation.

“I wouldn’t do anything unless I looked at the new ethics rules and how they applied,” said Waxman.

Waxman said he would be guided ultimately by the House ethics committee’s advice, though he expressed concern over running afoul of a watchdog group.

“I certainly don’t want to be at odds with Public Citizen because I think it’s a good group and we’re often together on important consumer issues,” said Waxman.

John Feehery, a former executive at the MPAA who now has his own government relations consulting firm, said the screenings were a good way for film industry executives to get to know members of Congress.

“I don’t understand why they’re going after the MPAA screenings,” he said. “It’s a great tradition that’s been around a long time . … There’s no doubt that they help people get to know people.”

Feehery said executives now will have little choice but to attend fundraisers if they want to forge relationships in Congress.

“It’s too bad that places like Public Citizen are trying to keep members of Congress in a bubble and isolate them from everyone else,” he said. “The only way to meet these members is give them $1,000.”