The word "lobbyist" carries a number of, usually, negative connotations. Having paid my mortgage for a while by lobbying and a future plan to get back into lobbying, I harbor no such negative connotations. However, I and my colleagues are in the minority. The fact of the matter is that lobbyists play an important role in government since lobbyists are generally experts in their field, with access to more information an knowledge than even the most able legislator or legislative staffer can put their hands on. In theory it is supposed to help make better policy, but as we all know usually satsifies the ends of the lobbyist and the organization they represent.
This is not a bad thing at all, but rather the nature of our governmental system. As James Madison pointed out in Federalist No. 10, the point of all the factional squabbling and in-fighting to make policy, but the efforts of so many blunts the impact of one particular group, thus producing a more wisened approach to the law--again in theory.
I am reminded of a talk I gave to a group of very bright college students about the nature of lobbying. My job as a lobbyist to put all of my effort and energy into the case for my client--to pursue my client's goals. When asked about whether my efforts for proper for hte common good, my response was that a lobbyist is not paid to think about the common good, that is why we elect representatives. My goal is the good of my client.
having said that, there are problems with the current system of lobbying registration and disclsore under the Lobbying Disclosure Act. There have been many articles in recent days on a study the Center for Public Integrity showing that the lobbying industry has made some $13 billion dollars since 1998. The nubmer seems staggering but when one considers that nearly every organized interest (I destest the term special interest since by definition everyone's interest is special--at least to themselves) has done some lobbying. There are literally tens of thousands of registered lobbyists in Washington and probably millions of part-time lobbyists out there.
While the CPI study points to some serious flaws in the registration and reporting requiresment under the LDA, there are some serious flaws in the law as well. As this story points out,
It’s enough to confuse even a presidential candidate. Last year, Sen. John Kerry voluntarily released a list of all the lobbyists he had met with since 1989. At least 40 of the people Kerry listed as having lobbied him were individuals who didn’t register—and may not have been required to do so. Only those who spend at least one-fifth of their time lobbying for their organization are required to register.
That last sentence is accurate. Under the provisions of the LDA, people who spend less than 20% of their compensated time need register as a lobbyist. Thus, the heads of large lobbying organizations, such as the AARP, the NRA or any number of large and power organizations can spend 8 hours a week in a forty hour week, lobbying and not have to disclose any of it. Thus, a major segment of activity, that by part-time lobbyists such as CEOs who spend only a few precious hours a week influencing Congress goes unreported.
There are a couple of other major missing links. Volunteer lobbyists, such as employees who voluntarily write letters to their Congressmen on behalf of their company, likewise are not required to register, nor should they. But the organization that spends hundreds of thousands of dollars or more exhorting their employees to make those contacts should. But monies spent on grassroots organizing activities (a growing segment of the influence industry) are exempt from lobbying disclosure. The loopholes in the LDA are large enough to drive through an aircraft carrier.
One other major issue, reported in the news here points to the lack of a proper enforcement mechanism. The body responsible for regulating the lobbying of Congress is---Congress itself--surely a conflict of interest if there ever was one. LDA registrations and reports are submitted to the House and Senate--including LDAs for the lobbying of administrative agencies which is also legal. But the Senate and the House lack enough staff to even properly catalogue the reports let along enforce the provisions of the LDA. It has been suggested that the Federal Election Commission take over the enforcement of the LDA since, broadly, the FEC is concerned with preventing the improper influence of Congress by outside interests.
The government needs lobbyists to work efficiently. But the public needs more information on who the lobbyists are and how they operate. tougher disclsoure laws with some of the loopholes closed will go a long way to helping citizens understand the amount of money being spent on lobbying.
