Quitting the Lobby Hobby: Senate Doesn’t Want to go Cold Turkey

Who are lobbyists and what do they do? What assumptions about lobbyists do you have and where do those assumptions come from?

Many Americans know little about lobbying, an integral part of the lawmaking process. So how are Americans supposed to evaluate proposals that would change the lobbying system?

Changing the rules

On March 29, 2006, the Senate passed a bill that would change lobbying rules. Primarily, it would give Congress and the public two full days to examine any finished bill (a bill that’s already been approved by the House and Senate and finalized in a conference, also called a conference report) before the final vote. This would prevent special projects and funding, "earmarks," from being slipped into legislation without full disclosure to the other members.

Further, lobbyists would not be allowed to give gifts to legislators - no sports tickets, no fancy dinners - or to their aides. Lobbyists would also have to post reports about their activities onto an Internet database that the public could access. Finally, lawmakers leaving Congress could not become congressional lobbyists for at least two years.

The bipartisan bill won overwhelming support with of vote of 90-8. So who were the eight that voted against it, and why?

Senate rebels

Often the revolutionary, John McCain (R-Arizona) voted against the bill that he had initiated because he felt that the end product was too watered-down. McCain doubts the bill will do much to curtail lobbyists’ influence.

The legislation doesn’t ban lobbyist-sponsored travel or prevent lawmakers from getting big lobbyist-sponsored discounts to fly in private jets, where lobbyists get precious face time.

The other seven rebels agreed. The motley crew included Barack Obama (D- Illinois), Russell Feingold (D- Wisconsin), Tom Coburn (R- Oklahoma), John Kerry (D- Massachusetts), James Inhofe (R- Oklahoma), Jim DeMint (R-South Carolina), and Lindsey Graham (R- South Carolina).

To lesser and greater degrees, this group felt that the legislation was a weak response to the 2005 lobbying scandal in which some House Republicans and their staff members accepted lavish gifts from former lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who has admitted to attempting to bribe Congressman Bob Ney (R- Ohio).

On the same day that the legislation passed, Abramoff was sentenced to six years in prison for fraud and corruption.

Strategies for success

The strategies behind the parties’ proposals are the same: to come out against corruption before the 2006 elections. That’s not to say that members of both parties aren’t sincerely in favor of limiting lobbying, but the timing is certainly strategic.

Although some argue that lobbyists are simply corrupt and unnecessary, lobbying has been a part of the American legislative system since its inception. And Congress has had to rethink lobbying rules over the years in order to control abuses.

Therefore, the recent Abramoff scandal is not necessarily evidence of a new era of corruption, but rather another episode in the long history of lobbying and its benefits and detriments to the U.S. Congress.

History of Lobbying

Lobbying is the process of trying to influence policymakers in favor of a specific cause. Both individuals and organizations have the right to petition for or against legislation, thanks to the First Amendment of the Constitution. Lobbyists are professional petitioners representing groups with special interests.

The origin of the term lobbying may come from the Presidency of Ulysses S. Grant, who would drink brandy and smoke cigars while relaxing in the lobby of the Willard Hotel where he was often approached by people seeking favors. However the Oxford English Dictionary contains references to the word "lobbyist" that date from earlier periods.

In the late eighteenth century, the first lobbyists represented a variety of groups, from merchants wanting to end a tariff on molasses, to military officers who wanted reimbursements for money they had spent on the American Revolution.

Petitioners quickly learned to attract attention to their causes by throwing parties and dinners for legislators, who missed the social and cultural amenities of cities like Philadelphia and New York.

In Congress’ early days, Washington D.C. was underdeveloped, and lawmakers took rooms in the boardinghouses that surrounded the Capitol Building. These dorms of sorts were particularly conducive to social lobbying, as were the bars, clubs, and brothels frequented by lawmakers.

Lobbying increased in the nineteenth century, and newspapers began to report abuses and bribes. However, the benefits of lobbying also became clear at this time. Lobbyists would provide analyses, opposition arguments, speeches, and personal contacts to legislators who were dealing with a more crowded congressional agenda.

History of Lobbying Part 2

As issues and interests became more complex, lobbyists’ briefings and analyses became more essential to legislators. The techniques that developed during this period are still with us today and are generally accepted as legitimate.

In the first half of the twentieth century, lobbying intensified through technology. The telegraph, telephone and radio allowed for increased development and access.

Recognizing lobbyists’ great influence, Congress worked to limit their powers. In 1928, the Senate attempted to require all lobbyists to register with the Secretary of the Senate and Clerk of the House, but the proposal failed in the House.

In the late 1930s, Congress finally required registration of all company lobbyists, but independent lobbyists were not required to register until 1946, when Congress specifically defined lobbyists as any person "who by himself, or through any agent or employee or other persons in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, solicits, collects, or receives money or other thing of value to be used principally...to influence directly or indirectly, the passage or defeat of any legislation by the Congress of the United States."

In the 1970s, the Watergate Scandal encouraged tighter lobbying laws, but Congress was unable to pass them due to the First Amendment rights that protect lobbying.

Lobbying today is extraordinarily diverse, with special interest groups, companies, non-profits, and even churches hiring lobbyists in order to make their voices heard. Lobbying now incorporates marketing and public relations, technology, and political action committees, the latter of which funnels contributions to candidates. And our election system is, after all, funded with private money to pay for commercial advertising and campaign staff.

Critics of this hyperdrive lobbying system say that special interest groups’ power is out of proportion to their representation in the general population. And of course, some lobbyists go too far, trying to influence lawmakers through elaborate trips, gifts, and entertainment.

What happens next?

The Senate bill is the first step towards changing lobbying laws for the first time in a decade. The matter now goes to the House, which is likely to debate bitterly over the topic. Republicans in the House are divided on the issue, especially over the matters of private travel and special projects or, earmarks, which are often inserted into bills at the last minute via lobbyists.

It’s unclear whether the House and Senate will be able to agree on a bill before the elections, but you can bet they’re going to try.

What do you think?

What do you think lobbying reform should look like? How much access should lobbyists have to lawmakers? Are there a special-interest lobbying groups that you support? Do you think voters are concerned about lobbying ethics right now?

Your input matters

Your representatives in Congress DO care what you think. Especially now -- 2006 is an election year and many representatives will be looking to reconnect with their constituents. Let your congressmen and women know what you think! Give your senators a piece of your mind! To find your reps, click here.

About WomenMatter

WomenMatter is a place to discuss life issues with other women. We don’t want to wedge women apart, but rather bring them together to dialogue. To participate in our blog, click here.

WomenMatter is the place where we can take one issue at a time, match what we do about it every day of our lives to the facts of the bigger system that we all live in and recognize that every idea for making it better has tradeoffs.

WomenMatter is dedicated to empowering women to participate in the political process. To do this we have invested in the most in-depth NONPARTISAN information, because we trust each woman to make up her own mind.

• We track nine issues every week and update
• We launch after school GirlsMatter Clubs in middle and high schools to grow the next generation of politically aware women through a full curriculum and startup kit on girlsmatter.com.
• We do continuous research to make sure that we are meeting the needs of women across the country of all ages, races, incomes, preferences, and religions.

We offer all our services free of charge without memberships or subscriptions. To help us maintain this work - not just in election years but as a continuing part of women’s lives - please make a tax deductible donation, click here.

Update Posted on: 4/2/2006