Jun. 28, 2004
Legislators Look at Lobby Changes
By J. Barlow Herget
RALEIGH - Experienced public relations people here know that warm, free Krispy Kremes are a cheap hook to lure journalists to a press conference.
I still can’t resist the bait.
That’s why I have great admiration for politicians who can eat a man’s steak, drink his liquor, finish with crème broulet and not be beholden to the man’s pleadings. I’m sure lobbyists share my admiration, but they earn their money by trolling for those politicians who share my weakness.
And the fishing has been good.
It is accepted practice here and elsewhere for lobbyists to buy a meal or score tickets, or more, for friendly politicians, particularly state legislators who currently are adjusting the budget in a short session. Sometimes, it becomes unseemly.
One tale making the rounds here is about a state legislator at dinner in an upscale restaurant. He spies a lobbyist across the room and with a wink and a nod, sends his bill to the lobbyist. Somehow, I don’t think that is what Mr. Jefferson had in mind when founding our democracy.
Lobbyists, like the poor, will always be with us. Lobbying is a legal and fair trade. But it is one on which we should keep an eye. And that is the purpose of legislation that grew out of a report earlier this year by Secretary of State Elaine Marshall’s Advisory Council on Lobbying Reform.
Marshall’s office is the agency in North Carolina that watches over lobbyists and their work. When the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity almost flunked North Carolina’s lobbying regulations, Marshall called for the examination of current lobbying guidelines and possible changes.
The 20-member Council did its job and made its report before the General Assembly convened May 10. Chairman Gene Nichol, dean of the Law School at the University of North Carolina, commended his group for their hard work and varied opinions. There were legislators, lobbyists, citizen activists and at least one prosecutor on the Council.
What pleased Nichol was the majority consensus among the members on four points:
1. The current rules do not require full disclosure on lobbyists’ expenditures on legislators. (The lobbyists, understandably, were not part of the majority on this one.)
2. There is no “cooling off” period between a legislator’s active service and his or her employment as a lobbyist.
3. The restrictions are too generous on the value of gifts lobbyists can give legislators.
4. The Secretary of State’s office cannot provide adequate enforcement given its current resources.
“We wrote a report that was approved overwhelmingly,” says Nichol.
He is most concerned about the state’s current disclosure rules. “For those who follow it, they know that we have a system that pretends to regulate [lobbying] but it doesn’t,” he explains. That’s because of the “goodwill” loophole.
Lobbyists do not now have to report expenditures on legislators if the lobbyists are not talking about specific legislation. As a lobbyist, I can take you, an innocent legislator, to lunch, to golf, or to an ACC tournament as a gesture of “goodwill,” and I don’t have to disclose my largesse as long as I don’t twist your arm about House Bill 123.
Says Nichol, “If you take them to Sullivans [Steak House] 50 times and tell them how wonderful your company is, you don’t have to disclose that. The system is broken.”
The Council recommended that the state require full disclosure of all expenditures. He considers the change essential, but his Council didn’t stop there.
It asked that lobbyists limit their gifts to $25. No $50 meals, no ACC tickets, no golf resort trips. Lobbyists may cry crocodile tears at reducing their spending, but many legislators will weep quietly and may protest loudly.
Bob Phillips, executive director of Common Cause of North Carolina, sat in on Council meetings. He found it remarkable that when Nichol and others asked what is gained in the public good by giving such gifts, “no one spoke up.” It is a simple but telling question.
What good is it to you and your children and North Carolina if your legislator is allowed to be wined, dined and entertained for free?
Phillips, whose organization favors the Council’s recommendations, says that over 20 states now enforce a “cooling off” period for legislators who want to leave office to lobby. Recent cases of such quick job changes raised questions about votes legislators made before their switch.
“We don’t have any kind of period now,” he says, noting that other states typically require a year between holding office and lobbying.
Rep. Joe Hackney, D-Orange, and Sen. Tony Rand, D-Cumberland, have introduced companion bills that incorporate the Council’s recommendations.
Nichol looks at the legislation realistically. “I don’t know what’s going to happen in the short session. If it’s not passed, it will become part of the political debate this year and next.”
In the meantime, voters concerned about this should mention it when legislators on the campaign trail come looking for "goodwill" back home.
Barlow Herget is a radio host, author and former Raleigh city councilman. He writes "Follow the Money" for the N.C. Center for Voter Education.
743 W. Johnson St.
Suite E
Raleigh, NC 27603
919.839.1200