Weekly Lobbying Articles
February 10, 2017
South Bend Tribune
February 5, 2017
Our Opinion: Legislators shouldn't reject this gift (ban)
Given the ethics scandals that have plagued Indiana lawmakers in recent years, a bill to ban all lobbyists’ gifts sounds like a solid, common-sense proposal.
But like a lot of reasonable ideas, this one will probably never see the light of day.
On the first day of the General Assembly’s 2017 session, Sen. Mike Delph, R-Carmel, introduced the bill, which would make it illegal for Indiana lawmakers to accept a gift from a lobbyist. It would ban all gifts from lobbyists or their employers, including food and drink, to individual legislators and their families. Ten states have such rules, under what’s known as “no-cup-of-coffee” laws.
Senate Bill 289 would also require lobbyists to log all communications between themselves and legislators.
Delph calls his bill “the right thing to do” and explains that “When people give you gifts, there’s a reason behind it. Those offers go away as soon as you leave the Legislature.”
Kentucky passed its “no-cup-of-coffee” law in 2014, despite having one of the most restrictive ethics laws among the states. The legislator pushing for the additional measure explained that such legislation is important “in today’s culture.”
“Our focus is to make the legislative body function without the belief or suspicion that we are bought and paid for — because we are NOT,” he said, adding, “In practice, no one bought anyone a cup of coffee anyway.”
Under current Indiana law, only gifts of $50 or more in a single day have to be reported, and food, drink and entertainment are exempted. Ethics reforms that passed a few years ago — in response to scandals — focus on disclosure, rather than prohibition.
In a comment after those reforms passed, we called them a step in the right direction, but noted that there was more work to be done. Delph’s bill would further that cause. For those who question whether gift bans are necessary, consider the words of the late Alan Rosenthal, a political scientist who helped reshape and strengthen state legislatures across the country and used standards of appearance, fairness and responsibility to distinguish between appropriate and inappropriate legislative behavior. “There can be no question as to the propriety of lobbyists’ gifts to legislators. It is improper … because it gives people an impression of being so,” he wrote.
Delph’s bill has been assigned to the Senate Rules Committee, where bills go to die. It’s hardly surprising that legislators aren’t thrilled about the bill, which has no co-sponsors.
Senate Bill 289 is a much-needed attempt at ethics reform and if you believe it should be approved, ask your state representative or state senator where he or she stands on the matter. Call 1-800-382-9467 for senators and 1-800-382-9842 for representatives.
Knoxville News Sentinel
February 5, 2017
Editorial: More openness about lobbyists needed
There are about four-and-a-half times as many lobbyists as there are members of the Tennessee Legislature, and if one adds the number of companies represented, the ratio is one lawmaker for every six businesses.
The figures come from a USA TODAY NETWORK - Tennessee analysis of lobbying in the state Capitol. The analysis included lobbyist compensation, expenses, campaign expenditures and legislative registration. The result is that hundreds of organizations and businesses are spending millions of dollars to influence state laws.
Since the time of the “Tennessee Waltz” scandal early in the previous decade, lobbyists have taken a respectable place at the legislative table. That FBI and TBI sting operation and investigation resulted in a dozen convictions.
It also brought new ethics laws and an independent state ethics commission to monitor lobbying activities. While those laws are an improvement and remain active, there are loopholes and gaps that need to be filled.
The primary example is that there are no ways to find out exactly how much money companies spend on lobbyists and their activities. Tennessee law permits businesses and organizations to report their spending on lobbyists and related activities within a range of figures, not a specific amount.
Thus, according to the analysis, lobbyist compensation amounted to between $14.3 million and $29.6 million during the first half of 2016. That is a gap of more than $15 million, and that level of spending should require more specific information.
Companies are not required to submit additional details about how the money was spent or what legislation might be affected. The companies don’t need to furnish receipts or provide detailed accounting information on their semiannual reports, said Drew Rawlins, executive director of the Tennessee Bureau of Ethics and Campaign Finance.
While gifts from lobbyists are prohibited, there are 11 exceptions, including one for “close personal friendship.” Meals and dinner events can be paid as long as all legislators are invited and the cost does not exceed $59 per person.
There also are no reporting requirements for gifts from advocates who are not registered lobbyists but still can exercise influence with lawmakers. A previous USA TODAY NETWORK - Tennessee investigation disclosed several examples from last year, including lawmakers staying at an ocean condominium of a wealthy advocate of school vouchers. House and Senate leaders have promised to plug this gap this session.
Deborah Fisher, executive director of the Tennessee Coalition for Open Government and a registered lobbyist since she advises legislators on open records issues, acknowledged, “At a basic level, the function of advocacy by the lobbyist is a necessary one, and it’s really up to the lawmakers. It is their job to make sure they’re representing their constituents as a whole.”
Given the seemingly entrenched place of lobbyists in Tennessee politics, the best way to monitor their association with lawmakers is through stricter disclosure and maximum openness. That should mean requiring a more itemized record of payments from companies and from advocates who are not registered as lobbyists and placing these on a state website.
The strongest ethics requirements are not foolproof, but they can work to the best interest of the state’s taxpayers and voters if they are conscientiously reviewed and improved as needed.
Indybay.org
February 6, 2017
California oil lobby tops spending in 2015-16 session with $36.1 million
In spite of California's reputation as a "green leader, Big Oil is the largest corporate lobby in the state and exerts enormous influence over the Governor's Office, Legislature and regulatory agencies.
As usual, the California Oil Lobby was the biggest spender in the 2015-16 legislative session, spending an amazing $36.1 million as of December 31, 2016.
The spending amounts to $1.5 million per month — nearly $50,000 per day — over the last two years. The $36.1 million surpassed the $34 million spent in the prior session, according to an American Lung Association report. “That’s enough money to buy 103,000 goats,” reported Stop Fooling California, stopfoolingca.org.
The Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) was the top overall oil industry spender during the 2015-16 session, spending $18.7 million. As is normally the case, WSPA ranked #1 among all lobbying spenders this session.
Chevron, the second overall oil industry spender, spent $7 million in the 2015-16 session. It spent $3 million in 2016, sixth among all lobbyists in the current session.
In the seventh quarter alone, WSPA dumped $2.6 million into lobbying legislators and state officials while billionaire Tom Steyer's Next Generation Climate Action spent an unprecedented $7.3 million, almost 3 times the oil industry group’s expenses.
The spending by Steyer’s group helped propel the passage of Senate Bill 32, legislation that reduces greenhouse gas level to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, in spite of strong opposition by the oil
industry.
Since the 2007-08 Session, the oil industry has spent $133 million in lobbying in California.
To read the complete report, go to:
Western States Petroleum Association: Sacramento's most powerful corporate lobbying group
Although the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA) is the largest and most powerful corporate lobbying group in the West and California, its enormous influence appears to be one of our state’s best-kept secrets. It has spent more than other lobbying organization in Sacramento in recent years to exert control over the Governor’s Office, regulatory agencies and the State Legislature.
Big Oil, along with Big Ag, Big Pharma, Big Timber and other corporate interests, dominate politics in California, as well as in Washington, D.C., as evidenced by President's Donald Trump’s nomination of EXXON CEO Rex Tilleson as Secretary of State, Scott Pruitt as EPA Administrator, and other oil and energy corporation shills to his cabinet. The appointment of oil industry officials and their allies to California regulatory panels has been standard practice in California for many years.
The Western States Petroleum Association is a “non-profit trade association” that represents companies that account for the bulk of petroleum exploration, production, refining, transportation and marketing in the five western states of California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and Nevada.
WSPA’s membership includes a who’s who oil, energy and pipeline corporations including Aera Energy LLC, Chevron, Californian Resources Corporation (formerly Occidental Petroleum), ConocoPhillips, ExxonMobil, Noble Energy, Inc., Phillips 66, Plains All American, Inc. Shell Oil Products US, Tesoro Refining and Marketing and Valero.
From January 1, 2009 to November 8, 2016 alone, the oil industry spent $112,371,214 on lobbying expenses in California, according to a report, “The Chevron Way: Polluting California and Degrading Democracy.” The International Transport Workers Federation (ITF) Sydney Office produced the report, in collaboration with a coalition of conservation, consumer and environmental justice groups.
The Western States Petroleum Association led the oil industry lobbying expenses with $49,491,104 during this period, followed by Chevron with $24,035,901 and Phillips 66 with $4,821,144. For more information, go to:
The five way Big Oil exerts its influence
WSPA and Big Oil use their money and power in 5 ways: through (1) lobbying; (2) campaign spending; (3) getting appointed to positions on and influencing regulatory panels; (4) creating Astroturf groups: and (5) working in collaboration with media.
Big Oil and other corporate advocates have dominated appointments to Commissions and regulatory panels in California under Governors Gray Davis, Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jerry Brown, ranging from the Department of Conservation, to the California Public Utilities Commission, to the California Energy Commission, to the Marine Life Protection Act Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Force.
In a classic case of the “fox guarding the hen house, Catherine Reheis-Boyd, President of the Western States Petroleum Association, chaired the Marine Life Protection Act (MLPA) Initiative Blue Ribbon Task Forces to create faux “marine protected areas” in Southern California from 2009 to 2012 at the same the oil industry was fracking South Coast ocean waters. Reheis-Boyd, appointed by Schwarzenegger, also served on the task forces for the Central Coast, North Central Coast, and North Coast from 2004 to 2012.
It gets worse. Reheis-Boyd’s husband, James D. Boyd, first appointed by Governor Davis, sat on on the California Energy Commission from 2002 to 2012, including serving as Vice-Chair of the Commission from 2/2007 to 1/2012.
More recently, the California Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) in September opened an investigation into the California Democratic Party in response to a report by a prominent consumer group, Consumer Watchdog, claiming that the party acted as a “laundry machine” to funnel donations from oil, energy and utility companies to Brown’s 2014 election campaign. For more information, go to:
There is no doubt that Big Oil and other corporate interests dominate politics in California and Washington — and that we must relentlessly work to get Big Oil out of politics by supporting efforts like the Move to Amend, movetoamend.org, and the California Clean Money Campaign,
The News Tribune
February 6, 2017
Regulations on lobbyists, officials advance at state Capitol
A pair of bills meant to impose stricter regulations on lobbyists and public officials easily passed their first legislative tests Monday as state lawmakers weigh measures that would replace provisions of a recently repealed government ethics overhaul.
A Senate bill would bar many officials from private lobbying for two years after leaving state government, while a House proposal would put in place a $100 annual limit for gifts that legislators and other public officials could accept from lobbyists.
They were unanimously advanced to their full chambers, and Gov. Dennis Daugaard's office indicated support for both bills. Top Republicans have given assurances that voters would see laws passed this session to replace provisions of the voter-approved ethics package that lawmakers dismantled last week.
Under the now-defunct initiative, voters could tap a state fund to give two credits worth $50 each to participating political candidates. It strictly limited lobbyist gifts to lawmakers and also called for an independent commission to ensure that state ethics laws weren't violated and to administer the public campaign finance program.
GOP lawmakers contend that those provisions are unconstitutional, and the embattled law wasn't in effect as Republicans were challenging it in court. Supporters argued that the measure is constitutional.
One of the bills that advanced Monday would put back into state law similar restrictions on former officials becoming lobbyists, doubling the ban in current law to two years. It would apply to former elected officers, department or agency heads and other officials.
Senate Majority Leader Blake Curd, the bill's main sponsor, said he looks forward to working for many provisions that would "make our government better, more transparent, open and accountable to the public."
The other measure would impose the annual $100 gift limit on statewide officeholders, executive branch agency heads and legislators, or their immediate families.
A gift would be defined as anything of value given without compensation, but it doesn't include food and beverage under $75 per meal, among other things.
The bill is a bipartisan attempt to put in writing what has already been practice in South Dakota — that public officials not receive gifts from lobbyists or people who employ them, said House Speaker Mark Mickelson, the measure's main sponsor.
House Democratic leader Spencer Hawley said the bill is a step toward honoring the intent of the voters.
Tulsa World
February 5, 2017
Capitol influence: Lobbyists need more than money to succeed at state Capitol
To the public, influence at the state Capitol may seem to come down to who hands out the most campaign cash and hires the most lobbyists.
And why wouldn’t Oklahomans have that impression? More than 540 registered lobbyists — almost four for every lawmaker — are registered with the state’s Ethics Commission, and about $15 million was spent deciding 125 legislative seats, seven state questions and an uncontested Corporation Commission seat.
In practice, though, a host of factors play into determining what pieces of legislation make it into law and which are kicked to the curb.
“I would say the largest influence on legislative ideas comes from constituents,” said former Senate President Pro Tem Glenn Coffee, a Republican. “People and entities in your district that have an issue they need resolved.”
Coffee and three other former legislative leaders interviewed by the World acknowledged the roles of money and lobbyists, but they also cited individual constituents, public opinion, unexpected events, lawmakers’ own experiences and subtle and not-so-subtle attempts to shape perceptions of government.
All of those factors will be at work in the session that begins Monday and continues through May. Lawmakers will be taking up a variety of issues, including the elimination of tax credits and exemptions, increasing the tax on cigarettes, and trying to figure out a way to pay teachers more in a very tough budget year.
Others on the list: expanding the state sales tax, criminal justice reform, school choice, abortion, Medicaid and rural health care.
Lobbyists are easily identified as important influences on lawmakers — and, as far as the public is concerned, often not in a favorable way. Lobbyists tend to be associated with high-profile scofflaws like Jack Abramoff or corruption scandals like the one that sent former Senate President Pro Tem Mike Morgan to prison.
But many lawmakers will tell you the Legislature can’t function without lobbyists. They provide expertise and institutional knowledge that many legislators lack, especially in the age of term limits.
Lobbying, said Coffee, “is characterized as negative. But it can be negative or positive.”