We're blogging about the world of lobbying and its effect on, well, just about everything our government does. Email thoughts and tips to huffpostlobbywatch@gmail.com. Because some people look at laws and ask, why not? We're looking at laws and asking, who paid for them?
August 14, 2009
Six lobbyists for every lawmaker
No fewer 3,300 lobbyists have signed up to influence health care reform, Bloomberg reports.
That's six lobbyists for each of the 535 members of the House and Senate, according to Senate records, and three times the number of people registered to lobby on defense. More than 1,500 organizations have health-care lobbyists, and about three more are signing up each day. Every one of the 10 biggest lobbying firms by revenue is involved in an effort that could affect 17 percent of the U.S. economy.
"The sheer quantity of money that's sloshed around Washington is drowning out the voices of citizens and the groups that speak up for them," said Larry McNeely of U.S. Public Interest Research Group.
More here.
-- Rachel Weiner
August 13, 2009
Story continues below
Deal or no deal?
Did Big Pharma agree to back health care reform and shave $80 billion in costs over ten years and get nothing in return? LobbyBlog thinks not.
Gibbs doesn't exactly deny that something was given up. "Can you say for sure they were promised nothing in return?" he was asked Thursday.
"I can assure you that we've come to an agreement to seek some savings from the pharmaceutical industry as part of comprehensive health care," he said. Hmmmm.
Some kind of deal was reached. But the lobbyists involved in the negotiations better not try to show up to any fundraisers.
Practicing what you preach vs. hypocrisy
The White House policy of shunning federally-registered lobbyists (ones who don't register are OK) ran head-on into a fundraiser planned for Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), the Hill reports.
A registered lobbyist had planned to be part of an event that would feature Grayson and Vice President Joe Biden. The GOP cried foul and the lobbyist backed out. But not without a word for what he saw as hypocritical school-marmery from Republicans, who have no policy against accepting cash from lobbyists.
The lobbyist suggested that the National Republican Congressional Committee ought to practice what it preaches.
"This would go a long way to advance President Obama's policy to dissuade such participation by registered lobbyists, and I am confident that your committee and the Republican campaigns for which you raise money will be more than happy to take the same principled stand as the Administration," he wrote. "As you probably have heard, there is an old saying in the South: 'This dog won't hunt.' Let's see if your fat-cat will."
NRCC aide Andy Sere responded to the lobbyist, named Dick Batchelor, thusly: "[T]he request you made for a 'reciprocal commitment'... is nothing more than an attempt to distract from the central fact in this controversy: the White House imposed on their events a ban on the participation of federally-registered lobbyists, and Grayson broke that rule. It's not your career as a lobbyist that's the problem - it's the hypocrisy, Dick." (Sere kindly bolded that last line when forwarding the comment to LobbyBlog so we wouldn't miss it.)
But the flap raises a serious question: Given the tension between the need to raise campaign cash and the goal of remaining independent of lobbyist influence, what is a candidate to do?
LobbyBlog is in Pittsburgh at the annual Netroots Nation conference and posed the query to Jennifer Brunner over coffee and cookies in the ACLU-sponsored "Bloggers' Lounge of Rights."
"There's a lot of tension involved because every time you ask or accept money, especially in larger amounts, at a minimum they expect access. So when you do that, you have to decide first if this is a person you want to be associated with," she said.
Brunner is running as the progressive Democrat in an Ohio Senate primary for the chance to compete for the seat held by retiring Sen. George Voinovich (R-Ohio).
Brunner said that the ability of folks to make online contributions without being screened makes it trickier, because a refund is a more public rejection than a quiet refusal to take money. The lobbyists she watches out for the most, she said, are hired guns who represent a variety of clients.
"They're more focused on influence and power. They're the ones an elected official needs to exercise good care with," she said.
LobbyBlog flashback
That Obama anti-lobbyist policy is actually leading lobbyists to de-register, meaning less transparency, or not to go into progressive advocacy work, which would require them to register and be branded with an "L" around their necks.
________________________ ________________________ _______
Unfreaking real.
