In the states: lobbyists descend on the statehouse - Common Cause state-level monitoring successes

This fall independent presidential candidate Ross Perot vowed to send congressional lobbyists into permanent retirement - as exhibits at the Smithsonian. "We're going to get rid of them, and the Congress will be listening to the people," he promised.

But Congress isn't the only institution caught in the gridlock of special interests. In recent years lobbyists have headed to state capitals to ply their trade in record numbers. The number of registered lobbyists exceeded 42,500 in 1990 - a 20 percent increase over four years - according to an Associated Press survey.

Some states' regulation of lobbyists, however, has not kept pace with the increased activity, and as a result it's hard for the public to track special interest influence.

With federal cuts in state aid and the transfer of various responsibilities to state legislatures, states now set policy in areas such as the environment, the workplace, consumer affairs and social welfare, and must find ways to pay for these programs.

As a result, more "relationships" have sprung up between state legislators and lobbyists, Rutgers University Professor Alan Rosenthal writes in his new book, The Third House: Lobbyists and Lobbying in the States. "A good relationship means that a lobbyist has an opportunity for contact at practically any point in the process. A lobbyist with a strong tie will get in the door at a critical moment," he writes.

For decades Common Cause state organizations have fought to strengthen the laws and rules affecting lobbyists. And two state organizations recently filed complaints alleging violations of lobbying laws in their respective states.

In August CC/Illinois Executive Director Tracey Litsey called on state Attorney General Roland Burris and Cook County State's Attorney Jack O'Malley to investigate five Nevada-based casino operators for potential violations of the state's lobby registration law. According to a memo obtained by the Chicago-based Better Government Association (BGA), the five men - associated with Caesars World, Circus Circus Enterprises, Hilton Corp. and a coalition of casino interests - met with Illinois legislators to discuss a proposed $2 billion casino and entertainment center in Chicago. (A bill to legalize land-based gambling is strongly supported by Chicago Mayor Richard Daley and may be introduced during the November legislative session.) For each lawmaker, the document gave the meeting date and a character assessment and projected vote on the project. According to secretary of state records, none of the five businessmen was registered to lobby.

Soon after BGA released the document, a television news program broadcast admissions by several legislators and one senior casino executive that the visits involved lobbying.

Sidley & Austin, a firm registered to lobby for the casino project, set up the visits but contends they were educational, not lobbying. The firm argues that, under its interpretation of the law, registration applies only to those hired as lobbyists or whose job description clearly includes lobbying activities. Neither condition applies to the five men.

Litsey concedes that the law's vague definition of lobbying needs to be strengthened. But in situations such as this one, an individual "who promotes legislation should be registered," she says.

Since the law's passage in 1978, no one has been convicted of violating it. Thus the case could lead to a landmark definition of what constitutes lobbying. The penalty for conviction is unusually tough: up to five years in jail. Neither the state's attorney nor the attorney general has decided whether to prosecute.

CC/Michigan meanwhile has filed complaints against three lobbyists who allegedly were reimbursed by their employers for campaign contributions they made to state lawmakers.

The complaints came on the heels of a study of lobbyists' campaign contributions released by CC/Michigan in March. The study showed five lobbyists contributed more than $10,000 each to campaigns, while seven others donated more than $5,000. In subsequent news reports, three of the lobbyists admitted that their employers had reimbursed them for the contributions or increased their salaries to account for them. The attorney general recently ruled such reimbursements illegal but has taken no action on CC/Michigan's complaint.

"This is laundering money. It's misrepresenting the source of the money," says CC/Michigan Executive Director Karen Holcomb-Merrill. "Our concern lobbyists should not be acting as conduits for special interest money."

Michigan's law, enacted during the post-Watergate era, desperately needs reform, says Holcomb-Merrill, who believes lobbyists have found too many ways to get around it.

COPYRIGHT 1992 Common Cause Magazine
COPYRIGHT 2004 Gale Group