Tech Lobbyists Jostle for Attention In Crowded Field

Seven years ago, former representative Dave McCurdy (D-Okla.) made headlines when Republican lawmakers tried to derail his appointment as president of the Electronic Industries Alliance. The intervention failed, McCurdy got the job, and the incident introduced the public to the K Street Project, the Republicans' campaign to take control of Washington's trade-association establishment.

It also led to one of what is now a series of ethical lapses by Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.). The House ethics committee privately chastised Delay, now the House majority leader, for threatening EIA with retaliation for hiring the prominent Democrat.

One would guess, then, that given all the furor, EIA must be the central mover and shaker in the world of high tech. Why else cause such fuss? In fact, EIA is one of at least 20 tech trade groups that bounce around in Washington policy circles competing with each other for decision-makers' attention. It isn't even the largest in terms of members. Recently, in fact, the alliance's membership shrank significantly for reasons unrelated to partisanship.

"EIA is just one of a dozen or so players that are kind of involved in things," says Rick White, another former congressman who recently stepped down as president of TechNet, a group of tech-company chief executives who raise lots of money for political candidates and, therefore, gets plenty of attention in Washington.

McCurdy insists that his organization is a major player on issues like trade and cyber-security and that it will be around for a long time to come. I have no reason to doubt him, but as the EIA example illustrates, when it comes to lobbying, the tech sector is overcrowded.

"Yes, clearly there are too many groups!" says Rhett Dawson, president of the Information Technology Industry Council, which is well-regarded for its day-to-day lobbying skills. Making matters worse, he adds, "we don't collaborate nearly as much as we should."

How can we know for sure that the capital is too cluttered with tech organizations?

Here's a hint: A senior Bush administration official has been forced to sit down regularly around a big table with 14 or so tech representatives to figure out what -- if anything -- the industry really wants and cares about.

Here's another: A couple of U.S. senators whose committee assignments require them to work closely with tech companies find it necessary to keep a cheat sheet listing the key groups so they can remember who's who.

Like so many associations, these groups like to refer to themselves by their initials, which, of course, can be maddening to the uninitiated. The next time someone starts jabbering to you about AEA or BSA or CEA, don't despair. Nod knowingly and just assume that the person is talking about one of those too-many tech associations that even insiders can't keep track of. Nine times out of 10 you'll be right.

One such insider recently passed me his cheat sheet, and it reveals that there may be some order in this chaos. Each significant group has carved out a niche for itself. The American Electronics Association (which has changed its name to AEA) functions like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce of high tech; it's an umbrella group with lots of members and strong lobbying in the states. The Business Software Alliance (BSA) focuses on anti-piracy efforts. The Consumer Electronics Association (CEA) cares most about personal-tech gizmos and runs the nation's largest trade show, the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. And so on.

Earlier this year the big news in Washington's tech community was that CEA broke away from McCurdy's group, an act that gave McCurdy a public relations black eye and reduced the size of his membership. "We had simply grown much bigger than our parent, and it was time that we graduated," says aid Gary Shapiro, CEA's president. CEA's membership, he says, tripled in the past three years and is still going strong.

The future of tech associations, however, probably will go in the opposite direction. "I would not be surprised if over the next few years that there might be some consolidation among them," says Lezlee Westine, the new president of TechNet and, until last week, a top aide in the Bush White House.

Other association executives agree that a great contraction is coming. Fifteen years ago, the tech industry for the most part wanted nothing to do with Washington. Silicon Valley entrepreneurs thought that all they needed to do was pay attention to their businesses and that regulators and lawmakers would leave them alone. The best course, they thought, would be to ignore those politicians and bureaucrats on the other side of the country. Surely, then, Washington would leave them alone, too.

It didn't turn out that way. Microsoft Corp. was sued by the federal government for alleged antitrust violations, and every executive in the tech world woke up to the danger they faced if they didn't make friends along the Potomac. Associations sprang up left and right, and eventually there were too many of them.

TechNet's White says that in one way the large number of groups is a healthy sign. Finally, the industry has matured enough to realize that the federal government must be dealt with directly and often. But the abundance of organizations is proof that the industry is still in its adolescence, he says.

White expects to see mergers and maybe some disappearances among existing tech groups in the next few years, and he believes that will be healthy. Technology, he said, "is still a young industry in some ways."

Jeffrey H. Birnbaum writes about the intersection of government and business every other Monday. E-mail him atkstreetconfidential@washpost.com.