Page 3 of 3   <      

Lobbyists Tangled in a Paperless Pursuit

Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.

People familiar with the House program also worry that the heavy volume of documents that will flood in as deadlines approach next year could well crash the largely untested system. Each chamber deals with as many as 49,000 lobbying documents each year.

Lobbyists themselves are balking at going through the rigors of obtaining a digital signature. Many have complained to the American League of Lobbyists about the cost of buying the signature: $35 per individual and $119 per company for a two-year subscription.

Some lobbyists say the payment, though relatively small, amounts to a user fee or tax that discourages a constitutionally protected right: to petition government for redress of grievances. (That's a fairly lofty argument, but, then again, experienced lobbyists will try anything.)

Others complain that they have to provide too much personal information to the vendor of the digital signature and are putting themselves at risk of identity theft. The company must double-check a lobbyist's identity before providing him or her with a digital signature. To get one, the lobbyist must relinquish a home address, a Social Security number and a credit card number.

Lobbyists also dislike that only one company has been authorized by the House to provide the digital signatures, Rockville-based Digital Signature Trust, a subsidiary of Identrus Inc. That seems to some like too much information -- and therefore too much power -- in the hands of a single company.

Lobbyists love to speculate why Ney issued his paperless dictum. A minority suspect that he was trying to sabotage the process. But a larger number believe this: Ney was having his own troubles with lobbyist connections, specifically with Abramoff, and wanted to show he was on the side of the angels.

Ney accepted many favors from Abramoff, including a golf outing to Scotland in 2002, and is under investigation in Florida by federal prosecutors looking into Abramoff's purchase of a cruise line company, according to people familiar with the probe who spoke only on the condition of anonymity. Ney's spokesman denied that the congressman had done anything improper with Abramoff and said Ney didn't change the lobby rules in reaction to Abramoff, either.

House and Senate staffers have been meeting privately to try to harmonize their systems and correct problems. So far, they haven't found a way.

The next set of lobbyist filings is due Feb. 14, Valentine's Day. But if problems persist, lawmakers won't be getting hearts and flowers from their friends on K Street.

Jeffrey Birnbaum writes about the intersection of government and business every other Monday. E-mail him atkstreetconfidential@washpost.com. He will be online to discuss the lobbyist registration rules today at noon athttp://www.washingtonpost.com/business.


<          3


© 2005 The Washington Post Company