Lobbyists' Disclosures Via the Internet

The edict to lobbyists that they must file their reports to the House of Representatives electronically, a seemingly sensible and long-overdue reform, has sparked one of the nastiest, loudest and most counterproductive mess-ups on K Street.

Washington Post business columnist Jeffrey Birnbaum addressed the issue in a recent column and was online Monday, Oct. 31 at Noon ET to answer questions and comments.

A transcript follows.

Birnbaum's column about Washington lobbyists, "K Street Confidential," appears every other Monday in The Washington Post Business Section.

____________________

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Hello everyone. Thank you for writing in.

I'm Jeff Birnbaum and I write K Street Confidential for the Washington Post.

I hope to do a chat like this every so often on the day my column appears. It runs every other Monday on the business page of the Post.

I hope that we can talk about the topic of the column but also about all sorts of other things. Lobbying, sure.

But also other matters that relate to my favorite subject: the intersection between government and politics and the outside world, business in particular.

So please feel free to ask and ask and ask. I look forward to our conversation today and in the future.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Halloween is the perfect day to discuss the corrosive effects of lobbyists on American government. We need publicly financed campaigns! Burn K Street, burn!

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Now that's provocation if I've ever seen it! There's no question that Americans don't like lobbyists. They also don't like reporters, or politicians--as a class. But it would be wrong and willfully ignorant not to study government, politicans and yes lobbyists. Lobbying is very important to the way that the world of Washington and lawmaking works. I see the place as a bottom up world and that bottom (at the level of organized interests) is directed by lobbyists. Maybe what lobbyists do isn't good for the public at large. But lobbyists have a lot to say about how our lives are governed by laws from Washington.

_______________________

Anonymous: Comment:

The sad part of these new lobbying rules is that they will hurt the small organizations most. Well healed big corporations, unions and trade associations can afford to figure them out, but small nonprofits, companies, and consumer groups may find themselves victims of the costs and complexities.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I agree with you entirely. The big companies and organizations will find a way to deal with these crazy rules. They have the staff to cope. But one- or two-person shops will be harmed.

In fact, I think, all of us will be if as a result of these many missteps public disclosure of lobbying reports might be undermined.

Average Americans, lawmakers and lobbyists themselves have a lot at stake with these reports. That's why I wrote at such length about the controversy.

Thanks for writing!

_______________________

Reston, Va.: What does it mean to "register" as a lobbyist, and are there people who effectively lobby Congress etc. without being registered?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you for the question.

A person must register to lobby if he or she is paid to talk to members of Congress of their staffs for a significant spell.

But most people who lobby don't have to register. And that's a terrible flaw in the system.

Most of lobbying is done at the grassroots level. That is, Washingotn -based lobbyists get folks back home to contact their lawmakers. But that indirect style of lobbying doesn't require anyone to register.

A lot of lobbying is done through advertising and public relations and detailed research and library-based analysis. But none of that requires people to lobby either.

I think you catch my point. Thousands of people register to lobby but there are many people who lobby but never have to register.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: We often hear about how much money is spent annually on lobbying, and separately how much is contributed by various industries and interest groups to politicians. Has anyone ever synched those figures up so that it's possible to see how much these groups are spending collectively on trying to influence public policy?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, there are some excellent organizations that keep track of both lobbying expenditures and contributions to electoral campaigns.

My favorite Web site is PoliticalMoneyLine.com. It's just a terrific place to see how much industries, unions or other interests or individuals are pouring into politics and lobbying.

Another wonderful place is opensecrets.org, which is run by the Center for Responsive Politics. The people who work there are hardworking and nonpartisan--just like at PoliticalMoneyLine.

A third place is the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity. That group does very fine research into these topics.

I also would recommend you read the Washington Post and washingtonpost.com--of course. We try to write about these topics as often as we can.

_______________________

Jacksonville, Fla.: The American government has evolved into a trillion dollar hog trough where the "Golden Rule" prevails and lobbyists representing non-voting corporations and narrow special interest groups control the seating arrangements. Isn't this whole discussion little more than an amateurish attempt to paint lipstick on those pigs?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: This discussion is whatever you want to make it. As you have just done.

My column is one of hundreds of things I've written through the years on the subject of lobbying and the intersection between government and the rest of the world.

I don't pretend to think this particular set of mess-ups is anything more than it is: a good story that could make matter worse on an important subject, our window into the world of lobbying.

As for the trough you mention, yes, the huge amount of federal spending and tax cutting targeted at individual interests is a growing embarrassment that some day will spawn a backlash.

It is a far more competitive world among lobbyists than you suggest, however. It's not one-sided, which makes stories about the topic so much more interesting and compelling.

So stay tuned, and please write in again!

_______________________

Anonymous: How often does it happen that a genunine grass roots effort- just citizens, writing, calling and emailing-defeats a lobby that's working behind the scenes to affect a conference committee report?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I'm afraid to report I have never heard of anyone beating an organized lobby that far into the process of making law.

At the conference committee stage, both chambers of Congress have already acted and only groups that have large numbers of people to mobilize or that have given tremendous amounts of money to politicians usually have the clout to change the outcome.

Sorry about that.

But if anyone out there knows differently, please write in!

_______________________

Harrisburg, Pa.: What are these lobbying "rules" people are talking about? Do you know, in Pennsylvania, the courts threw out Pennsylvania's lobbying laws and we still never enacted another lobbying law? So, is it a good idea to regulate lobbyists? Just asking.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I didn't know about the ruling in Pennsylvania. Thank you for letting us all know.

The federal lobbying law requires a minimum amount of disclosure by lobbyists: how much they earn, from whom and what in general they are lobbying about. Only people who deal with federal government officials themselves or through their work product have to register.

The reports I refer to are the documents that list this information for the House and the Senate.

And yes, I think that lobbying disclosure rules are a very good idea. I think, in fact, they should be strengthened to compel lobbyists to give more details about their activities.

I also think grassroots style lobbyists should register and report, and others, too, who make their living lobbying in the broadest sense.

I also wish we'd have some enforcement of lobbying laws and rules, which at the moment, we really don't.

_______________________

Herndon, Va.: Is there any "time lag" for ex-representatives or senators before they can march on to the floor or either house to talk to their former colleagues as lobbyists?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Former lawmakers can go on the floor right away, without a "cooling off period."

But they are not supposed to lobby in the legal sense for a year after they leave, at least when it comes to their former colleagues.

No one knows if this rule is strictly adhered to, however, because so little enforcement of lobbying laws is done.

Also, the definition of lobbying is so loose that a lot of what former members do is allowed even when you and I would understand it to be lobbying.

Strategists, is what newly minted former members of Congress call themselves. I think it's pretty easy to see through that. But lobbying laws do not.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Enjoyed your article.

My question and point is more geared towards your column.

If the Senate already had a user-friendly LDA disclosure program, why didn't the House leadership confer with them and coordinate a "joint but separate" type of system? I heard that the Senate even offered to work with the House on that very point but was rejected early on.

Don't you think that the separate filing points lend confusion to the process?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you.

I also heard that the Senate offered to work with the House to make all this right, but for whatever reason, nothing much has happened.

I don't know who's right or wrong, but I think that the lack of cooperation could lead to a breakdown in a system that already is pretty crippled.

That would be a loss for all of us.

And I agree with you entirely. It would make common sense to have only one disclosure point. The problem is that if the House is that point we all we lose out.

The House disclosure forms aren't online and unless they are put out there on the Web--and that isn't in the cards right now--we could end up knowing a lot less about lobbying than we do already.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Does this apply for lobbyist with foreign government and/or foreign companies account?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: There is a separate system, located through the Justice Department, for filings by so-called foreign agents.

So, no, this particular flap doesn't directly impact on people or firms that work for foreign governments.

_______________________

Fairfax County, Va.: Jeff:

First, kudos to you for being so tenacious in decoding the world that we lobbyists operate in. Of course, as you know, lobbyists come in many flavors, from the Abramoffs and other PAC-powered lobbyists to the more noble (and often ill-equipped) advocates who fight for the 'little guys' to those of us who fall somewhere in the middle (I am a university employee who lobbies for research funding, student aid, etc.).

Echoing the earlier question, Independent Sector recently came out with a series of recommendations for strengthening the accountability of nonprofits, something that Senators Grassley and Baucus encouraged absent Congress and the IRS just going ahead with what would likely be overly restrictive regulations that would impede charitable giving, among other things. Since most 501c3 organizations already believe (incorrectly) that they are prohibited from lobbying by virtue of their tax-exempt status, how do you think these new disclosure requirements are going to play out and whose responsibility is it to effectively get the word out to the "Independent Sector" so that they can fulfill their responsibility to advocate on behalf of their organization's interests while not endangering their compliance with IRS regs and, perhaps as importantly, public perception?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you very much.

To the extent that the mess on Capitol Hill makes filing hard for lobbyists, I think that smaller, less funded lobbying entities will be particularly harmed.

There are two or three lobbying organizations out there that might help. One would be the group, Independent Sector, which is a well-regarded advocate for nonprofits.

There is also the American League of Lobbyists, which has been taking the lead on the issue I wrote about today.

You might also try the American Society of Association Executives, which also does good work and might help spread the word as you suggest.

_______________________

Lawrence, Kan.: Jeff:

To what extent have lobbyists become resigned to higher levels of trasparency on reporting requirements?

It still seems as if we don't know nearly as much as we might about all these individuals who can have such an impact on legislative and regulatory outcomes.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Lobbyists have had to disclose for years now and I think they understand that such disclosures are a small price to pay for the work they do--much of it vital and important to their clients.

Some lobbyists actually want to register as a kind of calling card. See, they can say, I'm a registered lobbyist! Hire me!

But I do agree with you that lobbyists should be asked to tell us more about what they do--because it is so important and consequential.

I think many lobbyists would be willing to do so, as well.

_______________________

Tampa, Fla.: I don't get it. Filing electronically seems no big deal, depending on how you have to do it. Instead of typing in printed forms, you have to type in, say, Adobe Acrobat forms. Business and gov't use these every day for travel and entertainment reports, time sheets, employee evaluation, etc. Is there some peculiar form being required that is out of the ordinary?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: You'd think so, wouldn't you?

But apparently the "smart" type of form the House is using doesn't work in the Version 7 level of Acrobat. Only level 6 works.

Actually, there are a whole bunch of technical glitches like that and unless they're corrected the system is in some danger, in my view.

_______________________

Wall Street, NY: As a securities professional I see constant evidence of corporate abuses/corruption, and lobbying is out of control in the current system we have where policy and laws are for sale to the highest bidders. Until the 1860s there were no corporations, and government was influenced politically by voters and moneyed individuals, but politicians felt they represented society and individuals. Now corporations control government through campaign donations and lobbying campaigns, and individuals and society have been relegated to second class citizenship, despite all the political rhetoric to the contrary. Maybe we should again be a society without the protection of corporate status, despite the problems of risk and capital that that would create. At least we might behave more responsibly as citizens. Comments?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Another provocative thought! Thank you.

I bet rich individuals would exercise as much influence as you think corporations now do.

Money will always be a very powerful factor in government outcomes.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: Of Jack Abramoff: He apparently sent a $160,000 check to Grover Norquist who took off $10,000 off his trouble and sent another check to a Ralph Reed organization. Is Abramoff (and Norquist and Reed)representative of how lobbyists get money to targets?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: You are referring to the excellent reporting of a couple of my colleagues here at the Post.

That sort of misdirection isn't too common but it happens.

Then again, there is nothing unique to lobbyists about taking a piece of pie. That's what all sorts of businesses do all the time.

But it's usually not public policy that the takers are skimming in the end, which is the case with lobbyists.

_______________________

Middletown, NY: Will the new electronic filing have an impact on the shady dealings of gentlemen such as Jack Abramoff, and those he routinely deals with, such as Representative Ney of Ohio?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't see an impact on Abramoff.

Ney, however, is responsible for the system of mandatory electronic filing in the House, which is in some disarray, as my story points out.

If the system is changed or fixed, Ney may have to step in, or at least his committee might.

Only time will tell.

_______________________

Washington, D.C. (A Lawyer, and NOT a Lobbyist): This whole requirement is troubling in that it will deprive legit public-interest non-profits of some of the flexibility they need. Why no complaining?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Well, I don't think a lot of people knew how much difficulty the system in the House faces. That's why the silence.

The American League of Lobbyists has been talking about this. And now, I bet that more lobbyists and groups will be complaining--or at least talking to the House about its plans.

Lobbyists, after all, lobby. I bet we'll see an increase in lobbying on this issue now that it's been in the Post.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Not a question, just a "thank you" for your piece today on the ridiculous state of affairs re: the lack of meaningful Internet filing of lobby disclosure reports.

Bob Carr

Attorney, Of Counsel

Dow Lohnes & Albertson

Former Member of Congress

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you, Mr. Carr. Good to hear from you again. I hope you're well.

_______________________

Anonymous: What a joke, They are finding it too expensive to file electronically at the time they pay, probably, thousands times as much as a bribes in trips and sleaze...!

Why can't we, as country, stop the nonsense and do a real reform on lobbing, for ex:

1- No lobbyist should be allowed to meet with any representative, Congressman or Senator, individually. Meeting between our representatives and the lobbyists should be in committees only and should be restricted to twice a year or when a legislatively item is, that relates to them, is about to be discussed.

2- No lobbyist should be allowed to be on the floor at the time of Voting.

3-ALL the campaign money given to a representative by a lobbyist should be given back to the U.S. treasury upon losing election or choosing to resign.

4- No Representatives, including his/her immediate family or a civil worker that works for them, should able to work for any Lobbyist agency Before TEN Years, at least, from the time they leave office.

This way everyone of us would know that this is a Democracy By The People for the people Not For The Lobbyist And The Lobbyist.

The current system is a Mockery to say the least.

I hope we do not teach the Iraqis...

I know that what I am suggesting is Very Much Impossible especially with Tom Delays and Frists are in control, but at least i got it out.

Thanks for keeping up with me and reading my email.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you for your thoughts. I know not everyone agrees with you. But this kind of forum should air all sides. Cheers! Anyone out there want to disagree with this writer?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Ummm...are most lobbyists still actually on K Street?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: A wonderful question. I doubt that "a majority" are. Then again, most advertising execs aren't on Madison Avenue. And most stock brokers aren't on Wall Street. We are very road-centric in our metaphors. K Street is the lobbyists' boulevard. That's just the way it is.

If you have a suggestion for another street that's more accurate, though, please let me know!

That would be a story.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Why haven't they been able to master one singular LDA filing form for both chambers?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: The House and Senate say they're working on that simple, elegant answer. But I wouldn't bet on a quick resolution that makes sense.

The chambers aren't in it to help the public, only to meet the minimum requirements of their bosses, the lawmakers. And lawmakers would rather we not know too much about the lobbyists that they depend on.

That's my most cynical interpretation, in any case.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Since filing electronically is causing such a broo-ha-ha, what is your opinion on the best way Lobbyists should file their disclosure reports? Or can the House somehow simplify their system?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I would go for simple with online disclosure. In fact, I would ask for more data from more people and make it all digitally available via the Web--not just looking at documents electronically.

For what it's worth . . .

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: I understand how lobbying Congress works, but I'm less familar with how lobbyists try to influence agency decisions. How is it possible to lobby the regulatory process?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: The concept is very much the same. Only access is sometimes a little harder, bureaucracies being what they are.

A lot of lobbying is done at the agency level, however, and I hope to write more about that in the future.

Anyone have any good agency lobbying story ideas for me?

Send 'em along!

_______________________

Jacksonville, Fla.: Have the American people resigned themselves to the idea that corporate money and special interest minorities have seized control of the American political system? Is the age of the true American democracy over or did it never exist in the first place?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't think Americans like the idea that narrow interests control their government.

I'm not sure that's exactly the way things are these days, but if voters believe your notion is true, I think there'll be a backlash.

John McCain will run for the White House in 08 partly as the candidate who will fight against the "spcial interests."

If the American people think that those interests have gained too much control in Washington, McCain or someone like him could well win the White House as a result.

_______________________

Long Beach, Ca.: The answer to the mess is unfortunately as simple as always in Washington...

Eliminate the money and the pigs and sleaze like Abrahmoff will leave the trough..

Now that I've stated the obvious let me pose my question: Does the constitution's guarantee of access to petition the government entitle lobbiests to be paid?

How about legislation requiring LOBBIESTS BE UNPAID?

I would think sincere citizens would still petition as the founder's envisioned - but where millions are lacking scumbags will not gather.

Whats the flaw in my thinking here?

Thanks!

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Lobbying is a Constitutional right. And Congress can't and shouldn't prevent anybody from being paid for their labors, especially those who exercise a right as important as that one.

So, some people may not like lobbyists, but they are a key to our system and to understanding why our system does what it does.

Simply shutting that system down just won't fly, nor should it.

_______________________

Easley, SC: Happy Halloween! My question has nothing to do with the issue you're discussing, but I hope you'll help me. Like you, I grew up in Scranton, PA. During Halloween, I remember having to deliver a performance at my neighbors' homes before receiving a treat. My friends & I told jokes or sang. My husband, who is from MD, can't believe it. He thinks it's really strange & I'm exaggerating. Anyway, do you remember this "quaint" Scrantonian custom? Hoping confirmation from a Washington Post columnist will convince my husband that I'm telling the truth.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: You are absolutely correct. Tell your husband he should never disbelieve you again.

A couple years I remember dressing up as a hobo and singing "King of the Road" for my candy.

That's just the way Scranton is. We know how to work for our money.

All best and Happy Halloween to you (and your husband)!

_______________________

Capitol Hill: I don't much care for the system that requires a unique signature. We (a non-profit) paid $119 for a "company" signature for one individual who subsequently left the organization only to be told that we could not now change the signature over to the person replacing him. We probably need to pursue this harder with digicorps, but it is just a complete pain in the neck. As a lobbyist the more disclosure the better, but the House system is expensive for non-profits and it truly will interfere with the rights of people to be heard. The House should simply join the Senate's system.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yours is an excellent example. Thank you for sending it along. The House and Senate are continuing their talks and I hope they see your predicament.

Cheers!

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Not to defend all lobbyists but...what most people don't understand is that you are probably funding a lobbyist, right now. Go to a church on Sunday? then you have a lobbyist. Kids in Boy Scouts? You have a lobbyist. Live in a state? You have a lobbyist. Etc.. Not all lobbyists are hired by corporations. Lobbyists are working for you and what you believe in, too.

While I agree that money has corrupted many people in the system not everyone that lobbyies is trying to bribe people or get millions of dollars for some billionaire oil tycoon. A lot of us who lobby for increasing benefits for elderly or for more food aid for the poor. Or better afterschool programs. It's not always what you think of when you think of the word lobbyist. AND, let me tell you, none of get rich or even have 5 pennies to put together to create a bribe even if we wanted to!

And finally, in terms of restricting spouses employments (as per one posters ideas) that would never work in DC. Most couples here are 2 couple political staff people. It would be so unfair to ever say that I could do a certain job because my wife/husband had a certain job. Talk about a restriction of freedom!

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, you are correct. Thank you for the counterargument to earliler questioners.

_______________________

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you everyone for writing in. This has been a marvelous session. I hope we can do it again soon.

Cheers and all best!

_______________________

Editor's Note: Washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Live Online discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions.