K Street Confidential

K Street Confidential columnist Jeffrey Birnbaum was online at Noon ET, Monday, Dec. 12 to discuss the massive growth and profitability of lobbying, as well as what happens when government and business collide.

In his most recent column , Birnbaum looks at the buzz a venture capitalist is creating by secretly trying to buy a bunch of lobbying shops, tie them together and take them public.

A transcript follows .

K Street Confidential appears every other Monday in the Washington Post business section.

____________________

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Hi everyone, it looks like a lot of people want to chat today. I'm Jeff Birnbaum. I write K Street Confidential for the Washington Post. Please feel free to ask what you wish. I've worked in Washington a long time and have been a reporter here for both print and broadcast outlets. So let's get started!

_______________________

Dayton, Ohio: Is there anything the public at large can do to effect a "divorce", break-up between business and government as it is praticed in our government today? How can we protect our interests against those of the current K-Street bribes?

Thank you.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Lobbying is a right protected by the Constitution. So there isn't much anyone can or should do to block the interaction between petitioners of government and government officials.

We should all value that piece of liberty.

Professional lobbyists, on the other hand, do have limitations placed on them. That makes sense to protect citizens from conflicts of interest and make government more transparent.

I bet before next year is done that there will be more restrictions placed on lobbyists--both their activities and their campaign giving.

For those changes to happen, however, Republicans have to begin to join Democrats in calling for those changes in law. So far, Democrats are all-but alone in asking for these new laws.

Watch for Republicans to take up the call, and then the changes will come soon thereafter, I predict.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: I think taking lobbying firms public is a great idea. For instance, Haley Barbour is governor of Mississippi and retains an interest in his old lobbying firm (via a blind trust). Citizens in Mississippi could band together, buy large blocks of stock in his firm, and then elect him. The firm's stock would skyrocket on all the inside deals that could be had! Then the shareholders could sell the stock short and kick him out of office--the stock would fall b/c of lost access. Finally a legal way to make money off of our votes!

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thanks for that K Street fantasy!

I wonder if the Securities and Exchange Commission is reading this discussion!

_______________________

Portland, Ore.: How do I become a lobbyist? I want to get stinkin' rich.

Thanks!

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I've gotten more than one of these notes. Most of them aren't sarcastic, however.

Lobbying is a real profession and not all lobbyists are wealthy.

But enough are that plenty of people want to join the profession.

Enough are very rich, too, so that the profession is probably about to face some relatively tough times due to public outrage.

_______________________

Dover, Ohio: Dear Mr. Birnbaum,

As an announced candidate for the U. S. House of Representatives out of Ohio's 18th Congressional District, I have been following the K Street phenomenon very closely. Our current Congressman, Bob Ney, has immersed himself in the K Street shuffle, perhaps more than any other Congressman. Mr. Ney represents a very rural district in Southeast Ohio, which has been hit especially hard by the changing world economic order. I am utterly mystified by his total captivation with special interests. Indeed, this captivation has jeopardized not only the interests of his constituency, but his own career (and even his own liberty).

Of course, the K Street phenomenon is simply a manifestation of the influence of money in shaping virtually all elements of policy. We have seen the evolution of institutionalized bribery in this Country. Congressman Ney clearly has clearly crossed the line of moral and legal acceptability. But what of so many other Congressmen who legally accept boatloads of cash from monied interests, via high paid lobbyists? The legality of our pay to play system not only speaks volumes about this nation's real priorities, it also portends a grim future-especially for the middle class, poor, and near poor elements of our society. I was taught that in a representative democracy, one's elected Congressman has an obligation to represent his or her electors. This, of course, would entail making decisions based strictly on how they will affect constituents. Sadly, under our current campaign finance laws, too many decisions are made under the influence of a culture of greed: the greed of monied interests that influence legislation with their wealth; and the greed of politicians who are all too eager to accommodate.

The answer to this cancer lies in the development of comprehensive - indeed drastic - campaign finance reform. In the face of so many scandals this answer appears not to be given proper attention. No discussion about the K Street phenomenon can be complete without rational consideration and deliberation of real, substantive campaign finance reform.

Zachary T. Space

Candidate for U. S. HouseOhio's 18th Congressional District

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I bet Mr. Ney disagrees with you.

I invite him or a spokesman for him to reply.

_______________________

Philadelphia, Pa.: Is there more information on this. I think at this time, lobbyist companies should be under the highest scrutiny-especially based on the lastest Scanlon/Abranoff scandal.

Thank you

Anne

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Lobbyists are under a lot of scrutiny lately. They aren't taking lawmakers on as many trips. They also are pulling back their in town sponsorships of events, at least a little. But lobbying is largely a secret society. So we never really know what's happening--and what isn't.

_______________________

Spring, Texas: I know it is called lobbying, but is it not just legalized bribery? Why would any country allow their elected officials to vote on any matter, based on receiving compensation from some group? Buying votes is not democracy.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: It is illegal for a public official to give some official favor in exchange for anything of value. That's called bribery or an illegal gratuity.

In other words, there is a difference between illegal bribery and "legal bribery," which is what critics call campaign contributions that fall within the legal limits.

If an official gives a favor in exchange for even a donation within the limits, that is wrong and could be prosecuted.

Conflicts of interests are part of the process. How they are dealt with is a key challenge of keeping trust in Democracy.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: It seems that over the past year or two, many foreign governments or businesses are hiring K Street to help attract funds or enhance their image. Do you see that continuing? What firms are the leaders in this?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, this will grow and among the largest participants on K Street from abroad are Japan and, I hear, China. Lately it seems that every interest, foreign or domestic, is building its lobbying presence.

_______________________

Nashville, Tenn.: See now where some guy is wanting to buy lobby firms and take them into some sort of public offering as "So profitable". That pretty much says it all right there.. Looks like with the real government being the lobbyists.. why bother to vote or get involved.. to much money.. and as the data shows.."we have best government (for some) that the lobbyists can buy". Is there ANY way the people can get it back... as the money is running all and now congress it seems does not even hide their indiscretions.. simply ignores nation and moves on to next crime! "Lobby is profitable business".. so doubt that anyone can get government back to people! And the founding fathers in their wisdom warned us..but it seems no vehicle to take back nation, is there? Please no overly simplistic answers.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I'm afraid there is no answer, simple or otherwise.

Money will always buy a disproportionate share of power in Washington.

More crackdowns on extreme behavior will help, and so will tighter rules governing lobbying and campaign donations. Extra disclosure is always a good idea.

But I'm afraid that government has gotten so large and so many interests have so much at stake in DC that the interests that can buy into the influence system here will always have an advantage.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: There probably are lots more money to be made by owning a lobbying group in this town. That is, unless the K-Street Project run by the Republicans gets shut down. Tom Delay and Roy Blount have perfected the cycling of money through K-street lobby firms to GOP candidates to payoff in lobbyist-friendly legislation.

Historically, the payoff (return on legislation to fees paid to lobbyists) has run about 1000 to 1. For every dollar the firm spent on lobbying they got back a thousand dollars in favorable tax or business legislation. There is certainly room to raise fees to potentially change the return to, say, 500 to one.

Wilkes (of Duke Cunningham fame) and his Group W Advisors is a excellent case study in how the cash cycles through. Would you care to comment?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, the return on an investment in a lobbyist or a lobbying campaign can be huge.

That's one reason lobbying has grown so large and so rich. And a reason why someone might want to buy lobbying firms and take them public.

This same fact, however, is putting both lobbyists and lawmakers under pressure from the public. We are seeing prosecutors saying enough is enough. Voters may say the same thing to incumbents come November if the lobbying scandals and indictments proliferate.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, the return on an investment in a lobbyist or a lobbying campaign can be huge.

That's one reason lobbying has grown so large and so rich. And a reason why someone might want to buy lobbying firms and take them public.

This same fact, however, is putting both lobbyists and lawmakers under pressure from the public. We are seeing prosecutors saying enough is enough. Voters may say the same thing to incumbents come November if the lobbying scandals and indictments proliferate.

_______________________

Sherman Oaks, Calif.: Is it proper for lobbyists to reward a congressional representative or senator before services are rendered? Isn't the appearance of quid pro quo somewhat distasteful? In a democracy, shouldn't reward be proportional to and come after effort?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Quid pro quos aren't just distasteful, they are also illegal. But things that bring lawmakers and lobbyists close together--too close--are angering a lot of voters.

_______________________

Arlington, Va.: I admit to ignorance about the financial benefits of lobbying firms going public, but it strikes me that lobbying is a people-oriented business and people shift around a lot, so the initial value of buying stock because, say, Jack Abramoff is part of the firm does mean some negatives if Jack was forced to leave or went elsewhere.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, lobbying is a service business. If its main assets--people--leave, they lose value. That's why taking a lobbying firm public is a chancy business.

_______________________

Los Angeles, Calif.: It seems to me two ways to bring the lobbying more under control would be to: 1. change the law to 5 years from 1 year of waiting after leaving a government post before you can lobby again and 2. eliminate all gifts and donations to elected officials except $2,000 from U.S. citizens. Do you think this would help fix the problem?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Those are good ideas. And they are similar to ones that are under active debate in Congress. How about this one: refusing to allow lawmakers to take privately sponsored trips. Period. Only taxpayers can pay for our lawmakers travel. Not a bad idea, yes?

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Isn't this "cancer we call special interest" just a conglomeration of people with a similar cause organizing themselves to try to influence policy makers to change to what the organization, and thus its members, feels are more worth while policies? I would argue that "special interest" is the sign of a functioning democracy.

And no, I am not a lobbyist.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: An excellent point. And yes, your point is as true as lobbyists' critics. We are all part of one special interest or another and we want to win too!

_______________________

K Street, NW: What are the benefits of consolidating lobbying firms to the average citizen? I think it is a bad idea - too much power and money to interests that can afford these firms and the nothing to the average citizen. Also, the potential for conflict of interests is too great. Too many nonprofits are forced to turn to the judiciary to stop legislation that they do not support because Congress is deaf to their views. (Yes, nonprofits do lobby, they just dance around current rules.) Grassroots groups can't even get a phone call returned. I have worked in DC public affairs for nonprofits for 24 years and I do not like how K Street currently operates. It is corrupt and growing worse.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't see any benefit to the public at all. Only a problem. What do you think?!

_______________________

Kennesaw, Ga.: Good morning, Mr. Birnbaum. I thought your column on Mr. Ducey's Rentseeking, Inc. project a sign that K Street is finally getting just a little bit too greedy.

The success of government relations firms depends in large measure on their not becoming political issues themselves. Consolidation -- let alone incorporation -- makes them much easier targets. Once they become political targets, their clients have so many other options with respect to their government relations that lobbying firms could lose lots of business in a hurry.

I understand the power of lobbyists in Washington is an order of magnitude greater than it used to be -- the account you wrote of the 1986 Tax Reform Act (Showdown at Gucci Gulch) could not possibly be written today. But this sounds to me like a step too far. Do you agree, or am I missing something.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I think you are correct. Lobbying has changed in quality not just quantity over the last decade or more. I have been trying to detail that change piece by piece. That's my job, I think.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: The Jack Abramoff story has to be the most interesting drama to hit DC in years. Please tell me that your colleagues Susan Schmidt and James Grimaldi will write a book about it once the dust settles? If not, do you plan to steal their notes and write one yourself?

washingtonpost.com: Special Report: Abramoff Lobbying Questioned

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I do hope to write a book on lobbying, my second. More on that at another time. Thank you for asking.

_______________________

Lawrence, Kan.: Jeff:

One perennial problem in assessing DC lobbying is that although it's certainly lucrative, we have no good figures on income/profit. Would any of this activity make for more meaningful public disclosure on return on investment rates for lobbying firms, which in some instances have almost certainly been astronomical?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: One proposed change in lobbying would be to force more disclosure about lobbyists' activities. This new disclosure could include "grassroots" lobbying, which now goes on without any transparency.

Grass roots lobbying now probably is larger than access lobbying, which is the only kind that has to be disclosed.

I agree that more information would be better than the small amount we now get.

Starting with more detail of grassroots lobbying would be great.

_______________________

San Antonio, Texas: Will these lobbying businesses be primarily conservative, neoconservative, progressive or a mix? The idea seems sort of funny to me. Will the shareholders be able to naysay things that are not in the best interests of the firm?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: It's hard to know what lobbying firms might go public--if any.

My guess is that we are still a ways off from seeing a publicly traded lobbying company.

But there are all sorts of lobbyists and lobbying firms -- Democratic, Republican, bipartisan, conservative, liberal-leaning, grassroots, access lobbyists, you name it.

We may be at the start of a new lobbying era or at just another point where the money in lobbying as gotten so large that the business is about the change.

_______________________

Dist 22, Houston, Texas: As an American living in DeLay's district I have been amazed that anyone ever voted for the man, let alone continues to vote for him.

The educational system that produced him without teaching him any ethics has continued to tolerate his lack of moral compass. The media, radio, tv, and print have done little to define his lack of ethics, thus prolonging the problem.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Ethics is hugely important in all walks of life, especially public life.

Mr. DeLay asserts that he is upholding high ethics. His critics disagree.

What is certain is that the House ethics committee hasn't done a single thing in the last 12 months to look into the accusations of Mr. DeLay's lapses.

Or any other members' lapses, either.

The panel has been shut down when it comes to investigations. There are plenty of people who think that's a scandal in itself.

_______________________

Fort Myers, Fla.: If lobbying firms go public they will then have the original goal of influencing events in Washington, for a fee, on behalf of clients who want something from Washington, combined with a new goal of creating profitability and "shareholder value" for investors. I can see no possible benefit for ordinary American citizen/taxpayers who may hold to the simple, yet naive, hope that the expenditures of the US Government will be based upon fiscal responsibility and sound judgment. Such a development would be particularly regrettable in view of the Bush administration tax policy which has shifted a larger portion of public financing to middle and lower income families. The stench in Washington could get worse.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Lobbyists aren't here in Washington to promote the public good, even though they would all say that they are.

They are here to promote their own version of good, which sometimes touches a lot of people and sometimes only a few.

The public interest is hard to assess, objectively speaking. Using a lobbyist's point-of-view, however, isn't the most efficient way to see it, however.

Lobbyists have to help their clients first and use the pithc of "public good" to make their case.

_______________________

Minneapolis, Minn.: What current legislative processes/lawmaking rules allow for the distasteful "special interest" laws and budget lines that we hear about only after the fact so often? One problem is the size of government spending, of course, but does the GAO play any up-front role in this? How open for scrutiny are Capitol Hill lawmaking processes?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Lawmaking is open in its results not always in its process along the way.

Many decisions are made behind closed doors (and with lobybists) and we see only the result in written law.

With C-Span and the Internet, however, the process is a lot more open than it used to be and for that we can be grateful.

Remember though legislation like sausage-making is something you might want to see in theory but is ugly if you really get up close.

Be careful what you wish for.

_______________________

Falls Church, Va.: I am outraged by ex-Senator Tausin's creation of the Medicare drug bill. He chaired the committee, refused a job with Jack Valenti paying over a million and upon resigning from the Senate took a job with Pharmacia with a salary of over Two Million. To me, this should be a crime given the disasterous mess Part D of the Medicare Bill creates with the provision that it cannot be changed. What gaull!

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I've heard this criticism many times.

He is now president of Phrma, the drug company lobby, after helping to pass the drug benefit.

What can I say? That's the way the revolving door swings!

Or, who better to push the program than a man who helped create it?

You decide.

Rep. Tauzin was in the House, by the way.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: Why can't all lobbyists be as transparent as the late Baron Edward Von Kloberg...you knew what "you got" with the Baron. If all lobbyists appeared as they "Are" perhaps the public "whoring" of our elected officials would not occur on the magnitude as it occurs today!

A retired Ambassador

Jeffrey Birnbaum: What a notion!

Everything about the legendary PR man's life was made up or exaggerated--or so I have read.

I guess then, yes, he is a perfect model for lobbying.

_______________________

Mullinax from Alabama-a former Hill staffer.: What will keep these wiley-lobbyists from setting up other K-Street shops after they sell out to the venture capitalists and thus undercut the publicly traded/consolidated firms? These folks are as slippery as mercury?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: It's hard to know what kind of ownership structure of lobbying firms would be most advantageous. I'm not fully convinced, by the way, that a publicly traded lobbying firm will ever happen.

What I see, though, is that lobbying has become such a big and successful business that outsiders want to profit from it.

I also see that lobbying has become so profitable that prosecutors and voters may want to pull it back--for the sake of the general good.

_______________________

New York City: What about this approach to cleaning up lobbying: Require legislators (and executives) to recuse themselves when they have received value from a party who has an interest in the legislation (or action, in the case of the executive)? After all, recusal is common in the judiciary.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: That might be to strict a rule. There are plenty of standards about when lawmakers must refuse to deal with a subject but getting campaign donations from interested parties doesn't qualify for such a recusal. The system would fall apart entirely if that were imposed. But then again, maybe it should. That's a notion we should all ponder. Thanks!

_______________________

Albany, N.Y.: I'm trying to figure out why Republicans telling K street lobbying firms that they will not have any influence unless they hire Republicans (at least to key positions) isn't extortion. Your thoughts?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: It strikes me as improper, yes. It also struck the House ethics committee that way a few years ago, too. I think, though, that the K Street project was more myth than fact. After the initial flurry of interest in the 1990s, I could never find a member of Congress or a congressional aide who directly threatened anyone. Have you?

_______________________

Boston, Mass.: Why can it not simply be made a crime for organizations that seek to influence legislation (registered lobbying groups) to contribute to federal campaigns? And, for that matter, why can't the rules on "bundling" of contributions be strengthened to prohibit the kind of coordinated fundraising (for particular politicians, from many individuals or organizations with similar legislative agendas) by private lobbyists such as Abramoff?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, this is a much discussed idea. Several states already prevent or limit the donation from professional lobbyists and I have heard talk about similar limits in DC. (Actually, in an earlier column, I also proposed such a limit, though I have to admit that no one took me up on the idea.)

_______________________

Groton, Conn.: Is the abuse of power from lobby influences any worse now than it has been over the years (60's, 70's, 80's, or 90's) ?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Lobbying abuses are cyclical. They get worse, they are cracked down on, they relent and then they eventually get worse again. It's about a 10 year cycle. We are, I think, at or near another apogee in the cycle.

_______________________

Va.: I wondered how a VC can buy when most lobbyists work for law firms. Or only lobby shops?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I think only lobby shops. But, then again, a few lobby shops have been spun off from lobby firms over the years. So, stay tuned.

_______________________

Alexandria, Virginia: Our civics teacher in high school told us that there is a secret "fee schedule" that exists in congress that determines the price for different types of legislation. For example, a simple proclamation is relatively inexpensive, but an industry-specific law is very, very costly. I have been trying to obtain a copy of this fee schedule, but have so far been unable to do so. Where can ordinary citizens find out how much their representative charges for their vote?

Thank you very much for helping!

Jeffrey Birnbaum: There's no such fee schedule. Too many lawmakers, however, will talk only to donors if they aren't also constituents. And that's unsavory at best.

_______________________

Shadow Hills, Calif.: Is their any lobbying group I could support that is lobbying to change the laws to RESTRICT lobbying!? I want to do something to help change the system but don't know what to do.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Many groups are interested in the topic including CREW, Common Cause, Public Citizen and, on the political right, Judicial Watch. They all have Web sites that you can check out.

_______________________

Toronto, Canada: Did you see Syriana? And, if so, any comments on how it portrayed Washington politics and the politics of lobbying?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I haven't yet, but plan to. Thanks for the suggestion.

_______________________

Sunland, Calif.: I always hear that lobbying can't be outlawed due to a provision in the constitution. What provision is that?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: The First Amendment protects the right of petition to redress grievances, a freedom that goes back to the Magna Carta.

_______________________

Reno, Nev.: I think we may see some of the big firms go public, but not that many. And the firms that do go public will likely have other service function beyond lobbying (advertisinfg, PR, law). As a lobbyist, I want to be focused on my clients, not shareholders. I also don't want to be questioned by others about how I do my business. If they do go public, stock will be held by few. Do you agree?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Lots of lobbyists and lobbying-related professionals already have corporate bosses and have to deal with them all the time. You are lucky if you don't have that hassle. As for how many people would own lobbying company stock, many do already through the big communications giants that own lots of lobbying firms.

As for a pure lobbying company, there aren't any with publicly traded stocks yet. When that happens, there would be lots and lots of shareholders, depending on how the IPO is done.

_______________________

Anonymous: Hello Mr. Birnbaum,

Thank you for the discussion. You mentioned that lobbying is guaranteed by the Constitution. Where in the Constitution can I find it? I'm a law student and am trying to understand lobbying?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Hello, Amendment One, please see earlier reply. Cheers!

_______________________

Kansas City: Compared to five or ten years ago, which industries have gained the most influence in Washington and which ones have lost the most? What have the key factors been in these fluctuations? Thanks.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: These would be guesses, but broad business interests have flourished while environmentalists and women's groups have declined. This may be as much about Republican control in Washington as it does with lobbying.

I don't want to get more specific, because I would only be estimating. Not fair, I don't think.

_______________________

Rochester, N.Y.: A few weeks ago you wrote a column in which you wrote "voters think less of both political parties" since "no fewer than seven lawmakers, including a Democrat, have been indicted, have pleaded guilty or are under investigation for improper conduct such as conspiracy, securities fraud and improper campaign donations."

Isn't it a little silly to pretend that Democrats have their hands as diry as the Republicans in the lobbyist scandals when the stated purpose of the "K Street Project" was to cut Democrats out of the action?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: A media Web site has attacked my work lately on this subject and I think the criticisms are unfair.

It would be wrong of me and for the Democrats to assert that only Republicans stand to be hurt by the burgeoning lobbyist scandals.

The polls show that the voters are trusting both political parties less. What's more, even the Abramoff scandal could touch both Democrats and Republicans. Abramoff's lobbying team was bipartisan and so were their gifts and donations to lawmakers.

The Post and others have reported that the Justice Department is looking at both Democrats and Republicans in Congress and their former staffers.

Republicans are more vulnerable overall since they control the Congress and the White House, as I have written repeatedly. But to say that Republicans need to worry exclusively would be a misrepresentation of the facts as we know them.

_______________________

Hot Springs, Ark.: Just how much are you willing to wager that the R's join in placing restrictions on the very source of their largess?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: If the scandals get big and broad enough, I think that lobbying "reform" will become a consensus item on Capitol Hill as a way to defect voters anger.

_______________________

Washington Lobbyist: I've been a lobbyist for over 6 years now and I think there's a huge difference between the Jack Abramoff's of the world and the average woman/man who educates policymakers. Let's face it. The interworkings of Capitol Hill can be pretty boring. The public sits up and pays attention after a scandal.

There are lots of lobbyists out there pounding the pavement and promoting good causes for hometowns, non profits and others. When will they get a little more attention in the media?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: We write about that, too. In fact, my next column will be about lobbyists who do pro bono work for good causes.

_______________________

NoVA: First, as a former non-profit association lobbyist, it is sad for me to see the worst of the profession being protrayed, albeit it quite necessary to rid the industry of scoundrels and cheats.

However, I also see much more coverage on the revolving door of members of Congress and their staff to lobbying Congress. However, some of the most sickening stunts I have seen pulled is the result of government agency staffers and attorneys switching to advocacy of the very agencies they worked for. This is also considered lobbying and yes, there is supposed to be a cooling off period but there rarely is. This is especially pandemic among smaller independent agencies. It is really a cesspool of corruption out there!

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you for your comments.

_______________________

Toronto, Canada: I read once that the most invulnerable weapons system in the US arsenal would be the one with sub-contractor's factory in every Congressional District. What role do you think "Duke" Cunningham's corruption played in the fatal delays in delivering body armor and the humvee up-armor kits to the GIs in Iraq?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I haven't seen any connection to that, thank heavens.

_______________________

Springvale, Maine: Would it be possible to pass a law that would define corporations as non-people? They cannot vote. They should not be able to donate to political campaigns either.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Actually, there already is such a law. Corporations can't donate to individual candidates for office. Their political action committees can, and do. These are donations pooled from their executives and given to candidates in the name of the corporation. The end of so-called soft money a few years ago ended what many saw as illegal corporate giving. Then again, who knows where the money is going now? There's no way to track a lot of the funds that go into lobbying and politics these days.

_______________________

Albany, N.Y.: Regarding threats: I think so. Last year, House Republicans told the Motion Picture Association of America (the film industry lobby group) that appointing Democrat Dan Glickman as its head would endanger $1.5 billion of tax relief for the film industry.

In other words, they made MPA an offer they couldn't refuse.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: WEll, Glickman has the job and I, for one, couldn't prove the connection you assert.

_______________________

Tujunga, Callif.: Many people think all politicians are corrupt, evil, etc. I don't. I have a friend who is a senator today. But I'm sure he takes money from lobbyists all the time. Because how else can someone afford to run for office as it is so expensive? is there any talk of the taxpayers paying for campaigns and eliminating the donations to elected officials entirely?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Good points. Th only solution to all of this is to have publicly funded elections, but what taxpayers want to pay for politicians? Not many I know of. So we have to live in a messy world.

_______________________

Woodbridge, Va.: Love your columns and chats. I doubt that lobbying shops could be corporatized as suggested in your column. Lobbying is all about personal connections to congressional leaders and committee chairman. If the founder leaves a successful shop that enterpise becomes worthless.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thank you. I tend to agree with your analysis, but stranger things have happened.

_______________________

Boston, Mass.: Just to be clear, it is the activity of communicating with a legislator, telling that legislator what you want him/her to do legislatively for this or that interest group, that is protected by the First Amendment. Giving money to the legislator in exchange for such access, or in order to influence his/her position on legislation, is not protected by the constitution. Since the problem with lobbying is the distorting effect of money on the process, I think it is important to be clear that it is only the "communicating" part of lobbying that could never be outlawed.

Jeffrey Birnbaum:

Fair enough.

_______________________

Orlando, Fla.: With so much wrong with the influence Corporate K-Street Lobbyists hold over Congress, giving them effective control of much Congressional action, based on Corporate funding of election Campaign Financing, what will it take for the American Public to catch on to the axion, "Who pays the piper, calls the tune"?

Many people oppose Public financing of campaigns in order, "...not to give my tax money to politicians." How can the public be educated that by NOT paying for Public Financing, the costs to the taxpayers are FAR, FAR greater that it would cost for a modified plan -part private with low individual limits, largely Treasury paid National elections?

Robert

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Your view is worth noting. Thanks!

_______________________

Sanibel, Fla.: To what extent do you attribute the current GOP lobby scandals to a nearly total lack of congressional oversight? And if so, in your opinion, is the press filling this void when most reporters, with the exception of a few like yourself, are so uncomfortable reporting on the $10-15 billion lobby industry, perhaps the most powerful force in Washington.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: We try our best. The ethics committees aren't much help, though. And, I afraid ethical lapses happen to both political party members.

_______________________

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Thanks for a terrific chat! I hope to talk to you all soon!

_______________________

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.