K Street

K Street columnist Jeffrey Birnbaum was online to discuss the intersection of business, politics and government on Tuesday, May 8, at 2 p.m. ET.

A list of Birnbaum's columns can be found here.

A transcript follows.

____________________

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Hello everyone.

Thank you for writing in.

My column today was about the fruit and vegetable lobby being more than just dessert. It is, in fact, a newly potent force that is likely to win its share of the farm bill pie.

But I am happy to take questions on any topic. Fire away.

So, let's get started.

_______________________

Detroit: What ever happened to the lobby bill that was supposed to come, I think, from the House?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: So far, nothing has happened. At least publicly. The Democratic leaders are discussing elements of the legislation and plan to spring it soon. But not yet and I'm not sure exactly when. The latest word from Speaker Pelosi's office was that the bill's language and House passage would happen in late April or early May. By my count, that's about now. Stay tuned.

_______________________

Bethesda, Md.: What is it with President Bush. Anyone else would have gotten rid of Alberto Gonzales and gotten out of Iraq, given all the uproar and the polls. Doesn't he care about anything other than his own mind?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: That is what Democrats accuse him of doing -- being stubborn without regard to real life consequences. I think that is unduly harsh. Bush does not believe that small mistakes merit major punishment, and that is the way he views Gonzales' missteps with regard to the U.S. Attorney firings. Bush is also loyal to his friends, sometimes to a fault. On Iraq, Bush believes he should give his best try to win and sees the surge policy of additional soldiers there as that last, valiant effort. The question for him will be whether he persists in Iraq even if the judgement of the generals there is that the surge isn't working--if that is their judgement. In that case, Bush's stubbornness will be put to the real test.

_______________________

District of Columbia: You should write more about public interest groups, not just all those business lobbyists. The Democrats are in the majority in Congress so there's a new sheriff in town. You should write about that, don't you think?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, I think I should and I have been. On Monday, I wrote a very long feature about 1825 K Street NW, where a critical mass of liberal interest groups have clustered and run all sorts of issue campaigns on the Iraq war, an increase in the minimum wage and the like, all pretty much in close coordination with with Democratic leaders in Congress. I also have been writing more about labor, plaintiffs' lawyers, environmental issues and other interests close to the Democrats in charge. I also continue to write about business lobbyists, of course, because they represent the bulk of lobbying no matter who is in the majority on Capitol Hill.

_______________________

Fairfax: You write about all this lobbying, but not much seems to get done in Congress. What are all those lobbyists doing anyway and why are they being paid?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Quite often lobbyists are paid to prevent things from happening and certainly they are working wonders doing that these days.

But in general it's wrong to think that nothing will be done; it's still quite early in the legislative session. It is also incorrect to think that if lobbyists don't produce legislation right away that their work is for naught.

Creating laws takes a very long time, often years. And lobbying tends to move in spurts, a lot of it focused in the fall when lawmakers face deadlines and things finally get done.

Also there's a lot of structural waste in the system so much of what lobbyists have to do is move without the ball, as they say in basketball.

Now I don't mean to say that lobbying is backbreaking work. But lobbyists are very busy -- laying the groundwork for big doings down the road.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: What is the likelihood of an immigration bill this year?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: President Bush would like to say the chances are strong, but I'm not yet convinced. I mention in my column today that labor unions are divided about the legislation, which will make it tougher for the president to find enough votes to make a majority in Congress. Labor unions hold a lot of sway with Democratic lawmakers and if most unions don't like something in the immigration bill, at least some Democrats in Congress are sure to vote against it.

Then again, we are not yet sure what "it" is. The process of negotiating a compromise with the White House is not done or may not produce a final product. That will leave the legislation entirely to the whims of first the Senate and then the House. Who knows what will come out in the end, if anything.

_______________________

Chicago: Why were you so mean to Neil Hare about his lobbying of you. Isn't that what lobbyists were supposed to do? So what if he had some friends of his write to you about his novel writing.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I thought I was the opposite of mean to Neil Hare. I mentioned that he was a novelist in print. I hope that mention, in my column last week, helped him sell some books.

I admit that I was less than completely pleased that he had encouraged some friends to e-mail me to include him in the running series, Moonlighting Lobbyist of the Week. I do not need to be deluged with e-mails like lawmakers are routinely by people like Neil.

I felt a little diminished by the technique but not enough to refrain from mentioning his hard work as a book author.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: So what's wrong with Bill Gates using his foundation to try to wring money out of the federal government? I read your column last week and wondered what you were complaining about?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I don't think I was complaining. I was explaining. I think most people missed the significance of the announcement by Families USA a few weeks ago that it had gotten a big grant from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. It is this: that the Gates Foundation isn't merely buying medicines to treat the sick around the world it is, in effect, lobbying the federal government to hand over taxpayers' money to do the same, or at least to pay for more research to make better medicines.

You might say that leveraging its money is smart for the Gates Foundation. Others might say that he should keep his hands of out dough, meaning taxpayer funds. I say, let the debate begin. But it can't start unless everyone knows the facts.

_______________________

Pittsburgh: Why haven't you mentioned that Bill Thomas who used to head the Ways and Means Committee went to a law firm? I would guess that's a pretty big deal.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: The announcement came out last Tuesday, the day my column runs. So I had to wait at least a week to make a mention of it. I honestly did not realize the Post had not mentioned the move. I had passed it along to colleagues for them to use if they wished. Although I can also see why it was not used at all. Mr. Thomas says he is joining a law firm but will not lobby, meaning ask his former lawmakers to do things for him. My column is largely about that process, so if Mr. Thomas won't be doing that, I can probably wait another week before mentioning his new job. It would have been better overall, in fact, if I had been told about the move on the day I finish my column, on Monday. Then I certainly would have used it because it would have been news. A lesson to everyone who wants a major personnel mention in my column . . .

_______________________

McLean: What's your best guess about whether Murdock will take over the Wall Street Journal? I remember that you used to work there, right?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, I worked for the Wall Street Journal for 16 years. Thank you for remembering. I don't have any inside information about whether the purchase of Dow Jones, the Journal's parent, by News Corp. will go through. Of course. But I do note that the price of Dow Jones stock is still in the mid-50-dollar range, not too far from News Corp.'s offer of $60-a-share. The stock market professionals must believe that some sort of merger is in the offing, or the price would probably not remain that high for this long, especially given the rejection of the offer by Dow Jones' controlling shareholders.

_______________________

Washington: How long have you had that mustache? I don't think I've ever seen you on TV or in a photo without it.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Well. . . since freshman year in college. I tried it earlier, but it didn't quite work. I also shaved it for a short while early in college, but my friends stopped talking to me, so I grew it back.

_______________________

District of Columbia: How did you find Michael Gessel of all people for your "Moonlighting Lobbyist of the Week" section?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Michael responded to the request I made in my column for suggestions about fascinating sidelines by lobbyists and PR specialists. I've gotten several great recommendations and I will be writing about those for a few weeks at least. I could still use more, so please send them along if you have any.

But Michael has an extra story as well. He lived across the hall for me for two years at the University of Pennsylvania. I did not know for sure that he still was active in the Wizard of Oz stuff, and I was only half sure that he lobbied for a living. But when he wrote me an e-mail I knew immediately he would be perfect for the item. It is not disqualifying if you know me AND you have an interesting moonlighting job or hobby. So, please, write early and write often.

_______________________

San Antonio, Tex.: Has the hiring of former Democratic staffers and the like increased dramatically since the last election? Any signs of a Democratic "K Street" project surfacing...?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Yes, there are lots and lots of Democrats being hired as lobbyists since the party took control of Congress. But I do not see any coercion from lawmakers to hire those lobbyists--that's what the K Street Project was in the Republican-controlled era just passed. If you see something different, please let me know right away.

_______________________

Court House, Va.: I was amused by your article yesterday about the left-leaning clubhouse at 1825 K St. If their table-pounding tough talk about "retribution" against their enemies is what really energizes and unites them, it's hard to see how they will be taken seriously over the long term.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: Could be. They were certainly partsan and confident in a way that is thrilling to them but also off-putting to their enemies. It was a stark reminder to me how much Washington works on an us versus them model.

_______________________

Chicago: Where is all the money coming from for the presidential candidates and is it a good thing or a bad thing?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: A lot more of the money given to presidential candidates is coming from average folks, a lot of it over the Internet. Presidential giving used to be concentrated on only really rich people and the people those rich people would solicit. But the Internet has democratized the donation process a lot. Anyone can go onto a candidates' Web site and donate with a credit card and thousands of people have done just that. That means a lot more people are putting their money where their opinions are and that seems like a good thing to me.

_______________________

Potomac, Md.: I thought the gift ban in the House would hurt Washington restaurant industry but I haven't heard or seen anything about that. What's the deal?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: You know, I haven't heard much about that either. I guess that any loss in revenue due to the House's ban on meals from lobbyists for lawmakers and their staffs has been offset by the continuing large business they do catering campaign fundraisers for those same lawmakers. If fundraisers were outlawed that would really put a dent in the DC restaurant business, is my guess. But until that happens, the wine will flow . . .

_______________________

Bethesda, Md: Yesterday the Senate voted to effectively outlaw Americans buying less expensive imported medicines. According to public-domain information from the Center for Responsive Politics (opensecrets.org), the pharmaceutical industry gave $19 million to Federal candidates and political parties during the 2006 election cycle alone. It seems to me that any major newspaper would have a database installed which their reporters could query and with the press of a button link readers to a breakout of how each legislator voted, and for whom he is working. Could you enlighten me as to why this has not happened at the Post? Thanks.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: washingtonpost.com will soon expand the amount of campaign finance data it carries, and its stories (and the Post's) already do often include campaign contributions as part of its coverage. One reason that the donations are not always part of stories about legislation passing or failing is that the link between votes and contributions is not always clear. In fact, it is rarely clear, and sometimes borders on libelous. Just because a lawmaker takes money from drug companies does not mean he or she votes the way the drug companies all the time or on any specific matter. Connections like that are often too glib, though I do agree that the information should be available so people can draw their own conclusions.

washingtonpost.com: A database of campaign finance data can be found here. We also maintain a Congressional Votes database, where you can explore how each legislator voted.

_______________________

Atlanta, Ga.: I thought this web discussion was at 1 o'clock but this write-in part says it's at 2. Are you changing around. I liked it at 2.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I think you means you liked it better at 1 p.m. And yes, I will return to that slot, if not in two weeks, then thereafter. Sorry to switch things around occasionally, but I had to be somewhere else at 1 o'clock this week. Thank you, though, for sticking with me!

_______________________

Bethesda: So what's wrong with a congressional committee meeting in private? The Senate Finance Committee is just doing what committees always do.

Jeffrey Birnbaum: I mentioned in my column today the Finance Committee has been holding a series of private meeting with influential people like Pascal Lamy and the head of major interests like business and labor. I'm not a big fan of entire committees convening in private to meet with individuals. When that happens it should probably be done in public. But that's just me. The panel clearly can do it and I think they will continue to. Certainly no one in the world would turn down its invitation. That's a very powerful committee.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: What's the latest with Albert Lord and Sallie Mae? I saw that you wrote about him and the company a couple times recently. Will that transaction, going private, go through?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: My guess is the purchase of Sallie Mae, the student lending giant, by a private equity partnership will probably go through. The industry has had some tough hits lately especially from the attorney general or New York State. But that is the reason that Sallie Mae wanted to go private--to get out from under the whims of politicians and the like.

_______________________

Washington, D.C.: So what do you think? Will an immigration finally pass this year?

Jeffrey Birnbaum: As I said earlier, I'm not sure the bill will make it this year.

Then again, I am done with this hour of questions.

Thanks for writing in and I will "see" you again in a couple weeks.

Cheers!

_______________________

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. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.