Cook Knows; Why Don't the Rest of Us?

According to a Sun-Times story over the weekend, lobbyists in Cook County billed their clients $1.3 million in the second half of 2009. That includes only work to lobby officials and agencies of Cook County. For the year, billings were $2.1 million. The top five lobbyists accounted for over half of the total.

Want to do the same sort of analysis of lobbyists at the state level? Ever wonder about people who hang out around the rail and how they rank? Tough. The state doesn't require lobbyists to file reports like that.

The public has a right to know what lobbyists bill their client in Cook County and at the federal level, but the State of Illinois does not give the public access to the same amount of information. It would take legislation to change that.

Lobbyist Registration Suspended

The General Assembly goes into session next week for three days. Anyone attending can expect to find lobbyists hanging out around the rail on the third floor. But will any of those lobbyists be registered with the Secretary of State, as required by law? That remains to be seen.

Lobbyists are required by state law to register within two business days of entering into an agreement to lobby, and before actively engaging in lobbying on behalf of a client. Registration ends with the calendar year, and most lobbyists renew their registration in January. But this year, a lawsuit over the recent increase in registration fees has closed registration for everybody.

SB 54, signed into law last summer, had a lot of provisions. There's a lot of good stuff in that bill, and the SJ-R recently editorialized in favor of some of them, dealing with public access to reports of Inspectors General under the 2003 Ethics Act. Another section made some long-needed clean-ups to the Lobbyist Registration Act. But it also increased the registration fee dramatically. Under previous law, for-profit entities and lobbyists each paid $350 per year to register, while non-profits could register for $150. Under the new law, all registrants, for- and non-profit, would be required to pay $1,000.

The fee increase is especially onerous for non-profits (and let's acknowledge here that ICPR is a non-profit). Many employees of non-profits lobby in the course of their work. If a legislator reaches out to them for advice or guidance on an issue, answering that question is lobbying and triggers registration. Testimony before a legislative committee, under most circumstances, is lobbying and requires registration. Speaking with an agency head about the implementation of a new policy is lobbying. It's difficult to be an effective advocate for a cause or organization without coming into contact with legislators and other government officials, but that contact can quickly trigger the registration requirement and the $1,000 fee. With the fee rising nearly 6-fold, many non-profits were alarmed.

The ACLU of Illinois and the Illinois Society of Association Executives filed separate suits against the increase, the former in federal court and the latter in state court. In the ACLU suit, U.S. District Judge Joan B. Gottschall issued a temporary injunction, forbidding the Secretary of State to collect the increased fee from non-profits, pending the conclusion of the case. Further arguments are expected soon, and the suit could be concluded in a matter of days or weeks. The ISAE suit has a hearing before Illinois 7th Circuit Court Judge Pat Londrigan on Friday.

But while the federal injunction applies only to non-profits, the Secretary of State ended registration for all lobbyists. They could have kept registration open, collecting the $1,000 fee from for-profit entities and no fee from non-profits, or they could have collected the old $150 fee from non-profits and, after the two suits were concluded, adjusted the fee accordingly. Instead, it now appears that Illinois is the only state in the country without lobbyist registration.

Let's hope this gets resolved soon.

Problems with Proposed Lobbying Changes

One of the hit-or-miss bills that passed the General Assembly this year was SB 54, which, among other things, made substantial changes to the Lobbyist Registration Act (LRA). The genesis of the LRA portion of the bill is plainly found in HB 736, which ICPR supported, but SB 54 differs in some key ways.

One difference is the disclosure of lobbyist costs, and several recent news stories make clear how the differences between HB 736, which did not pass the GA, and SB 54, which did, will impact public policy discussion. In one news story, the federal government gave billions to the financial services industry, and the industry responded by spending dramatically more on lobbying. In another news story, Congress took up legislation to regulate student loans, and lo and behold, the industry hired a bunch of lobbyists to fight the proposals. A third national news story compares the progress of the debate over health care reform with spending by health care interests (noting, also, that health care interests combine to spend more on lobbying at the federal level than any other sector).

All of these stories are built around disclosure of lobbyist contracts. At the federal level, lobbyists are required to report how much they bill their clients. Indeed, spending on lobbying is often in the same ballpark as spending on elections. Interest groups that spend millions on campaign contributions to candidates often spend similar amounts to hire lobbyists to influence elected officials. Just as disclosure of campaign finance is in the public interest, so too is it in the public interest to let the public know how much an interest group is spending to influence legislation.

The Illinois General Assembly has yet to go that far in statute. HB 736, the bill that did not pass, would have mandated disclosure of lobbying costs, but SB 54 did not include that provision. This was a missed opportunity to help the public better understand how particular interests are trying to sway the General Assembly.

Another provision in SB 54 that did not come from HB 736 raises the registration fee for lobbyists. And the increase is a whopper. Currently, most lobbyists pay $350 per lobbyist per year to register with the Secretary of State (non-profits, including ICPR, pay $150 per lobbyist per year). SB 54 raises that fee for all lobbyists, including non-profits, to $1,000. For most lobbyists, it's a steep increase; for non-profits, it's a huge added cost.

The increase is particularly steep because of the way that lobbying is defined. Generally, anyone who communicates with officials to influence legislative, executive, or administrative actions is a lobbyist. There are exceptions, of course (it's statute, after all) but broadly, once you are paid or reimbursed $500 for such communication, you become a lobbyist and must register. Which is to say, once you are paid or reimbursed $500, you must pay $1,000 to register. And the entity that paid or reimbursed you the $500 must also pay $1,000 to register. That's $2,000 in registration fees for $500 in reimbursements. Large lobbying firms will likely be able to absorb these costs, but smaller groups, especially non-profits, will have a harder time.

SB 54 increases the registration fee in order to cover additional administrative costs, but some of the cost of registration (the $200 difference between the for-profit and non-profit rate) goes into the General Revenue Fund. It seems that the state is still using lobbyist registration fees to produce income for the General Revenue Fund.

Both of these changes are unfortunate components of the new Lobbyist Registration Act. Gov. Quinn, or the General Assembly, would do well to revisit them.

ICPR Finds Contract Lobbyists Were Paid $6 Million in Government Funds to Influence State Government

But Private Sector Spending on Lobbying Remains a Secret in Illinois

Local governments and public agencies spent more than $6 million to hire professional lobbyists to influence Illinois state government last year, according to a report released Tuesday by the Illinois Campaign for Political Reform (ICPR).

The non-partisan organization calculated the price tag after analyzing FY2008 lobbying contracts awarded by 115 municipalities, transit agencies, public universities and other units of government which were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

"Because Illinois has relatively weak laws to regulate lobbying activity and transparency, it’s impossible to know specifics about lobbyists’ work," said David Morrison, Deputy Director of ICPR and lead researcher and writer of the report. "Nor can the public know the cost of lobbying on behalf of private organizations that are not covered by the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)."

There are more than 1,500 professional lobbyists paid to influence Illinois government. If it were not for FOIA, the public would have no idea how much money is involved. Most neighboring Midwestern states, and most large industrial states, provide the public with far more information about lobbying and lobbyists than does Illinois.

Morrison noted that the public knows even less about the tens of millions of dollars spent on lobbying by private special interest groups, such as corporations and labor unions, because their contracts are not public documents.

“There’s a lot of money flowing to lobbyists, private professionals who are paid to influence state policy,” Morrison said. “In most cases, we don’t know what these lobbyists are doing: who they’re talking to, what agenda items they’re pushing, and what they're trying to block.”

Illinois law requires lobbyists to disclose meals, gifts, and travel paid for by lobbyists. But what special interests pay lobbyists, and which clients are footing the bills for those meals, gifts, and travel, is a mystery.

Even worse, some of the lobbying firms hired by local governments did not comply with state ethics laws related to their work. Illinois law requires professional lobbyists to register with the Secretary of State and disclose their clients before performing work. ICPR found several who did not register themselves or their clients in a timely manner; some did not register themselves or their clients at all.

Morrison said ICPR’s analysis demonstrates the need for greater disclosure and more transparency as it relates to lobbying on the state level. He noted that the federal government, many other states and even Cook County and the City of Chicago have more comprehensive sunshine requirements for their lobbyists.

“Illinoisans are being kept in the dark about lobbying and how it affects their government,” Morrison said. “We need new laws mandating greater transparency so that the public can get a better handle on how their taxpayer dollars are being spent and how special interest groups are influencing their government.”

This is ICPR's second report on lobbying expenditures by units of governments. The report covering FY2007 found $5 million in spending. Among the 96 units of governments in both reports, total spending on lobbying grew 15% since last year.

The report recommends changes to Illinois' Lobbyist Registration Act, including:

• All lobbyists, whether representing a government or private entity, should be required to disclose the terms of lobbying contracts, including financial arrangements.
• Lobbyists hiring other lobbyists as subcontractors should disclose whether the subcontractors are lobbying for all or only some of the primary lobbyist’s clients.
• Units of government should be required to acknowledge that they have hired a lobbyist.
• There should be a "cooling-off period" between the time a government employee or official leaves public service and his or her engagement as a lobbyist targeting former colleagues.
• The Secretary of State should have the clear authority to audit lobbyist disclosure reports and punish violators.

Check out the full report here.

For additional information, please visit www.ilcampaign.org or call 312-335-1767.

Crain's looks at lobbying at the federal level

Today's Crain's Chicago Business has an analysis of federal lobbying expenses by Chicago companies. The top ten combined to spend $44 million to lobby federal officials. Crain's attributes top-spender Boeing's lobbying to problems with a military tanker. But a similar analysis of lobbying at the state level is not possible, because the state of Illinois does not require lobbyists to disclose this information.

This kind of analysis gives insight to which companies are most focused on government activities, and what those companies may want from government. A similar analysis of lobbying at the state level would also help illuminate what role state government plays in the economy and in the aspirations of particular interests.

Lobbying expenses at the federal level are disclosed. Incredibly, lobbying expenses at Cook County are also disclosed, and lobbing expenses at the City of Chicago are disclosed. But the State of Illinois? No dice, no data.

Legislation now pending, HB 8, would address this problem, helping voters, lobbyists, and government officials alike get a better handle on what is at stake in government decisions, and who is investing funds in the outcome of those decisions. Would that the State of Illinois caught up with Cook County on the subject of lobbyist disclosure.