Disclosing Lobbyists' Language

The principal value of lobbying, according to both lobbyists and
government officials, is the expert information lobbyists provide. The
view is often stated that, with the resources they have, government
officials could not effectively do their job without the expertise
they obtain from lobbyists.<br>
<br>
The public, however, has no idea how this information is used. When
it turns out that a lobbyist effectively wrote a bill, argument,
letter, or speech that an official presents as his own work, no
matter how useful this service may be, it appears that the official
is representing the lobbyist's client rather than the public.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/07/us/politics/energy-firms-in-secretive…; target="”_blank”">An
article in today's New York <i>Times</i></a> quotes former Oregon
attorney general David B. Frohnmayer on the topic, specifically with
respect to a letter written by a energy industry lobbyist for a
state attorney general to send to the federal Environmental
Protection Agency:<blockquote>

“When you use a public office, pretty shamelessly, to vouch for a
private party with substantial financial interest without the
disclosure of the true authorship, that is a dangerous practice. The
puppeteer behind the stage is pulling strings, and [the public]
can’t see. I don’t like that. And when it is exposed, it makes [the
public] feel used.”</blockquote>

This sort of puppeteering is not wrong. What is wrong is doing it
secretly (as well as not allowing opponents to have their say, but that is a different issue). Attribution should be given to the true author (even if
only the author of part of a document), not for copyright reasons
(the true author would usually be happy to waive attribution to keep
her involvement secret), but rather to make the process transparent,
to let the public know who the author is. It is also important that the lobbyist's client(s) also be disclosed.<br>
<br>
Government officials should not be ashamed of disclosing whose work
they used in drafting bills, letters, and the like. If they are
ashamed of disclosing the origin of the language they use, they shouldn't use it.<br>
<br>
What they should be
ashamed of is keeping the use secret. If officials and lobbyists
insist that lobbyists are providing a valuable service to them and
to the public, and that officials lack the resources to do the research themselves or employ experts to provide the information, then the public should know about this service and this unmet need.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---