Skip to main content

Lobbying Subject Disclosure

When a lobbying code requires that lobbyists report "specific
lobbying issues" or "the subjects on which they have lobbied," what exactly is required? The best
approach is to include more specific language in the disclosure
section, such as "information sufficient for an ordinary member of the public to identify the law or
resolution, contract, grant, regulation, real property or project,
rule, proceeding, board or commission determination, or other
matter."<br>
<br>
Another approach is to include this information in comments to the lobbying code, or in a
manual. This is what Congress chose to do in its Lobbying
Disclosure Act (LDA) Guidance publication (attached; see below).
Here is what this publication says on the topic, and the example it
provides:<blockquote>

<br><br>
When reporting specific lobbying issues, some registrants have
listed only House or Senate bill numbers on the issues page without
further indication of their clients’ specific lobbying issues. Such
disclosures are not adequate, for several reasons. First, Section
5(b)(2)(A) of the LDA requires disclosure of “specific issues upon
which a lobbyist employed by the registrant engaged in lobbying
activities, including ... bill numbers[.]” As we read the law, a
bill number is a required disclosure when the lobbying activities
concern a bill, but is not in itself a complete disclosure. Further,
in many cases, a bill number standing alone does not inform the
public of the client’s specific issue. Many bills are lengthy and
complex, or may contain various provisions that are not always
directly related to the main subject or title. If a registrant’s
client is interested in only one or a few specific provisions of a
much larger bill, a lobbying report containing a mere bill number
will not disclose the specific lobbying issue. Even if a bill
concerns only one specific subject, a lobbying report disclosing
only a bill number is still inadequate, because a member of the
public would need access to information outside of the filing to
ascertain that subject. In our view, the LDA contemplates
disclosures that are adequate to inform the public of the lobbying
client’s specific issues from a review of the Form LD-2, without
independent familiarity with bill numbers or the client’s interest
in specific subject matters within larger bills. The disclosures on
Line 16 must include bill numbers, where applicable, but must always
contain information that is adequate, standing alone, to inform the
public of the specific lobbying issues.<br>
<br>
Example: Client “A’s” general lobbying issue area is “Environment.”
During the first quarter of 2008, lobbyists for “A” made contacts
concerning the Department of Defense appropriations for
environmental restoration. For fiscal 2009, the Department of
Defense Appropriations Act was part of the Omnibus Consolidated
Appropriations Act for 2009, H.R. 3610, a lengthy and complex bill
that did not have numbered sections throughout. Title II contained
separate but unnumbered provisions making appropriations for
“Environmental Restoration, Army,” “Environmental Restoration,
Navy,” “Environmental Restoration, Air Force,” “Environmental
Restoration, Defense Wide,” and “Environmental Restoration, Formerly
Used Defense Sites.” Lobbying contacts for Client “A” addressed all
environmental restoration funding within the Defense Department
bill. An appropriate disclosure of the specific lobbying issue would
read as follows: H.R. 3610, Department of Defense Appropriations Act
for 2009, Title II, all provisions relating to environmental
restoration.</blockquote>

But even this is insufficient. For one thing, it is important to say
which side of the issue one's client is on, and how the client might benefit.
In the example, did the client seek to increase environmental
restoration appropriations because it is in the business of
environmental restoration? Or did the client oppose environmental
restoration, because its spending on restoration takes funds away from other areas of the
Defense budget? If so, was the opposition purely policy-oriented
(more Defense spending), or was it because the client is a Defense
contractor (or association or such contractors) trying to preserve Defense contracts?<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/how-to-disclose-your-lobbying-whi…; target="”_blank”">A
<i>National Journal</i> article this week</a> looked at the issue
of subject disclosure by lobbyists. It found that many lobbyists and
their clients are not following the guidance provided in this
publication. For example, Archer Daniels Midland, a large agricultural company, said on its form that it lobbied on trade, with the only detail
being "Matters related to agricultural trade." As for the
environment, the only detail was "Matters relating to climate change
and sustainability." This provides almost no information to the
public. Even Koch Industries, which provided a great amount of
detail, did not disclose which side of each issue it was on.<br>
<br>
Why are so many lobbyists ignoring the Secretary of the Senate and
the Clerk of the House of Representatives, who prepared the guidance
publication? Because these offices "don't have the auditing and investigative
power to police the quality of the disclosure once the filings come
in." For these offices, the big problem is getting lobbyists to disclose anything in a timely
manner. How much detail they provide comes too far down the priority
list to be the topic of enforcement actions.<br>
<br>
This is also true at the local level, where the staff and resources
for disclosure oversight are usually lacking. In fact, since many
lobbying programs are overseen by the clerk's office or by another
office that does not ordinarily engage in oversight, the expertise in and prioritization of oversight is sometimes
lacking, as well. But the more clear the guidance, the easier it is
to find a disclosure inadequate and, through advice and enforcement, get
lobbyists to provide information that is useful to the public.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---

Tags