Local Government Lobbyists, Prohibitions on Use of Funds, and Campaign Contributions

Recently, the hiring of lobbyists to represent cities before state
and federal governments and agencies has become controversial. Some
people think this is an inappropriate use of taxpayer funds. I don't
agree. However, the hiring of external lobbyists (as opposed to
government officials who do the lobbying themselves) does raise some
government ethics issues, because it adds to the mix highly
politicized contractors.<br>
<br>
This problem is exacerbated when there are laws limiting
or prohibiting the hiring of lobbyists. For example, the Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has a rule prohibiting the
use of HUD funds for lobbying.<br>
<br>
According to <a href="http://www.wgrz.com/story/news/investigations/2014/02/26/mayor-brown-co…; target="”_blank”">an
article put up on the WGRZ-TV website yesterday evening</a>, when
Buffalo's current mayor was first elected in 2005, he didn't know
about the HUD rule and thought nothing about continuing the
contracts of three lobbying firms, paid for partially out of HUD funds. He
also appears to have thought nothing about accepting campaign
contributions from two of these firms, and even told a reporter he
wasn't aware of any such contributions.<br>
<br>

The city did end the contracts with the lobbying firms in 2011, but
the record shows years of both illegal payments to lobbyists and
campaign contributions from those lobbyists. And whether or not the
mayor or his aides who deal with housing matters knew about the HUD
rule, the lobbyists almost certainly did.<br>
<br>
This raises two questions. One, do lobbyists have an obligation to
tell their employer about a law that says they can't be paid with
HUD money, when they are working on HUD-related issues? I think they
do. To make this
obligation clear, it might be a good idea to place in every contract with a lobbyist
a provision requiring them to disclose any law that might limit or
prohibit their hiring or payment with particular funds.<br>
<br>
The second question is, since local governments are increasingly
hiring lobbyists to represent them, shouldn't all lobbyists be treated
as potential contractors? As potential contractors, it is best not
to accept their campaign contributions, because it will look as if
they are seeking to influence or reward elected officials, or engaging in pay to play.<br>
<br>
In short, this is another reason not to accept contributions from
lobbyists. The downside for everyone is simply too big. An official who accepts contributions from lobbyists deserves
scandals such as this one. You can say you didn't know until you run
out of breath, but no one will believe you. It's best to have a
policy and stick to it, so you can't make mistakes.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---