K Street Exploits Stimulus Lobbying Loophole

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


After the Obama administration levied strict new rules on stimulus-related lobbying late last month, K Streeters didn’t just get mad, they got creative. Under the March 20 directive, federal agencies must disclose lobbying contacts on stimulus issues and post them online. And, if lobbyists wish to influence government officials on particular stimulus projects, they have to put these requests in writing—communications that are also to be made public by the relevant government agencies.

Naturally, lobbyists bristled at this attempt to foist transparency on their opaque world. But it didn’t take long for the influence industry to devise a very simple workaround: use non-lobbyists to lobby on the $787 billion stimulus. The Wall Street Journal reports that “the rule has brought in a slew of work for nonregistered lawyers, who can call or meet with officials without submitting requests in writing.” (That is, so long as they don’t spend more than 20 percent of their time peddling influence, in which case they would be legally required to register as a lobbyist.) “Where there’s any issue, it’s just easier to hand it off to somebody who’s not registered,” one lobbyist told the Journal. “Certainly people are helping out who normally wouldn’t be engaged in this.”

The “recovery” Web sites of federal agencies overseeing billions in stimulus funds would appear to bear this out. Of those that do include sections detailing lobbyist contacts and communications, most have few if any entries. The Department of Transportation’s  site, for instance, features a lone piece of correspondence [PDF] from Ferguson Group lobbyist Matt Ward, who’s representing the city of Stamford, Connecticut. The letter requests a meeting to discuss obtaining stimulus funds for a handful of “mega-infrastructure projects.” Likewise, NASA, the Small Business Administration, and the Interior Department are each reporting a single lobbyist contact. The Web sites of the General Services Administration and the Commerce Department disclose two apiece. And the Department of Energy has made public three “communications with interested parties.” According to the Sunlight Foundation, a host of federal agencies controlling stimulus funds—including the departments of Homeland Security, Education, and Housing and Urban Development—have yet to post lobbyist communications.

Surely, with nearly billions in economic recovery funds to be doled out, lobbyists and their clients aren’t simply crossing their fingers and hoping for a piece of the action. They’ve simply found a way to game the system. It’s not as if the Obama administration wasn’t warned that something like this would happen. After the directive was released, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), the ACLU, and American League of Lobbyists sent a letter [PDF] to the White House asking Obama to rescind the rules, which the groups called “an ill-advised restriction on speech and not narrowly tailored to achieve the intended purpose.” The groups warned: “Instead of increasing the transparency and accountability, this action will encourage participation by people who are not required to register and abide by the rules set forth in the stringent regulations that govern lobbyists. To be clear, this action will decrease transparency and accountability. Moreover, it will also discourage accurate reporting under the Lobbying Disclosure Act—especially for those who are on the cusp for meeting the definitional  requirement of a ‘registered lobbyist.’”

In a strange turn of events, it was actually CREW’s cofounder, Norm Eisen, who helped to devise the administration’s tough stimulus lobbying rules. Last Friday, Eisen, now Obama’s special counsel for ethics and government reform, and other White House officials met with the aggrieved groups to hear their complaints. But it appears the administration is so far standing firm on the restrictions, whether or not they are having the desired effect. According to Eisen, “We told them we believed the restrictions were tough but fair to make sure that lobbyist communications are as transparent as possible, and that stimulus decisions are based on the merits.”
 

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate