Making Government Transparent and Accountable
The Sunlight Foundation uses cutting-edge technology and ideas to make government transparent and accountable. Underlying all of our efforts is a fundamental belief that increased transparency will improve the public's confidence in government
The Sunlight Foundation Blog
-
Health Care Industry Operates Shadow Congress of Lobbyists
The Washington Post reports today that the health care industry, in its attempt to influence the debate over health care reform, has hired at least 350 former government staffers and former members of Congress to lobby on the issue. With the many connections these former government workers have, particularly former members of Congress or congressional chiefs of staff, they will have near saturation coverage of the 535 current members of Congress. They also are operating with seemingly bottomless funding. The industry is currently spending $1.4 million a week on lobbying. Perhaps, the most unparrelled lobbying campaign ever.
Now the Post story has a few caveats that indicate that this lobbying campaign is probably larger than their reporting shows. For one:
The analysis identified more than 350 former government aides, each representing an average of four firms or trade groups. That tally does not include lobbyists who did not report their earlier government experience, such as PhRMA President W.J. “Billy” Tauzin, a former Republican congressman from Louisiana. Federal law does not require providing such detail.
Lobbying disclosure reports contain a field for listing prior government work, but this field is often left empty by lobbyists with government experience. If someone like Billy Tauzin, who is the poster boy for everything wrong with the revolving door, does not list his previous work as a leading lawmaker, what hope do we have for the many lesser former government workers to list their previous government work. I’d assume that the number of former government employees working in this campaign far exceeds 350.
One other aspect of the story highlights something which we’ve discussed here, lobbying contacts. The real problem with the revolving door is the unusual amount of access that former government officials, particularly members of Congress, have to current government officials. And that includes the ability to meet, call, or email with staffers or lawmakers to push their client’s agenda. Of course, Congress does not require any disclosure of lobbying contacts, thus obscuring the role that these 350+ lobbyists are having in the process of crafting a health care reform bill that will affect everyone in the country.
If you want to see other reporting on the network of former government staffers turned health care lobbyists, we’ve been looking at the Senate Finance Committee — “the central broker in the [health care] debate,” according to the Post — and the connections each lawmaker has with health care lobbyists. You can see our visualization of Senate Finance Committee Chair Max Baucus’ connections or our visualization of all Senate Finance Committee Democrats and their connections. I’ll be posting about the Senate Finance Committee Republicans this week.
-
The Lobbying Power of the Groups at the Presidential Health Care Pow-Wow
Today, President Obama held a public event with a number of leading health industry trade associations that have previously been reticent towards efforts to reform health care. The organizations included the Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers Association (PhRMA), America’s Health Insurance Plans (AHIP), the American Medical Association (AMA), the Advanced Medical Technology Association (AdvaMed) and the American Hospital Association (AHA). The public event included a promise by these industry groups, among others, to reduce health care costs by $2 trillion. It also served as a symbolic event, potentially showing the shrinking rift in between the two sides in the health reform debate. President Obama wants these organizations to temper their fire when the health reform debate begins in full, as they wield a mighty hand in the Washington lobbying game.1st Quarter Lobbying PhRMA $6,910,000 American Medical Assn $4,355,000 American Hospital Assn $4,237,176 America’s Health Insurance Plans $2,030,000 Advanced Medical Technology Assn $364,638 In their first quarter reporting for 2009, these five trade associations have reported nearly $18 million in lobbying expenditures. Their expertise in reaching out to Congress is also nearly unparalleled. The five trade groups employ in their inside lobby shops at least 20 former government employees, many of whom are former congressional staffers. The head of PhRMA’s lobby shop is former congressman Billy Tauzin, notorious for negotiating his current job as he was writing Medicare prescription drug benefit while in Congress. (This does not take into account the outside lobbying firms hired by these groups.)
The health care sector, on the whole, is leading the pack in lobbying expenditures this year. After three months of 2009, the sector has reported $127 million in lobbying expenditures. That is on pace to break the record $487 million spent by the sector on lobbying in 2008 and the congressional debate has yet to be fully engaged. The sector is the only other private sector that competes with the financial sector in lobbying spending. From 1997-2008, the health care sector has spent $3.4 billion on lobbying officials in Washington — only slightly less than the financial sector ($3.6 billion).
(Continue reading…)
-
Countering the Reward Method of Corruption
David Sirota posted on OpenLeft yesterday on what he called “the reward method of corruption.” Sirota writes, “As opposed to the Payoff Method whereby a campaign contribution is made and then a favor is legislated, the Reward Method gives a politician a goodie after a favor is done, sorta like a dog being given a treat for rolling over.” This is one of two major issues raised by the revolving door between government and lobbying. (The other issue being the use of access built up over the years.)
While I don’t think there is a direct answer, which Sirota was seeking, to how to stop the flow of lawmakers and staffers from government to the lobbying profession–short of greatly increasing their pay–there are some things to mitigate the effects.
First, let’s look at the problem. This goes from the somewhat benign, lawmaker goes to work for a nonprofit cause not connected to private enterprise, to the wholly corrupt, the various staffers who did deals for Jack Abramoff and then were hired by his lobbying firm. But for the most part, these things fall in between, a staffer or lawmaker has a particular expertise and flips to make more money doing, essentially, the same thing they were doing in Congress.
Now perhaps the biggest fear is that, in preparation for a future career on K Street, a staffer or lawmaker will do favors, directly or indirectly, having been asked or on their own volition, to protect future hiring opportunities. The biggest example of this is Billy Tauzin, who was in talks to head the pharmaceutical industry’s top lobbying shop, PhRMA, while he was writing the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act, the largest health care overhaul since the 1960s. Tauzin’s tale included many instances of opaque situations: closed conference committees with lobbyists at the table, secret discussions for future employment, unreported meetings with lobbyists. The revelation of all of these things would have aided in providing the public with a view into Tauzin’s world preemptively.
What I’m saying is that the preemptive, or real time, disclosure of a variety of items would allow the public to prevent a lawmaker from doing favors for a potential future employer. The following would be most useful:
- Real time lobbying disclosure with increased reporting requirements — We’ve covered this here, here and here recently. Require lobbyists to disclosure all meetings with covered officials within 24 hours. Require lobbyists to report with whom they meet and the office of the lawmaker when they are meeting with staffers. Also require specific information on positions taken on bills, appropriations, or other topics of discussion.
- Open all conference committees and require time to read conference reports — Require all conference committees to be open to the public (didn’t the Democrats promise this back in 2006?) and require all conference reports to be available for 72 hours prior to consideration. (Of course, beyond this, all committees should be open and all bills should be available for 72 hours prior to consideration.)
- Increase reporting requirement for job negotiations — Currently, members of the House and some staffers must report job negotiations to the Clerk of the House, but the information is not publicly available.
As I said earlier, I don’t think there is a direct way to limit government officials from leaving for a more lucrative profession outside of increasing their pay. There could be a longer “cooling off” period in the House, where it is only one year, and perhaps an extension to staff making less money than currently meets the threshold for the post-employment lobbying restriction. But that hasn’t stopped lawmakers from taking positions as “consultants” and later becoming lobbyists (see: Hastert, Dennis or Daschle, Tom).
Greater transparency and disclosure would, however, be the best solution at present to provide less incentive for lawmakers and staff to act favorably for future employment. With more eyes on their actions there will be fewer Billy Tauzin’s, Kevin Ring’s, Michael Scanlon’s, and Tony Rudy’s.
