Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, May 16, 1993                   TAG: 9305170255
SECTION: EDITORIAL                    PAGE: F-2   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium

EACH YEAR, MORE LOBBYISTS

Au contraire. He got Richmond's finest cuisine and a swelling midriff - compliments of Virginia lobbyists.

Talk about swelling. Lobbyists now outnumber Virginia's 140 delegates and senators by almost 8-1. There were 1,106 "friendly persuaders" registered by 661 organizations at the '93 session.

And they set a new spending record for a "short" session: $4.6 million - or about $33,000 for each lawmaker. That's almost double legislators' annual $18,000 salary.

The $4.6 million figure also undertells the story. It does not, for example, reflect thousands of dollars spent on advertising this year by those on both sides of Gov. Wilder's controversial one-handgun-a-month purchase limit.

While the state's lobbying law requires lobbyists to report expenses for "communications," and the definition specifically mentions "advertising," an interpretation by the secretary of the commonwealth's office (which keeps tabs on the lobbyists) is that it does not require reporting of advertising expenditures.

But it definitely should. In the case of the gun-control bill, for instance, the sole purpose of ad campaigns was to stir up a frenzy of public sentiment that would sway legislators' votes. It worked, in this case, to get the bill passed. But lobbying via newspapers, radio or television is no less lobbying - and the public should be told how much special-interest groups spend on media blitzes to determine the course of legislation.

The $4.6 million also represents expenditures from Nov. 15, 1992, to the legislative session's end on Feb. 27. That gives the public little clue as to the extent of legislative arm-twisting and suasion.

To its credit, the '93 assembly passed a law that will require year-round reporting of expenses by lobbyists, beginning this month. That will be helpful. The public needs to know who's plying whom at those oh-so-pleasant golf outings and socials at The Homestead, so it can judge for itself whether subsequent legislative votes are cast in the public interest or for special interests.

To hear lawmakers tell it, of course, they are never, never affected by lobbyists' contributions to their campaigns or by their wining and dining. The feeding and entertainment of lawmakers - sometimes at lavish parties - accounted for thousands of dollars in lobbyists' reported expenditures this year.

But lobbying organizations that sink money into General Assembly feasts and soirees don't do it for the pleasure of legislators' company. They do it to influence votes. If they could see that it had no effect, why would they keep doing it? Not simply, we have a hunch, because a swell time is had by all.

Oh, well. Lobbying is a fast-growth industry in Virginia. In 1983, for instance, lobbyists spent just $1.5 million to influence legislators, compared to the $4.6 million reported this year. It provides jobs and revenue - to Richmond caterers and restaurants, for example - that keep a lot of folks off the streets. That, presumably, is good for the economy.

Whether it also makes for good government is another question entirely.