THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, July 9, 1996 TAG: 9607090012
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A14 EDITION: FINAL
TYPE: Editorial
LENGTH: 68 lines
Yet another glimpse at the influence of money on politics came our way last week courtesy of the secretary of the commonwealth.
Once again, it wasn't a pretty sight.
Special interests spent more than $7.3 million lobbying members of the Virginia General Assembly in the year that ended April 30 - a bit less than in the previous 12 months. But the figure is certain to rise since anyone missing the July 1 reporting deadline has a 10-day grace period before fines kick in. That $7.3 million comes to more than $50,000 per member in a parttime legislature whose 1996 session lasted 62 days.
Stunning as the tally is, the biggest surprise in each year's accounting is learning who spent how much money and on what pieces of legislation. The reporting has a way of bringing into focus day-to-day actions in the legislature. What we wind up with, four months after the fact, is a far clearer picture of why what happened in the winter session happened.
For instance, we learned last week that the Virginia Baseball Stadium Authority spent $257,000 lobbying the General Assembly through its agent, the Richmond law firm of McGuire, Woods, Battle & Boothe. What the authority gained, in part, was removal of a prohibition against state spending in the authority's behalf. No public monies have changed hands yet, but the door has been opened.
Or we find that Trigon Blue Cross Blue Shield paid almost $135,000 to a contingent of 16 lobbyists, largely in support of its effort to become a for-profit company. The Assembly stamped its approval on that plan, thereby reducing the scrutiny that the company faces at the State Corporation Commission.
Virginia Power, Virginia's largest utility company, unleashed 17 lobbyists on the Assembly. Among them was a former legislative heavyweight, retired Del. Alson Smith of Winchester. Spending totaling $167,000 reaped positive results. A packet of bills that cleared the way for looser regulation passed easily.
On the other hand, the annual lobbying reports also give a clear picture of the impotence of citizens' lobbying groups. The Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, which opposed both the Trigon and Virginia Power legislation, spent less than $2,000 on the session.
Virginia's lobbying-disclosure laws have improved dramatically in recent years. Not long ago, lobbyists had to report only what they spent while the Assembly was in session. That made disclosure a sham. The new forms supply substantial detail about the scope of lobbying activities. And $50-a-day reporting-violation fines add teeth to the requirements.
Still, a few adjustments are in order.
As reported by staff writer David Poole, thousands of dollars are spent each year by lobbyists on private dinners with lawmakers. Individuals, who seldom have such access, should know who's picking up the tab for their delegate or senator and why. Adding the names of dinner guests shouldn't be a burden.
Second, fines should be added for those who fail to register at the time their lobbying begins. Laxity at that end of the reporting process is as serious as failure to give timely reports after the fact.
And third, the Assembly should consider adding a midsession accounting. Information about how much lobbyists are spending would be far more valuable to the public while the debate is under way, rather than after it's ended.
While this might be a hardship for small-time lobbyists, the major law firms and lobbying enterprises already keep detailed records of their day-to-day activities. Summarizing them in a report would not be a hardship.
Lobbying is an inescapable fact of political life in the 1990s. The best lobbyists provide accurate and timely information. But when money weights the process in one direction or another, the public needs to know about it. And the time for awareness is when it might make a difference, not after the conversation is already complete. by CNB