Lobbyists need to break our code of silence

At a recent press conference on the debt ceiling crisis, President Obama kicked off the latest round of lobbyist-bashing when he said: "I hope [Republicans are] not just listening to lobbyists and special interests ... I hope they're listening to the American people as well." We, as lobbyists, have been blamed for everything from doing something that one interest group doesn’t like to preventing something from happening that is favored by another. In talking with dozens of registered lobbyists over the past six months, all are agreed that we are tired of being the scapegoats. It is high time we break our code of silence and show our true determination to solve the critical problems that are tying the federal government in knots.

For as long as I can recall, it has been popular to rail against lobbyists and the “special interests” we represent. With immense dexterity, elected officials complain about our power while almost simultaneously asking us for contributions to their re-election campaigns. President Obama has been the loudest and most visible critic of our profession. He has accused us of having the influence to make elected officials vote for bad policies, banned us from working at the White House, and rejected our expertise on federal advisory committees.

Nevertheless, the President’s staff uses a nearby coffee shop to meet with lobbyists, and he will gladly take your money as long as you call yourself a lawyer, consultant, or anything but a lobbyist. The Abramoff scandal has long since passed, but the constant bashing of lobbyists has not abated. Lobbyists are simply the convenient door mat of a dysfunctional government. For years, we have acted as though there was no choice but to silently take the abuse to ourselves and our profession. There is a choice, however. I am calling on all lobbyists to break the silence and show our determination to be part of the solution to the most virulent problems facing our government.

Who better to take the lead than lobbyists? We know the system, inside and out. We know what works well and what doesn’t. We are an integral and valuable component of our system of government that both helps people to have their voice heard in Washington and provides our expertise on issues to Members of Congress and their staffs.  

Over the four decades I have been in this town, I have seen the sun shine where once there was only secrecy. Today anyone can turn to a database on the Internet that tells who is lobbying, what they are lobbying for, and how much they are getting paid to lobby. That change came about because the American League of Lobbyists (ALL) led the effort to replace a previously ineffective registration law with one that has teeth and is transparent.  

There is a great risk in writing this and thereby breaking the lobbyists’ code of silence. Our greatest fear is that Members of Congress might deny us access. However, this is not Lobbyists versus Members of Congress. We may be on a low rung of the ladder of public esteem, but the polling numbers of Congress are not much higher. We are both feeling the pain, but lobbyists run less risk than Members of Congress if we lead the charge for change.

The incessant bashing of lobbyists has served, intentionally or not, as a smokescreen for two serious problems. First, the Federal lobbying registration law needs to be updated. Among its deficiencies is a provision that only requires registration as a lobbyist if an individual spends at least 20 percent of his or her time on covered lobbying activities. For example, think of all those former Members of Congress who are hired to provide “counsel” and not to lobby. Anyone who is paid to advocate before Congress or the Executive Branch should have to register as a lobbyist. Most states and foreign countries that have lobbying laws take this common sense approach. You are paid to lobby, ergo you are a lobbyist and should be registered as such.  

The second issue we face is more of a disease than a problem. The legislative process has become saturated with round-the-clock campaign fundraising, blurring the line between policymaking and politics. When words such as “high-powered” or “influential” are used to describe a lobbyist, it has nothing to do with their persuasiveness of facts.

Money is at the heart of the public's concerns about both lobbyists and Members of Congress.

Acting on the heels of the Abramoff scandal, Congress instituted a gift ban. The underlying issue was this: Can lobbyists buy access, an appropriation, or a vote for the cost of a meal? The perverse result has been to move the venue for contacts with elected officials and their aides from the restaurant to the political fundraiser. Instead of paying $50 at Bullfeathers or the Monocle, we now pay $1,000 or more at the Democratic or Republican clubs. Hand over your check at the door and you get a chance to chat about your issue with both the Member and his senior legislative staff. Is it any wonder that the public is concerned about a process that draws so little distinction between making policy and paying for campaigns?

Either lobbyists act now or we risk serious wounds to our profession that will take many years to heal. Because of the stigma of being called a lobbyist, young people shy away from the profession, and others are using gaping loopholes in the law to avoid registering. This unwillingness to register is not a reluctance to disclose what one does. Rather it is a primal fear of being labeled as a lobbyist. 

Either we act now or we risk another big scandal that will trigger a new round of “reforms” and public vilification. You are dead wrong if you think it can’t get any worse for our profession.

Howard Marlowe is President of the American League of Lobbyists and has been a public servant or owner of his firm, Marlowe & Company, for the past four decades. He can be reached at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it .

---