Post

“Lobbyist” is not a four-letter word

It’s pretty much a sure thing I will NOT be working in the Obama Administration. It has nothing to do with political philosophy or how many bumper stickers and yard signs I may have distributed, but purely and simply because I’m a federally registered lobbyist.

President-elect Obama is certainly not the first, nor will he be the last, candidate to run against “entrenched special interests” in Washington, DC. Heck, at any given moment in any town in the U.S. during the election season, somebody was railing against “special interests” and “lobbyists.” I’m guessing most of the president’s elected to office since FDR have at one time or another attacked “special interests” in DC.

However, such campaigns make lobbyists the enemy of free and open debate, portraying us as a weakness in the system rather than a strength. This ignores the reality of lobbying in DC. I can honestly say 99.99% of the registered lobbyists in DC are good, honorable, hard-working people. Yes, there are the Jack Abramoff’s of the profession, just as there are bad politicians. However, no one I know walks around town with huge bags of money, threatening members of Congress and demanding that our will be done. The stereotype of the “lobbyist” from the days before strong ethics laws and registration/reporting requirements doesn’t hold.

We are the eyes, ears and voices of American businesses, unions, environmental and consumer groups and other so-called “special interests” who are directly affected by what Washington decides to do and how it decides to do it.

There is no profession or endeavor in the U.S. that is not a special interest. Teachers, nurses, autoworkers, machinists, doctors, pipefitters, lawyers, farm wives, Indian chiefs — all have their issues and deserve a voice in how law and regulations are made. That’s what lobbyists do — they deliver to decision-makers the positions of their constituents — along with the evidence to back up those positions — be they trade association, union or individual company.

Those of us who’ve been at this profession for a number of years have also developed a level of expertise in our chosen specialties that most politicians will tell you privately is invaluable to informing their decision-making. No member of Congress or staffer can be an expert in all areas with which they must deal, nor do they always know to whom they can go to get information.

I was frustrated this week to hear Obama’s transition co-chair shrug off the effect strict rules on lobbying placed on transition team participants may have on the fledgling Obama Administration. When asked about the loss of valuable expertise by arbitrarily limiting “lobbyist” participation — or restricting a lobbyist’s ability to return to the profession post-transition — the transition head’s response was “So be it.”

I find it curious politicians will stand among the members of their various constituent advisory teams, groups in which you’ll routinely find company CEOs or heads of constituent organizations. I’m curious why politicians are comfortable in the company of these “advisors”, but not in the company of the men and women in DC who lobby for those same companies and organizations?

This is not a tirade against the incoming Administration, but rather my venting over the portrayal my profession has received for years. I don’t want to see the new Obama team misstep because of a campaign promise too rigidly delivered upon.

But I should be used to it, I guess, because before I was a lobbyist, I was a newspaper reporter. Media and “special interest” — now there’s a resume of which any Mom would be proud.