 |
| Volume 7, Issue 3, March 2008 |
| Legislators have another chance to stand and deliver |
| Copyright © Capital City Free Press - Use of Capcityfreepress.com and its related sites signifies your agreement to the terms of service. The article "Legislators have another chance to stand and deliver" is copyrighted by the Alabama Policy Institute and is published here with permission. |
| (Your response goes here.) Write a letter to the editor: Holler@capcityfreepress.com Just include your full name, and city/county, state and/or country from which you are writing. (Your email address will NOT be posted with your letter.) |
| Gary Palmer Alabama Policy Institute Special to the Free Press In 2006, according to a report by the Center for Public Integrity, there were some 40,000 individual lobbyists targeting state legislators across the nation. On any given day during the Alabama legislative session, it seems like 39,000 of those are packing the halls of the Alabama Legislature. Actually, as of 2006, there were 693 registered lobbyists, or about five per legislator, who can attempt to influence state laws. The Center for Public Integrity also disclosed that lobbyists reported spending over $1.3 billion on their lobbying activities. But the reported amount is lower than what was actually spent because only 13 states require full disclosure of all lobbyists’ expenditures while five other states prohibit any expenditure on legislators. In total, the reported spending by lobbyists came to an average of $200,000 per legislator. Alabama was one of six states that did not provide information for the report. The state of Alabama is one of the most lax when it comes to limiting lobbyists’ spending and gift-giving to state legislators. Only three states, including Alabama, allow lobbyists to spend up to $250 per day without reporting it. As has been pointed out before, if a lobbyist gave $250 to a legislator every day, it would amount to over $91,000 per year. And if they did it for every legislator, every day for the whole year, the total unreported lobbyists’ spending and gift-giving would be almost $12.8 million per year in unreported influence-buying. No one is suggesting that lobbyists are spending $12.8 million in unreported influence-buying or that any legislators are maxing out on unreported cash and gifts. But if they wanted to, it would be hard to prove because Alabama law does not require anything under $250 per day to be reported. And, even if it were proven, it would still be legal. For the record, when it comes to disclosure of lobbyists’ expenditures, the Center for Public Integrity gave Alabama a grade of ‘F.’ What this grade means is that when it comes to protecting our citizens from excessive influence by special interest groups, Alabama is one of the worst offenders in the nation. And the problem isn’t limited to what lobbyists spend on gifts and favors for legislators; it also involves millions of dollars in campaign contributions that lobbyists run through the hundreds of political action committees (PACs) which they have created to hide their influence-buying. In short, Alabama citizens are victims of a massive shell game. The PAC-to-PAC transfers and the excessively high amount of money lobbyists can spend on legislators on a daily basis without reporting it are just two examples of the lack of transparency and accountability in Alabama politics and government. During the 2006 election, Alabama voters were led to believe that something would be done about the lack of transparency and accountability in Alabama politics. These hopes were fueled by Democrat and Republican candidates for the state legislature and by Governor Bob Riley because of specific campaign promises that were written and published. Governor Riley outlined his agenda in “Plan 2010.” The Democrat candidates campaigned on the promises outlined in their “Covenant for the Future” and Republican legislative candidates ran on a platform they called “A Handshake with Alabama.” All three plans promised to establish transparent and accountable government by passing legislation requiring registered lobbyists to report all expenditures on appointed or elected officials, a ban on all PAC-to-PAC transfers and the elimination of “pork barrel” spending – another form of influence-peddling that is hidden from the public. These were not the only promises that the Democrat and Republican politicians made. There were 23 specific legislative proposals in the Democrat’s “Covenant for the Future” that they promised to pass if elected. Of those 23, only 11 have been introduced. The Republicans’ “Handshake with Alabama” included 38 specific proposals and thus far, only eight bills have been introduced. Moreover, in both platforms, there were ten legislative promises which were virtually identical, including the promised legislation to require full disclosure of lobbyists’ expenditures, a ban on all PAC-to-PAC transfers, and a ban on pass-through pork. However, of those ten promised bills, only six have been introduced of which one passed – the alternative energy with tax incentives for Alabama farmers bill. A full list of these promises and their status is available to the public at www.alabamapolicy.org/standanddeliver. Thus far in the 2008 legislative session, the House of Representatives has passed a bill banning most, but not all, PAC-to-PAC transfers. This bill falls far short of keeping the promises of both parties to ban all PAC-to-PAC transfers. It creates a loophole by allowing candidates to pass money through each others’ campaign coffers which is just another way to hide the money. Given all the revelations of corruption and conflicts-of-interest involving state legislators and other public officials, you would think that our state legislators would be eager to improve Alabamians’ perception of them. But thus far, the Democrats have failed to live up to their covenant and all the Republicans can show for their handshake is a fist to the head of Sen. Lowell Barron (D-Fyffe) on the last day of the contentious 2007 legislative session. Let’s hope that the 2008 legislative session will be the one where promises made are promises kept. About the author: Gary Palmer is president of the Alabama Policy Institute, a non-partisan, non-profit research and education organization dedicated to the preservation of free markets, limited government and strong families. |
|
|
|
|