Fitzsimon File

This was supposed to be the day that the House gave final approval to a lobbying reform bill that would ban gifts from lobbyists and limit how much lobbyists could contribute to legislators’ campaigns. Monday was supposed to be the day too.

Monday, the House adjourned without taking up the bill. Tuesday afternoon, the bill was “temporarily displaced” and the House adjourned for the day without un-displacing it.

Reportedly, the House leadership has decided to delay consideration on the bill until the Senate completes its work on lobbying reform legislation, work that hasn’t begun yet, at least in public. 

Senate leaders have been working privately on a lobbying reform bill that will not include a ban on fundraising by lobbyists, a key part of the reform agenda passed by the House Select Committee and a provision supported by House Speaker Jim Black.

The House is waiting for the Senate not just to be polite. The House bill that was skipped on the calendar Monday and Tuesday does not include the lobbyist fundraising ban either.

It was taken out in committee. But at least one House member had planned to offer an amendment to put the fundraising ban back in the bill, forcing members of the House to take a recorded vote on the ban, a prospect that many House members are not very excited about. 

There is growing sentiment behind the scenes against the ban, a feeling that lobbyists should be allowed to raise unlimited money for the lawmakers whose vote they often need. Publicly, some lawmakers say that the fundraising ban may be unconstitutional or that it might affect hundreds of people now considered lobbyists under the new bill.

But ultimately, the ban is being opposed by legislators who want to continue to rely on lobbyists for campaign cash and by some lobbyists themselves, who don’t want to forfeit the access and special consideration that their fundraising prowess provides them.

Ironically, the same week that the House and Senate are playing their legislative games with the fundraising ban, evidence of the influence of lobbyists and special interests is more obvious that usual in a flurry of troublesome bills.

A House Committee approved a bill Tuesday that would give Duke Energy a way to skirt air pollution restrictions as it builds a new power plant. The provision was added to a Senate bill that has already passed, meaning there is little chance for meaningful debate.

A bill providing for the sale of low-emission cars was removed from the House Environment Committee after pressure from the auto industry that’s opposed to the legislation.

The Senate passed a bill over the objections of State Insurance Commissioner Jim Long that would exempt UNC campuses from safety reviews of construction projects.

With virtually no debate, the Senate Finance Committee approved sweeping legislation that would dramatically expand state business incentives that could end up costing taxpayers $180 million over the next 12 years. The bill also gives new sales tax exemptions to investment firms and IT facilities.

The Senate Finance Committee met hurriedly around a Senator’s desk to increase the tax breaks given to the film industry.

It goes on and on. Now that the budget is done and time is short this session, the special interests are coming out of the woodwork and getting tax breaks, exemptions, and special treatment at a dizzying pace.

They all have at least one thing in common, influential and wealthy lobbyists who make contributions and raise money for campaigns.  Hard to think of more compelling evidence for meaningful lobbying and ethics reform.

As long as it’s legal for a lobbyist to raise thousands of dollars in his living room for key legislators, the mischief will continue.

 Email This Post  Print This Post

This entry was posted on Tuesday, July 11th, 2006 at 4:58 pm and is filed under Fitzsimon File. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.