Broadband Lobbying Increased Despite New Rules, Records Show

More than four times as many lobbyist filings said they contacted NTIA on broadband matters in this year’s first quarter than in the fourth quarter, and six times as many as the first quarter of 2008, records show. While the filings don’t say how much money went toward lobbying on specific issues, the increased interest is likely due to the $7.2 billion in broadband stimulus funding that is to be given out by NTIA and RUS.

RUS, part of the Agriculture Department, can’t be specified in lobbyist filings, but there was a significant uptick in filings that said lobbyists contacted the USDA on broadband issues. There are 107 lobbyist filings that said they contacted USDA about broadband in the first quarter, compared to 28 in the year-ago period and 30 in the fourth quarter.

Groups that have hired lobbyists or are using in-house lobbyists to discuss broadband with NTIA or RUS vary from large telecom companies such as Sprint Nextel, to nonprofit organizations like the American Federation of the Blind, to municipalities, such as Minneapolis.

President Barack Obama’s administration has made limiting the influence of lobbyists a major goal in distributing the $787 billion from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. Federally registered lobbyists are prohibited from having contact with administration officials to talk about the funding of specific projects, and any meeting between lobbyists and administration officials requires public disclosure.

The restriction has caused an upheaval among large and small law and lobbyist shops, said Dave Wenhold, president of the American League of Lobbyists. Many are shifting work to lawyers who are not registered, he said. That’s prompting complaints from registered lobbyists that their contacts with the administration are taking place in the dark, the opposite of the stated goal to increase transparency in the government spending, Wenhold said.

“Bundlers who gave a lot of money [to Obama’s campaign] can walk right in the door,” Wenhold said. “None of them are registered lobbyists,” he said. Wenhold has teamed with the ACLU and the Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to press the administration for a policy change they claim will lead to more transparency (CD May 1 p2).

The rules are attracting “lots of critics,” said a registered lobbyist who used to work in government. “It is entirely proper to help your clients position their applications as best you can,” said the lobbyist. “It would be an unusual thing to have a lobbyist or any other person influence or intervene in the competitive process.”

Groups upset with the rules have met with the White House and suggested policy changes they argue would increase transparency. The rules now ban registered lobbyists from contacting the administration in person about proposed projects that would get stimulus money. Large lobby shops and law firms have been coping with those rules by delegating non-registered lobbyists to call or meet with federal agencies on behalf of clients interested in stimulus money, Wenhold said.

That means less transparency for the public because no reports need be filed about such meetings, Wenhold said. And in some cases, clients may not be getting the most experienced counsel, he said. Small lobbying practices are having a particularly hard time because they lack the resources to substitute for themselves with non-registered personnel. If they delist themselves as lobbyists, as some have done, they run the risk of violating the law because lobbyists in small groups tend to spend the bulk of their time lobbying. Federal ethics rules require a person to register if they spend more than 20 percent of their time in official lobbying duties.

Public interest groups are upset about the rules as well, according to the ACLU, which has taken a lead role in proposing alternatives to the administration. The group and others suggested the policy be altered to require disclosure of all oral conversations with administration officials, said ACLU Counsel Michael McCloud-Ball. Initial White House reaction was that the proposed filing requirement could be burdensome on agencies, which are charged with reporting contacts, he said. The groups then suggested those requesting the meeting be responsible for filling out forms.

The Office of Management and Budget set a 60-day window to elicit reaction to the rules. That will end May 19. “We will be making decisions fast and furious” if there is no action, said Wenhold. “A lot of big firms have been calling and asking me ‘how much do you need'” to mount a lawsuit against the administration, Wenhold said. The groups have been patient, hoping to persuade change, but that won’t continue if there is not an adequate response, he said.

“We continue to track the implementation of the President’s unprecedented transparency rules for lobbying contacts under the Recovery Act,” said Norm Eisen, special counsel to the White House on ethics. Eisen said he’s met with a range of groups “from the reform community, including those generally supportive of the policy.” The U.S. Chamber opposes the rules, Eisen said. “We heard their concerns … We continue to believe that the rules are sound.”

Despite the rules, work is still flowing to lobby shops. Industry sources said they expect business to continue to increase after the notices of funding availability are released, expected by June. The NOFAs will define the terms of the broadband programs for lobbyists and applicants. The stimulus funding is expected to be given out via three funding windows, in which case, three separate NOFAs will be issued by each agency, said NTIA spokesman Mark Tolbert.