The Southern Male Democrat

Long time readers of The Southern Male Democrat will remember that last winter, I decided to “come out of the closet” and tell the world that yes, I am a lobbyist. Having wrapped up another legislative session in the NC General Assembly, and having filed my quarterly lobbying reports with the state, I’ve got some further thoughts on lobbying and ethics in general.

Can we all agree that most ethics and lobbying laws are just window dressing to make the public feel like something is being done? For example, as a lobbyist, I file these quarterly reports outlining how much I spend on my lobbying activities. Well guess what? Each quarter, my report lists the exact same amount - $0.00 . I don’t spend any money lobbying. The only thing I spend is time at the legislature trying to meet with Members and my colleagues.

But even if I were producing all manner of expenditures to be included on my report such as briefing documents, logistical suuport for rallies, etc. - does the public really care? What good does it do John Q. Public to know that I spent X, Y, Z on printing and stamps? The last time I checked, lobbyists were not elected by the public so why isn’t the onus on the elected official?

This is where my Libertarian streak rears its ugly head. I am completely against gift bans, campaign contributions and all other means of making the public feel like somehow the playing field is level. But here’s the catch - while I would do away with all of those bans and limits - I would make elected officials report EVERYTHING.

They are the ones being judged and serving the public, not me. Let’s do away with all this window dressing, but put in place that all contributions, gifts, meals have to be reported. That way, Senator Smithers (whenever you need a fake name, ALWAYS go for the Simpsons reference! ) is free to take $100,000 and free barrels for life from Duff Beer. But - it is now public record and the public is free to judge him for receiving all that Duff Beer, and his opponents are certainly free to exploit the information. When it comes to political advocacy and ideas, I am definitely a free market guy.

The elephant in the room that no one talks about is the fact that campaign money still rules the day. Those who give the most, get the most access to elected officials. I’m fine with that and am not bemoaning the fact one bit. But to then take all these actions on bans and limits, when you’re not getting at the root of the “problem” is hypocritical.

What no one like to talk about is that for all the limits on contributions that are in place, both parties use the term “soft money” to get around it. You say that you can only give $4000 as a couple to NC Senator Smithers? That’s absolutely no problem. All you have to do is write a check for $50,000 (or whatever) to either the Democratic or Republican Caucus Campaign, who will then re-distribute the money to Senator Smithers and other Members who “need help.”

The whole system is hypocritical because we”re only addressing the symptoms rather than the disease. The disease is money and how much of it is needed to even run for dog catcher. For better or for worse, campaigns are won through mass communication. This doesn’t have to be millions of dollars spent on TV for a statewide race, it can also be $50,000 spent on a couple of mailings to targeted voters in a state house district. But either way, large sums of money are needed and typically, that comes from the political action committees of special interests. (Note - I am NOT bemoaning special interests either. As I said in the original column, EVERYONE is part of some special interest of another and has lobbyists working for them.)

If you want to truly take the money out of politics, you’re going to have to come up with some system of public financing AND free airtime over the tv and radio waves that the public owns. Granted, that won’t be easy. I don’t mind admitting that I’ve got no clue how to start. After all, we can’t publically fund EVERY candidate for EVERY office, lines have to be drawn somewhere.

But until we can be frank about what the real problems are, we’ll just keep coming up with more window dressing, and I’ll have to keep on filing quarterly reports that say $0.00 .