RE: Lobbying

[Ken Diamond <kenken5001@yahoo.com>]

Taylor noted, "it is difficult to determine or monitor motivations." It is also scary that we should even attempt it. She also wrote, " "good" lobbying is that which represents the public's best interest." That begs the question. It's not difficult for people to convince themselves that their interest is also in the public interest. And there are often competing public interests that need to be weighed and balanced. 

Hanson Kappelman and Ellen Russak make a distinction between paid lobbyists and citizen lobbying. While those who argue for lobbyist's role as "information providers" ignore what others accurately note; that information is designed to persuade not inform. Yes lobbyists will often know way more than the legislator about a particular issue. But just as lawyers need to know all sides of a case, their aim is one of advocacy. If there is a desire to seek some notion of the "truth", however elusive, advocates and advocacy groups are rarely part of that. A search for the truth must override the interests of any group.

But if the intentions of paid lobbyists are clear, that does not mean that those of citizens are necessarily pure. The question again is; whose voice should be heard and why? It is inevitable that people will try to promote their interests. How should the process test the legitimacy of their representations? 

For one thing, it is impossible to rebut what you don't have knowledge about. If disclosure about contributions is a necessary component to transparency, why is it that the arguments being made to decision makers shouldn't be subject to the same disclosure? I think that the judicial proceedings model has much to offer. I like the idea of a public record of arguments and rebuttals along with written decisions by legislators. This provides a basis of understanding and a place of tangible reference from where public discourse about policies and elected officials can proceed.

Of course the real concern is that lobbyist's and the groups they represent provide the corrupting "mother's milk of politics," as the late California Speaker Jess Unruh called it. But I would extend that further. Money is mostly just a tool used in the pursuit of votes, and so I see votes as sometimes just as corrupting. You may ask, votes as corrupting? Isn't that what democracy is all about? To some extent yes. But deciding things on the basis of power is not the ideal I seek for our democracy. Doing the right thing is often not what we want. I would hope for a process that challenges us to be better people than mere pursuers of our own interest. I'm no utopian being at skeptical if not cynical about people and society. But while acknowledging our human failings, I still believe that encouraging civic virtue is worthwhile.