Re-Setting The Lobbyists' Table

Can't we just un-invite them by making their presence irrelevant? I believe in 100% public financing of all political campaigns! Who's with me?--Pete

Ellen Miller
January 04, 2007

Ellen Miller is the executive director of the Sunlight Foundation.

“Ethics reform” always sounded to me like something having to do with etiquette: the polite and proper way to hold a fork or knife, set a table or respond to an invitation. Something, in short, given the vast array of things we have to worry about, that just isn’t all that important. But ethics reform is at the top of the 100 Hour proposals the Democrats will offer in the House this week. And that’s a good thing.

Changing how Congress does business, and who it does it for, particularly in wake of an election that demonstrated the public’s disgust with the corruption, is the single most critical thing Congress can do to establish faith in our democracy and the institutions that govern it. It may be too late to do that, but at least the new leadership wants to try.

The Democrats are promising more transparency so the public can see and understand what happens on Capitol Hill, greater separation of lobbyists and state and tighter enforcement of the new rules. This is good, indeed, very good.

With our politics still reeling from the crooked culture of Abramoff, DeLay, Cunningham, et al., we are looking at an initial proposal that will ban travel and gifts from lobbyists, and end secret earmarks by requiring lawmakers to disclose who secured them. The devil is always in the details, but at least the broad outlines of these initial proposals sound very solid.

In the age of the Internet, though, transparency means something more than what the leadership has yet to propose. It means using the new technology to broadcast what and how Congress is doing the nation’s business; who lawmakers meet with and why; and making information available in a way that consumers of that information want it—24 hours a day, seven days a week. It also means putting out information in ways so that ordinary people can connect the dots. And besides all that, Congress would be foolish not to use the Internet to engage citizens in the new conversation that is taking place.

Congress now files a myriad of reports, but much of it is effectively hidden from plain view—information filed in three-ring binders in basement offices of the Senate or House Clerk or in some obscure government office, or put online as unsearchable documents. Like mold, influence peddling and corruption grow best in the darkness, and for a long time Congress has liked it just that way.

But the times, the technology and what people are beginning to expect in the Age of the Internet, have changed. Congress must go further than what it is now contemplating.

First, all currently required public filings by lawmakers should be filed online, in a searchable and downloadable format within 24 hours of the time they are filed in paper form. There are many valuable disclosure forms already required which would add to transparency—if only we could find them! Making all filings available online, and increasing their frequency, is a logical and easy step forward.

Second, end offline, secret legislation. Bills and amendments should be posted online at least 72 hours before a vote, so that members of Congress and the public have time to read the bills before they are voted on. There should be no reason to continue the practice of adding last-second earmarks and riders that benefit the moneyed and even lawmakers’ personal interests. The proposed rule requires disclosure of the sponsor of an earmark, and that information should also become available, immediately, online.

Finally, recognizing that members of Congress are not the only culprits who allow corruption and secrecy to fester on the Hill, there must finally be some meaningful lobbyist disclosure. Paid lobbyists should have to report who they meet with, and what they discuss, and report any connections they have with members of Congress. All lobbyists’ reports should be filed on the Internet, within 24 hours of any meeting.

There is nothing radical about these proposals. In the era of new technology, these are all feasible and common sense steps towards making our Congress more open, accountable and modern. This kind of accountability of lawmakers to constituents could begin to repair the broken relationship between elected officials and their constituents. They might change how the House and Senate operate, too. And that’s precisely the point.