|
Floor Remarks of Senator Robert C. Jubelirer
on Lobbyist Disclosure Restoration
The conventional wisdom in Hollywood is that a
sequel rarely rises to the quality of the original production. Maybe in
Harrisburg we can prove the opposite to be true. Today, we are considering a
sequel, a revised lobbyist disclosure law, which is every bit the equal of the
original, and which will surpass the former law in effectiveness, because this
one conforms with the Supreme Court’s order relating to lawyer/lobbyists.
This is a good government measure, pure and simple.
Lobbying is big business, and expanding in dimension every year. As the
economic stakes of decisionmaking rise, as the disputes over policy intensify,
as new issues of high complexity materialize, lobbying activity expands
commensurately. There are roughly 800 individuals registered with the Senate,
and some of them have lengthy client lists.
The public deserves to see who is working to
influence decisionmaking, what they are spending, and where their efforts are
being directed. A solid lobbying disclosure law provides those answers. It
pulls the processes of information exchange and issue advocacy out of the
shadows. It gives observers and commentators facts to work with, rather than
leaving them to rely on speculation, fiction, and fantasy. This bill details
the public purpose, the specific disclosure requirements, and a functional
system of enforcement.
The designation as Senate Bill 1 demonstrates the
priority we put on it. This issue is one of consistent, historical unity in the
Senate, as evidenced once more by the extensive bipartisan sponsorship.
This Senate took a singularly responsible step in
again adopting a lobbying disclosure rule at the beginning of this session. Not
only did a similar Senate Rule provide the only reporting requirement in place
during the last two years, it demonstrated that filing is not a burdensome
undertaking.
Take a look at the numbers recorded under our Senate
Rule. In 2003, lobbyists reported expenditures of nearly $87 million. This is
a staggering sum, yet it is dwarfed by the filings for 2004, totaling more than
$122 million, reflecting the many high-octane issues we confronted.
Over $52 million of that is accounted for by health
care interests. Education interests laid out nearly $20 million. Gambling
interests accounted for over $8 million. Telecommunications interests were in
for a comparable amount.
And remember, this is just part of the story.
Lobbyists need only reveal their spending as it affects the Senate. As useful
and revelatory as our Senate Rule has been, it is not sufficient. A law
covering the entire legislative branch and the executive branch is the only way
the universe of Pennsylvania lobbying becomes public information.
We do not make a judgment on these lobbying efforts,
as to their quality, their quantity, or their utility. We insist that the
particulars be reported, we put the information out, and the public can then
draw their conclusions.
Governor Rendell earlier this year expressed support
for a law, and there are no surprises in here that would disqualify this one.
We are approving this bill with the intention that it will credibly fill the
information gap in Pennsylvania law.
If we can turn this into law, we can give people
more confidence in our process, and we can take away a dubious distinction – the
only state without a law – that too frequently earns us dishonorable mention.
There is no perfect configuration, but this bill is a good blend of public
interest, common sense, and practical experience.
Those reluctant to vote on this measure contend
there is no public clamor for it. Perhaps that is indicative of the public
disbelief that a responsible solution is truly forthcoming. Pennsylvanians have
seen good intentions trumped by mischievous amendments too many times before.
They have seen well-crafted measures stopped by a piling on of other
priorities. They have seen a good law tossed by the first lawsuit down the
track. So it is hard to fault the doubts that people harbor.
That is why our vote today, on a measure that enjoys
strong bipartisan backing, is so important to Pennsylvania. By acting
decisively, we give the issue momentum, we give the advocates encouragement, and
we give the people hope that reform can succeed in 2005.
 
# # #
|
