Home Home Page

AIM Urges Changes to Proposed Ethics and Lobbying Bill

March 18, 2009

STATEMENT OF ASSOCIATED INDUSTRIES OF MASSACHUSETTS BEFORE CHAIRMAN KOCOT,  HOUSE COMMITTEE ON ETHICS;   CHAIRMAN  BERRY,  SENATE COMMITTEE ON ETHICS AND RULES; HOUSE CHAIRMAN STEVEN WALSH ,  SENATE CHAIRMAN  BRIAN JOYCE  AND MEMBERS OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ON STATE ADMINISTRATION AND REGULATORY OVERSIGHT RELATIVE TO HB. 95, AN ACT TO IMPROVE THE LAWS RELATING TO ETHICS AND LOBBYING.

Good afternoon, my name is Eileen McAnneny, Senior Vice President and Associate General Counsel of Associated Industries of Massachusetts (AIM), the state's largest nonprofit, nonpartisan association of Massachusetts' employers.  AIM's mission is to promote the well-being of its members and their 680,000 employees and the prosperity of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts by improving the economic climate, proactively advocating fair and equitable public policy, and providing relevant, reliable information and excellent services.

AIM takes the current ethics and lobbying laws very seriously and supports appropriate standards for lobbyists.  We strive to satisfy both the letter of the law and spirit of those standards and support efforts to ensure that all lobbyists do the same. As a membership organization, however, we are greatly concerned about the changes to the definitions of lobbying and incidental lobbying and the chilling affect these changes will have on the democratic process.

More specifically, as amended by HB. 95, the definition of “legislative lobbying” includes;

“any act to promote, oppose or influence legislation, or to promote, oppose or influence the governor's approval or veto thereof. Acts to influence legislation shall include, without limitation, any action to influence the introduction, sponsorship, consideration, action or nonaction with respect to any legislation. The term includes acts to influence or attempt to influence the decision of any officer or employee of a city or town when those acts are intended to carry out a common purpose with legislative lobbying at the state level; and includes strategizing, planning, research, and other background work only if performed in connection with or for use in an actual communication with a government employee for purposes of the acts described in this definition."

There is similar language in the “Executive lobbying” definition.

Any person engaged in such activity described above would be required to register as a legislative agent unless such activity was not a part of the person’s  regular and usual business or professional activities, and was simply incidental thereto.   “Incidental” is defined in the legislation as (i) lobbying activity of not more than 10 hours in a reporting period and (ii) payment of less than $2,500 during a reporting period for any activity covered by the definition of “legislative agent.” (A reporting period in the bill is four months.)

These two changes are very significant and depart greatly from current law. The effect of the expansion of the definition and the reduction of the “incidental” criteria is to include third parties as “lobbyists” who are trying to participate in the development of good public policy, exercise their rights, and engage in civic discourse and engagement. This burden will without doubt chill civic participation, reduce the stream of good information and advocacy to lawmakers, and result in no benefit to the public. No important state interest will be served by creating such a complex and burdensome environment in which to have a dialogue about legislation or regulation.

Let me illustrate this point with an example.  There are many complicated bills pending before the legislature that are directly relevant to the business community affecting various cost components of doing business in the Commonwealth. During any given legislative session, AIM will be tracking over 1,000 pieces of legislation and submit more than a hundred written statements.  Additinally, we will submit pages of testimony to state agencies about proposed rules, and attend many advisory committee meetings in state agencies, committees, councils, etc.

To fully understand a bill or proposed rule, to ascertain the practical implications, to educate lawmakers and regulators, and to advocate our position effectively, AIM relies on our member companies for their expertise and practical input.  This is a rigourous process so that AIM’s comments are substantive, constructive and well-informed.

AIM has formed committee’s comprised of our members with expertise in a given subject area - taxation, health care, energy, environment, unemployment insurance, worker’s compensation and employment law.  These member companies assist AIM staff by analyzing bills, helping to write testimony and accompanying us to meetings with legislators.  If these companies spent more than 10 hours in a given quarter, or were paid by their employer more than $2,500 for their time, they would be required to register as lobbyists as a result of the proposed amendments.

The effect of this would be to stymie participation by AIM member companies in the legislative and rulemaking process.  We believe that AIM is not unique in this regard.  Any membership based organization, labor unions, non-profit entities, human service providers and the like, will have similar issues to those uncovered by AIM.  Civic discourse, the quality of bills enacted and the regulations promulgated would all suffer. So, too, would our democracy.  AIM believes this result is unintended. 

To address this concern, we urge the Committees to make two changes to HB. 95.  First, the current definition of “incidental” lobbying should be retained.  Secondly, the definition of lobbying should be amended to encompass only direct communications with lawmakers and public officials and not the  strategizing, planning, research, and other background work that so many of our members, and the members of virtually all associations, engage in on a regular basis.

I thank you for the opportunity to present our concerns and would be happy to answer any questions.