Government lobbying often relies heavily on PR strategies to leverage influence. Yet in the wake of the Jack Abramoff scandals that rocked Washington, it might appear the
lobbyists themselves are in need of PR assistance.
At the federal level, a flurry of proposed changes to lobbying rules have been talked up by politicians eager to distance themselves from Abramoff - including the White House,
which benefited from Abramoff's financial generosity during the two Bush presidential campaigns. Even at state levels, lobbyists are being viewed askew. Most notably, the
Tennessee Legislature enacted new ethics and lobbying rules in February in the wake of an FBI investigation that netted four lawmakers and a former state senator in a lobbyist-
bribery sting. Tennessee Governor Phil Bredesen signed the new rules into effect with the declaration: "This is a big stone in the foundation of restoring the public's
confidence."
But despite the scandals, do lobbyists face a PR crisis? According to PR industry leaders who are involved in public affairs advocacy, it would appear that lobbyists are not
suffering from a crisis in communications.
Truth Or Myth?
One expert notes the historic roots of lobbying are as old and deep as the republic itself. "Lobbying has been going on ever since political parties in America started,"
observes John Kerrigan, president of The Wilker Group, Austin, TX. "But I think the problem will probably be passing. It is in focus now because of everything that's
going on."
Gene Grabowski, vice president with Levick Strategic Communications in Washington, DC, acknowledges that lobbyists have a PR problem only in relation to how the public
perceives the depth and scope of their work. This is not due to the Abramoff affair, he says, but the fact the average American has no idea what lobbyists do on Capitol Hill.
"The image of lobbyists is distorted," he explains. "The big mistakes are that people think all lobbyists are like Jack Abramoff with bags of money, and that lobbying is evil
and is done by corporations."
Grabowski points out the vast majority of lobbyists accredited to Washington are not the money-bagged influence peddlers of popular misconception, but rather are "policy wonks"
that spend many hours in data- and information-based meetings with Congressional staffers (not the politicians themselves). "They are 80-90% ordinary people like you and me," he
continues.
Furthermore, Grabowski notes the public view of corporate America flexing its lobbying muscles is an exaggeration. "The biggest lobbyist presence in Washington belongs to the
AARP," he says. "Then comes the labor union, then other nonprofits. It is not just corporations."
Stop the Press?
Steven G. Ellis, president of Ellis International, Darnestown, MD, agrees with Grabowski, noting those who employ lobbyists do not have an image problem with that
particular industry.
"People who hire lobbyists understand the game," says Ellis. "Government relations people understand what lobbyists do. For lobbyists to do a big 'we're not really crooks'
thing is a mistake."
Ellis blames the election year political scramble and the heavy media coverage of the scandal. "The business of government is the business of government," he adds.
"Politicians are reacting to what the media writes. You have to admit it is great copy. But the media coverage in Washington and New York is more zealous than in the
hinterlands."
Strangely, the media focus on the Abramoff scandal did not focus primarily on his corporate clients, but rather on his questionable financial dealings with American Indian
tribes; a recent article in the Texas Observer reports Abramoff directed six tribes to contribute a total sum of $10 million in political contributions, almost exclusively
to Republican campaigns, while Abramoff and his partner Michael Scanlon billed the tribes $82 million for lobbying and PR work which they later stated was never delivered.
For Drew Setter, who provides PR and government relations support for several American Indian tribes via his Albuquerque, NM, agency Drew Setter & Associates, the
Abramoff scandal tarred the lobbyist's Native clients when his client roster was considerably wider.
"Much of the coverage deals with the amount of money involved with the tribes," says Setter. "But the tribes are relatively new players to government issues. The controversy
was not just about the tribes represented by this individual - he also represented corporations such as Microsoft, Unisys and Pitney Bowes."
Still, PR experts who work in government relations realize the lobbyists' work is far removed from the larger-than-life Abramoff affair. "Lobbying is like PR," says Ellis.
"People think it is glamorous, but a lot of it is laborious - imparting information to persuade. There's not much PR about that, because there's almost no news. A good lobbyist
may go to the White House or a black tie dinner with senators, but that's only 1-2% of what they do. The rest is slogging away to get their point across. It's like the Jimmy
Dean saying: It's great to taste the sausage, but nobody wants to see how it's made."
However, PR professionals involved in public affairs advocacy are not dismissing the debris left by the Abramoff fallout (he pled guilty in January to three felony counts and
agreed to a reduced prison sentence in exchange for testimony against former associates who have yet to be named). Drew Setter, whose focus is at the statehouse level in New
Mexico but not the federal level, notes that even beyond the Beltway there is the need to be a bit more careful.
"I wouldn't say it is business as usual," he says. "People are more cognizant of the rules now. I do government relations, so it is an issue. I've always been very by the
book. But what happened in Washington leaves a bad taste in everybody's mouth."
And, of course, it also leaves new words in one's mouth. Says Setter, with a laugh: "You'll notice I said government relations and not lobbying!"
Contacts: John Kerrigan, [email protected]; Gene Grabowski, [email protected]; Steven Ellis, [email protected]; Drew Setter, [email protected].
Washington Lobbyists: Strength In Numbers Or Overinflated Numbers?
Question: How many Washington lobbyists does it take to change a light bulb?
Answer: It might make more sense to ask another question first. Namely: How many Washington lobbyists are there? No one is entirely certain on that fact.
Reports on the number of registered lobbyists working the federal halls of power vary wildly from source to source. CNN stated there were currently "more than 37,000
registered lobbyists" in Washington, D.C. USA Today found the number to be "more than 32,000" while the Christian Science Monitor came up 39,402. The Monitor's
number mirrors the sum offered by the Senate Office of Public Records, which is responsible for coordinating and publishing lobbyist registrations.
Such large numbers feeds the PR problem that lobbyists face: The popular image of a horde of well-tailored locusts descending on the Capitol. However, a recent opinion column
in the Washington Post by Debra Mayberry, president of Columbia Books Inc., begs to seriously differ.
Mayberry's company publishes the directory Washington Representatives and the Web site http://www.lobbyists.info and she puts the number at being closer to 11,500. How does she explain the larger numbers cited by the media
and the Senate Office of Public Records? According to Mayberry, many lobbyists are erroneously registered under more than one name - she cites the notorious Jack Abramoff being
registered twice, under that name and as Jack A. Abramoff.