The Center for Public Integrity

The Center's analysis of the legal expense funds maintained by eight sitting members of Congress revealed that in addition to DeLay and Reid, those receiving questionable donations included Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., and Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah. Those five legislators collectively received donations from 12 lobbyists, the Center found.

Legal expense funds are designed to defray costs related to a variety of proceedings, including ethics, civil and criminal matters. Both House and Senate rules forbid any "contribution or other payment by a registered lobbyist or an agent of a foreign principal to a legal expense fund." This prohibition is similar to one that bars lobbyists and foreign agents from paying for lawmakers' travel.

DeLay faces a possible investigation by the House ethics committee over allegations that embattled lobbyist Jack Abramoff paid for some of the Texas Republican's travel, including a golf outing to Scotland. Abramoff is currently under criminal and congressional investigation for allegedly bilking six American Indian tribes out of tens of millions of dollars, and in the process possibly circumventing lobbying disclosure laws.

The Center found that five registered lobbyists and one lobbying firm contributed a total of $8,000 to DeLay's legal defense fund, although $3,500 of that was later returned. DeLay established this fund—which has since raised slightly more than $1 million— on June 22, 2000, after the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee filed a lawsuit accusing him of extorting campaign contributions. That suit was settled in 2001.

At least 123 of Washington's top lobbyists occupy the same ethical gray area now threatening to bring down high-profile influence peddler Jack Abramoff, according to a new study by the Center for Public Integrity, American Public Media and Medill News Service.

Like Abramoff, these registered lobbyists sit on the governing boards of non-profit organizations called 501(c)(3)s, which get their name from the section of the tax code under which they are authorized. As board members, these lobbyists can help set policies for the groups and are privy to inside information about the non-profits—including their sponsorship of congressional travel.

Contributions to such groups are tax-deductible and, because they are non-profits, by definition are supposed to be restricted primarily to education, research and service activities. IRS regulations prohibit 501(c)(3) groups from attempting to influence legislation as a substantial part of their activities. The IRS code does not define what it means by "substantial."

One such group, the Ripon Educational Fund, spent more than $1.3 million dollars sponsoring a single conference in London during the summer of 2003, according to its tax return. Eighteen members of Congress attended, along with more than 100 corporate representatives, according to Ripon board members. That same year the Ripon Educational Fund spent just $10,000 underwriting a single university scholarship.

At the time of the trip, the REF board of directors counted among its members at least four registered lobbyists, including former U.S. Rep. Susan Molinari, a New York Republican.

While such non-profits can legally pay for trips for members of Congress and staff, congressional rules forbid registered lobbyists or agents registered to represent foreign interests from paying for such travel themselves.

For example, from 1998 to mid-2004, London-based BP plc spent close to $25 million* lobbying the U.S. government—the third-highest amount among foreign entities. Surprisingly, this international energy giant lobbied nearly as much on matters related to the environment and Superfund as it did on oil and gas issues. One likely explanation: BP and its U.S. affiliates are listed as the potentially responsible parties for 162 Superfund pollution sites that, collectively, have cost the Environmental Protection Agency $1.1 billion in analysis and clean-up costs. All told, records reveal, 22 foreign companies listed as potentially responsible parties for 275 Superfund sites in 40 U.S. states reported lobbying on the same issue or directly to the EPA.

During these same six-plus years, the Center analysis shows, companies with headquarters in more than 100 foreign nations* spent more than $520 million* lobbying the federal government. Over that time, those companies employed 550 lobbying firms and teams of 3,800 lobbyists, more than 100 of whom were former members of Congress. Companies based in the United Kingdom alone spent more than their counterparts in 38* U.S. states during that time period.

When it comes to lobbying in Washington, ChevronTexaco Corp. knows how to distribute its energy. The petroleum powerhouse is a high-profile fixture on Capitol Hill, spending millions to curry legislative favor. The company's hired guns routinely seek to influence regulations at the Department of Energy, rulemakings at the Environmental Protection Agency—and even independent investigations at the Government Accountability Office.

But ChevronTexaco is hardly unique. The GAO has launched thousands of inquiries into government programs during the past six years. During that time nearly 300 companies and organizations have sought to influence those investigations, according to a study of federal lobbying records by the Center for Public Integrity.

In fact, many of the federal offices responsible for overseeing the integrity of American democracy are among the more than 200 agencies lobbied during the past six years—agencies such as the Federal Election Commission, the Office of Government Ethics and the GAO, which serves as the investigative arm of Congress.

"So many lobbyists cover so many issues, it is not surprising to find them popping up almost everywhere," said lobbying expert Burdett Loomis. Lobbying these oversight agencies, he added, may be a "more indirect" way of influencing government, but it can still be quite effective.

The deep-pocketed pharmaceutical and health products industry has lobbied on more than 1,400 congressional bills since 1998 and spent a whopping $612 million* during that period, a Center for Public Integrity review of lobbying records revealed. Drug companies and manufacturers of health products have used more professional lobbyists in the last six and a half years—almost 3,000—than any other organized interest, the analysis also found. In comparison, the insurance industry, second-largest in terms of spending, spent $543 million* in the same period and employed just over 2,000 lobbyists.

In recent years, the pharmaceutical industry has scored a series of legislative victories on Capitol Hill, which could potentially translate into tens of billions of dollars of additional revenue to drug companies annually. The federal government will buy drugs worth at least $40 billion from the companies every year once the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 goes into effect next year. In addition, critics have accused the industry of having undue influence over the Food and Drug Administration, the agency that regulates pharmaceutical interests.

Roberta Baskin, executive director of the Center for Public Integrity, introduces a vital new resource for understanding the lobbying industry, which exerts unmatched influence over the Federal government. View >>

When average Americans need help with their federal income taxes, they hire an accountant or buy a computer program to ensure that they don't miss out on any deductions. But when corporate giants like Detroit-based DTE Energy want to save millions, they turn to Washington, D.C., lobbyists.

The energy services provider relied on its lobbyists—not accountants—when the Internal Revenue Service began reviewing, in 2003, a controversial tax credit that benefits it and other companies that turn coal into synthetic fuels. But after only four months of investigation and heavy industry pressure on Congress and the IRS, the agency dropped the inquiry, preserving the program that gave DTE Energy more than $200 million in tax credits that year.

"We wanted to make sure [the IRS] had all the available information and technical expertise needed to make the final determination," said Renze Hoeksema, the director of government affairs at DTE Energy about contacting the IRS on the company's behalf.

DTE Energy is not alone. Nearly 500 companies and organizations have reported lobbying the IRS between 1998 and 2004, putting the nation's revenue collector among the top 30 most frequently lobbied federal agencies, according to a study of federal lobbying records by the Center for Public Integrity. In fact, more companies and organizations reported lobbying the IRS than the Navy, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the President of the United States combined.

Specifically, Zimmer wanted to increase the one-year-ban on lobbying for former members to two years and strip former lawmakers registered as lobbyists of their special access to gyms, dining rooms and other members-only areas on Capitol Hill. The goal, he said, was to level the lobbying playing field.

The legislation did not pass. But Zimmer did—right through the revolving door. In 2001, five years after he left Congress, Zimmer registered as a lobbyist with the Los Angeles firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, where the former member of the Ways and Means Committee now lobbies on taxation and other issues.

"I thought it was appropriate to abide by my own standards," Zimmer said in an interview with the Center. But, he added, "I did not say anyone could never lobby."

Zimmer is just one of the more than 2,200 former federal government employees registered as federal lobbyists between 1998 and 2004, according to a study of federal records by the Center for Public Integrity. Altogether, records show, more than 12 percent of current lobbyists are former executive and legislative branch employees. This includes more than 200 former members of Congress (175 from the House, 34 from the Senate) and 42 former agency heads.

These former government officials are indispensable to Washington's lobbying firms. Whether they saw the legislative process from the vantage point of Capitol Hill or in an office of the federal bureaucracy, they bring their new employers the unique understanding of government and the connections to key decision-makers that only an insider can develop.

Note to readers: This story has been reposted. Since the report was originally released, the Center for Public Integrity has changed the way it calculates lobbying expenditures to reflect a more stringent methodology for determining the total amounts. The change was made to correct the potential overstatement of totals. Figures or relevant text that have been changed are indicated with asterisks. (3/31/2006)

Special interests and the lobbyists they employ have reported spending, since 1998, a total of more than* $10.8 billion* to influence Congress, the White House and more than 200 federal agencies. They've hired a couple thousand former government officials to influence federal policy on everything from abortion and adoption to taxation and welfare. And they've filed—most of the time—thousands of pages of disclosure forms with the Senate Office of Public Records and the House Clerk's Office.

Washington's lobbyists reported billing $2 billion* in 2003, the most recent year for which complete data exist. That figure will almost certainly go up for* 2004.

Note to readers: This story has been reposted. Since the report was originally released, the Center for Public Integrity has changed the way it calculates lobbying expenditures to reflect a more stringent methodology for determining the total amounts. The change was made to correct the potential overstatement of totals. Figures or relevant text that have been changed are indicated with asterisks. (3/31/2006)

At a time of enormous budgetary constraints, states, cities and public schools have spent hundreds of millions of dollars on lobbyists to plead their cases before legislators and regulators in the nation's capital.

During the last six years, in fact, roughly* 300 universities have spent in excess of $114 million*, while more than 1,400 local governments have doled out more than $343 million* to secure funding for everything from freeways to fire trucks, according to a study of lobbying disclosure records conducted by the Center for Public Integrity. Similarly, the 56 states and U.S. territories, many of them facing severe budget shortfalls, have spent well in excess of $55 million*.

"It's almost like the lobbyist 'tax,'" said Keith Ashdown, vice president for policy and communications at Taxpayers for Common Sense, a federal-budget watchdog organization. "If you're from a local entity and you're trying to get funded and you don't have a senior lawmaker on the right committee in Congress, you have to basically pay a tax to lobbyists to get recognized."

Still, public organizations have more to lose by not hiring an advocate on the federal level, said Bob Stern, president of the Center for Governmental Studies, a non-profit organization devoted to addressing social problems and researching policy changes for more effective governance.

"It would be penny-wise, pound-foolish for them not to have a presence in Washington," he said.