The influence industry in state capitals continues to grow, as state lobbyists and the companies and organizations that hire them spent a record of almost $1.3 billion in 2006, according to the Center for Public Integrity's sixth-annual review.

As legislative sessions open in January, lawmakers and lobbyists are certain to be busier than ever. In 2006, also an election year in most states, the nation's 7,400 state legislators passed more than 33,000 laws and spent an estimated $1.3 trillion in taxpayer money, according to The Fiscal Survey of States for 2007, released jointly by the National Governors Association and the National Association of State Budget Officers.

More companies and organizations were signed up to send their own representatives to the statehouse: more than 56,000 in 2006, compared to just fewer than 50,000 in 2005. The total number of lobbyists remained about 40,000, still averaging out to more than five lobbyists for each lawmaker.

In the 43 states that reported lobby expenditures for 2006, the $1.3 billion total was almost a 10 percent increase in reported spending from 2005. And in those 43 states, the average spent per legislator on lobbying was more than $200,000.

Of the 42 states that provided totals in both 2005 and 2006, 21 recorded an increase in lobby spending.

As with each annual review, lobby spending disclosure laws vary widely from state to state. And a state disclosure agency's ability to pull together an overall total from thousands of records can change from year to year.

In 2006, due to a new law mandating disclosure of lobbyist salaries and fees, Florida moved into the third spot for most spending reported, from 27th when lobbyists were only required to report other spending.

Florida joins 27 other states that require that the salaries and fees paid to lobbyists be disclosed.

Connecticut did not provide lobby spending totals in 2005, but did so in 2006.

State lobbyists and the companies that hire them spent a record of more than $1 billion in 2005 to influence state lawmakers and officials, the Center for Public Integrity has found.

The almost 7,400 legislators in the 50 state capitals across the country passed close to 40,000 laws last year, according to figures from the State Net Web site. Those lawmakers also allocated an estimated $1.3 trillion in taxpayer money, according to The Fiscal Survey of States for 2005 released jointly by the National Governors Association and the National Association of State Budget Directors.

And working in the hallways of the nation's 50 statehouses was a corps of close to 40,000 registered lobbyists paid to advance the agendas of almost 50,000 companies and organizations, the Center found. Nationwide, that averages out to more than five lobbyists for each lawmaker.

In the 42 states that reported lobby expenditures for 2005, the total was $1.16 billion, a 22 percent increase in reported spending from 2004. And in those states, the average spent per legislator on lobbying was more than $190,000.

Of the 40 states that provided totals in both 2004 and 2005, 27 of them — more than two-thirds — saw an increase lobby spending.

Some of the most influential lobbyists, the Center learned, were the spouses and other relatives of legislators that have joined the profession.

State-to-state disclosure differences

Lobby spending disclosure laws vary widely from state to state, and a state disclosure agency's ability to pull together an overall total from thousands of records can change from year to year.

Arkansas' term limits forced Mike Creekmore out of his job as a Democratic state representative in 2004, but he still has a strong connection to the General Assembly. His wife, Dawn Creekmore — also a Democrat — was elected to serve in his old seat in the next legislative session.

The spring following her election, Mike Creekmore was hired to lobby for a bill on behalf of pharmaceutical services company Caremark Rx. Dawn Creekmore was not on a committee that dealt with the bill, but "it was a little odd" to see her in the statehouse, according to her husband — not that it mattered, though. "She's a pretty independent thinker," he said.

Mike Creekmore terminated his lobbyist registration after a week, and the bill never made it out of committee.

The Creekmores are just one example of the family ties evident in the legislative and lobbying ranks of the nation's state capitols. Through its six-month investigation of state legislators-turned-lobbyists, the Center for Public Integrity found not only ex-lawmakers cashing in on legislative experience, but wives, husbands, sons and daughters of sitting legislators as well.

"A lawyer who marries a legislator gains access," said Drew Johnson, president of the Tennessee Center for Policy Research.

Johnson noted that in his state, Betty Anderson is "the most powerful lobbyist in the whole state." In 1995, she married Rep. Jimmy Naifeh, who has been a Democratic state legislator for 30 years and speaker of the House since 1991.

But concerns go beyond access. A lobbyist's compensation is dependent on his or her success at persuading legislators. If a lobbyist is married to a legislator, the lobbyist's compensation benefits both and creates a significant conflict of interest.

To get a bill passed in the statehouse often requires legislators to do a little lobbying — a requirement that especially suits North Carolina Rep. Deborah Ross, D-Wake County, current lawmaker and former registered lobbyist.

While a Center for Public Integrity analysis focused on former state legislators who registered to lobby at some point after leaving office, Ross is among the rarer individuals who were lobbyists and who then became legislators.The process includes speaking with all committee members involved and following the bill when it crosses over to the other legislative chamber for consideration, Ross says. But she believes legislators sometimes think such tasks are reserved only for lobbyists.

"I haven't stopped approaching bills that I want to get passed [in the same way I did as a lobbyist] just because I'm a member," she said. "Not all members understand that to do as much as you can for your constituents on the issues you care about, you really have to be a lobbyist, too."

Ross said she avoided perceived conflicts of interest by resigning her post with the ACLU before May 2002, since the legislative session started that month.During her seven-year tenure with the American Civil Liberties Union of North Carolina, where her "client was the Constitution," Ross served as both its executive director and legal counsel. She also revamped the organization's legislative program, and, as part of that, became a registered lobbyist.

For some, like Missouri Sen. Timothy Green, D-St. Louis County, term limits and redistricting made continuing to serve in the state legislature impossible. So after 14 years in office, Green had to leave his seat as state representative in 2002 and turned to lobbying for two years before being elected to the state Senate in 2004.

Over a three-year period ending in 2005, nearly 1,600 former lawmakers across the country were registered at some point to lobby state legislatures for special interests, according to an analysis by the Center for Public Integrity. More than 1,300 ex-lawmakers were registered to lobby in 2005 alone.

The study findings show that the revolving door between public and private service turns just as easily in the state arena as it does in Washington D.C. on the federal level. And when the former state legislators moved into their new roles, Center research found, they often emerged as some of the most powerful, well-connected statehouse lobbyists.

"They sell that they have unique access because they're a former legislator," said Blair Horner, the legislative director for the New York Public Interest Research Group, a state government watchdog organization.

As lobbyists, they work to further the interests of companies and organizations as diverse as the 162,000 state bills introduced nationwide last year. Their clients run the gamut of special interests: from private companies to public schools, from trade associations to labor unions, from political watchdogs to political parties.Ex-legislators often start boutique shops or join established blue-chip firms as a name partner. Among those registered to lobby in 2005, more than 200 signed up under a lobbying firm or consulting group that included their name in the title. Others were hired by companies on a contract basis or became staff members of companies and associations looking for a voice at the statehouse.

Legislators become lobbyists because "they have skills and expertise to do so," said Peggy Kerns, director of the Center for Ethics in Government at the National Conference of State Legislatures. "They are effective. They become experts on certain issues."

As Congress struggles to maintain public trust in the midst of the lobbying scandal raging in Washington D.C., members could look to the states for ways to revamp the federal system.

Since the original 2003 "Hired Guns" report, lawmakers in almost half the states — sometimes prompted by scandals — have beefed up their disclosure laws, but federal legislators haven't.A Center for Public Integrity survey that evaluated the strength of lobbying disclosure laws nationwide found the federal law to be weaker than those of 47 of the 50 states.

"The federal law is pretty terrible," said Robert M. Stern, president of the nonpartisan Center for Governmental Studies, who helped write California's 1974 political reform law.

"Congress should be looking to the states," Stern said, because "states have had tremendous experience with enforcing and administering these laws. They are not that hard to enforce."

While no state earned an "A" when graded on providing the public with full disclosure on behind-the-scenes lobbying in the 2003 survey, Washington state had the highest score, 87 points out of a possible 100. The federal law tied with New Hampshire, earning a failing grade of 36 — almost two and a half times lower. Only Pennsylvania and Wyoming received worse marks.

What's more, 24 states have taken steps either to strengthen their laws or to implement or improve electronic disclosure systems in the two and a half years since the Center's study. At least another eight states have considered or are working on changes.

Vested interests are working harder than ever to achieve their goals in state capitols and state agencies across the country. Nearly 47,000 such interests—companies, advocacy groups, labor unions, professional organizations and even government agencies—hired more than 38,000 individual lobbyists. This averages out to five lobbyists and almost $130,000 in expenditures per state legislator.

Such generosity can create a sense of entitlement. In January, Louisiana state Rep. Charles Lancaster suggested raising the $100 limit on free tickets to sporting and cultural events because good seats at college and professional games often cost much more. The Republican's comments prompted editorials in the local media and rekindled an attempt in the legislature to enact an outright ban on free tickets. The measure breezed through the Senate but was ultimately killed by a House committee—whose chairman happens to be Rep. Lancaster.

All told, lobbyists and their employers in 42 states reported spending nearly $953 million in 2004 attempting to influence state legislators and executive branch officials. That figure is up from the $904 million reported in 2003. It seems likely that state lobby expenditures will exceed the $1 billion mark this year.

The other eight states could not provide overall spending totals for 2004, although lobbyists do report spending in those states. Pennsylvania, one of the eight, remains the only state in the union without a statute mandating lobbying disclosure, but its state senate does require those who lobby the chamber to register.

What follows are summaries of states that have either proposed or enacted changes to their lobbying regulations in the last year. Most of this information comes from Web-based news services.

Connecticut

As of mid-May, House and Senate Democrats were considering ethics and campaign finance reform measures, including banning lobbyists from soliciting money for legislative campaigns.

Colorado

In April, Sen. Bob Hagedorn introduced a bill that would expand the definition of a lobbyist and require companies seeking state contracts to file reports disclosing their lobbying efforts. Earlier in the session, the Joint Budget Committee announced it would examine the role of "legislative liaisons," state employees whose sole function is to lobby the legislature on behalf of their government offices. At a time of drastic budget cutbacks, questions arose about the propriety of spending approximately $1.8 million a year to pay those salaries.

Florida

In Florida, where lobbyists outnumber legislators by a ratio of almost 13-to-1, Tom Lee took over as Senate president promising to reform the state's lobbying laws. Lee first banned the tradition of lobbyists providing free lunches to Senate committees. In April and May, the Senate approved, revised and re-approved ethics measures that would, among other changes, require lobbyists to report their earnings and expenditures.

Lobbyists in 41 states reported spending more than $889 million wining, dining and influencing state lawmakers in 2003, according to a new study by the Center for Public Integrity. That figure is up from the $720 million of lobbyist spending reported in 40 states in 2002.

A year-to-year comparison of the nationwide total for spending on state lobbying was not possible because of variations among state disclosure requirements. Some states do not require lobbyists to disclose their spending each year. Among those 37 states that do have reporting mechanisms roughly comparable to 2002, 29 reported some increase in spending. Twenty states saw increases in spending of at least 10 percent, and eight of them—Delaware, Florida, Maine, Montana, Ohio, Oregon, Texas and Wyoming—saw increases of 30 percent or more.

The majority of this money goes to pay for a lobbyist's most important asset: time. Because state oversight agencies often do not break down total lobby spending into salaries and expenditures, it is impossible to determine the exact percentage of salaries paid. But a state like Connecticut, where the state Ethics Commission does categorize lobby spending, offers a good example of the sort of money at stake. In 2003, lobbyists pulled in $27.3 million and spent $2.7 million on entertainment, paid media, solicitation, office and other expenses combined. That 10 to one ratio is not unusual when it can be determined.

Of the 41 states reporting overall spending totals, 16 did not include information on salaries or fees paid to compensate lobbyists for their efforts. In Texas, lobbyists disclose salaries in a range. The Texas Ethics Commission reported that lobbyists earned somewhere between $132,485,542 and $516,155,477 for their efforts.