The Palmetto Insider

An article this week in the Free Times lamented budget cuts affecting the South Carolina Commission on Higher Education (CHE). The article noted that, among its functions, the CHE is “responsible for managing the flow of state money to public higher-education institutions—and that’s where the vetoes took their toll.”

Translation: CHE is lobbying the General Assembly, using taxpayer dollars, for more taxpayer dollars. A February 1 article in The Nerve explored the hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars being spent on lobbying by educational institutions. And a Policy Council report in January revealed that overall taxpayer funded lobbying in South Carolina increased dramatically between 2008 and 2009.

The Policy Council report, “Taxpayers Lose in Government-Funded Lobbying Game,” is a reminder that taxpayer funded lobbying—for education or any other state-funded activity—is a conflict of interest and an expensive misuse of taxpayer dollars. In fact, a number of states limit taxpayer lobbying in a variety of ways. And in South Carolina, while direct lobbying expenses by state-funded organizations must be reported to the state Ethics Commission, salaries of lobbyists do not.

It’s worth remembering the direct and indirect costs of taxpayer funded lobbying when we read about government agencies that lobby government for tax dollars complaining about budget cuts.

During the past few weeks, several localities across the state have announced plans to hire lobbyists to petition the state and federal government for more money. Such lobbying, the unfortunate byproduct of government-driven economics, is unproductive, wasteful, and in some ways, deceptive.

A Policy Council report released today investigates the scope of taxpayer funded lobbying on South Carolina, and offers solutions for meaningful reform.

According to the South Carolina Ethics Commission, 90 lobbyists were employed in some capacity by taxpayer funded entities during the first half of 2009—at a cost to taxpayers of more than $1.54 million. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg. Lobbyists are only required to report fees used to promote or oppose legislation “through direct communication with public officials or public employees.” That means fees for other services, including time spent drafting a bill, conducting legal research, or crafting legislative strategies, do not need to be disclosed.

The idea that taxpayer funded lobbying is wrong isn’t lost on government: in 2003 Governor Mark Sanford took a first step by banning cabinet agencies from hiring lobbyists, and a  number of states have enacted laws banning or restricting the practice. But there is currently no law in South Carolina restricting state entities from hiring lobbyists.

Government officials from Cayce, West Columbia, and Springdale plan to lobby Washington for federal money to beautify Airport Boulevard. New sidewalks, shade trees, banners, and bike lanes would be added, and traffic lights, currently suspended from wires, would be hung from decorative black iron posts.

WACH Fox news interviewed Policy Council Director of Research Jameson Taylor on this proposed use of tax dollars.

http://www.midlandsconnect.com/news/story.aspx?id=379272

“These are going to be temporary jobs and it’s also going to be government creating government jobs,” said S.C Policy Council Spokesman Jameson Taylor.  “And this is also a case of government lobbying government for more money.”

Taylor says overall it’s bad timing to create elective projects.

“We’re not talking about free money,” said Taylor.

Less than two months after the Columbia City Council voted not to renew its annual contracts with statehouse lobbyists, Richland County Council has tentatively approved spending up to $60,000 in taxpayer funds to lobby federal and state officials. 

The council voted Tuesday to award a contract to Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, according to WACH.

Columbia-based Nelson Mullins is the largest law firm in South Carolina and includes among its lobbyists Dwight Drake, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for governor.

Richland County had not previously employed any lobbyists to represent its interests, county spokeswoman Stephany Snowden told WACH.

The goal behind the move was to give Richland County a stronger voice at the state and federal levels, but as the Policy Council has pointed out, taxpayer-funded lobbying is problematic because it presents a conflict of interest and wastes tax dollars. Taxpayers, whether they realize it, might be paying a lobbyist to advocate for something they oppose.

It also adds an extra and unnecessary layer of government process that conflicts with good, open-government policies.

While the city council voted to authorize the expense Tuesday, it does not formally take effect until council members approve the minutes at their next meeting, scheduled for Nov. 17.

Several South Carolina counties already pay lobbyists, according to information found on the South Carolina Ethics Commission website.

These include Greenville, Jasper and Union counties. In addition, Dillon County Council paid for lobbying this year.

Also, the S.C. Association of Counties paid $47,393 to lobbyists and listed $34,043 in lobbyist-related expenditures for the first six months of 2009.

In all, several dozen government entities across the state expended public funds on lobbyists in 2009, according to filings with the state Ethics Commission.

Gov. Mark Sanford issued an executive order in 2003 prohibiting cabinet agencies under his control from using public money on lobbyists. Several bills have also been introduced in the General Assembly seeking to extend that ban to all state agencies. None have passed.

Columbia’s decision in September to cut statehouse lobbyists was the result of the city’s financial difficulties.

However, Columbia officials opted earlier this year to renew its annual contract with CapitalEdge Strategies of Washington, D.C. The amount of the city’s contract with the Capitol Hill lobbying firm is more than $62,000.