| I'm not one of those to quickly demonize lobbying as the greatest of ills befalling our democracy. Reasonable people understand that there is a place for professional advocacy in the legislative process. Still, there's no doubt lobbying often takes the form of back-slapping, behind-closed-doors influence-peddling that undermines our entire democratic process.
Recognizing that danger, the following Omaha World-Herald report suggests a newfound benefit of Nebraska's legislative term limits:
Term limits are helping to push three more veterans of the State Capitol out the door. And none of them is a lawmaker.
Paul O'Hara, Larry Ruth and Bruce Cutshall have a combined 106 years of lobbying experience in the Nebraska Legislature, and they have firms that traditionally rank among the top five lobbyists. But they're calling it quits.
All three cited advancing age as the top reason for taking desk jobs in their firms. But they also mentioned the harder work that is necessary to establish new relationships and build trust in the 49-member Legislature, which will have at least 15 new lawmakers next year and only five with six years or more experience. Twenty lawmakers were forced out by term limits in 2006.
"The reality of term limits is that it's harder to lobby. Maybe that's one of the things that the public liked," said Ruth, 63, whose firm Ruth, Mueller and Robak traditionally ranks No. 1 in total receipts. Nebraska voters approved legislative term limits in 2000.
Loree Bykerk, a political science professor at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, compared the changing landscape for lobbyists to an instructor who once taught graduate students suddenly teaching kindergartners. "You have to start from scratch with these (new lawmakers)," Bykerk said, which means spending more time explaining issues and the impact of bills.
She said it's possible that lobbyists will have more power in the future because they will have more experience and knowledge than the senators they lobby. The lobbyists questioned that.
Cutshall, a 63-year-old native South Dakotan, said that over the years, lawmakers have acquired more staff to do independent research and draft legislation - tasks that used to fall to lobbyists. Younger, energetic lobbyists will be needed to spend the extra time needed to be effective with lawmakers.
"They really need to have someone who has more in common with them," Ruth said....
Because each of the lobbyists plans to maintain some role with their firms, no major change in clients among them is expected. And there won't be fewer lobbyists - each firm will bring on new people to fill the roles of those retiring.
Without suggesting anything untoward on the part of the three retiring lobbyists mentioned in this article, I still have to admit that the problems they've faced are one of the more positive results I've seen suggested of term limits' ultimate effect.
The old order in the Unicameral too often allowed lobbyists to trade upon their decades-long personal relationships with legislators to help clients achieve their goals. Although there are no guarantees that more fresh-faced legislators will prove any less prone to compromising themselves with lobbyist ties, term limits at least serve as a check on just how long any one vote can stay entrenched with a single special interest.
Loree Bykerk really makes a silly argument likening freshmen State Senators to kindergartners, as if the problem these lobbyists are facing is the education of new legislators. That's rubbish! Sure, there is bound to be a little bit more work involved bringing State Senators up to speed in complex areas of state funding and the like. But, the real problem being encountered by veteran lobbyists is that they suddenly have to do their jobs. They're facing more State Senators who are unknown quantities and who may just need some actual convincing.
That may be tougher sledding, but I won't be shedding any tears. It's called a hard sell, and our democracy deserves nothing less (probably a whole lot more).
Of course, I'm not so naive to think the best facts and the most essential programs will intrinsically fare better under this new regime. A new generation of lobbyists will certainly develop new methods of twisting legislation to serve their clients' interest rather than the people of our state.
But, for now, these term limits exist as a sort of reset button on just how long those efforts might bear fruit. Is that progress? You tell me. Otherwise, we should all see soon enough. |
