Lobbying and Super PACs

This was an inevitable development in campaign finance law; lobbyists are now being tied to Super PACs as explained in this Politico article.[1] It is only natural for lobbyists to try and use every bit of influence that they can muster to advance the causes of their organizations.   Many in the public perceive lobbying as the rough equivalent of influence buying, i.e., lobbyists promise money to congressional members and in exchange those members vote favorably on the lobbyist's cause.   This conception is generally incorrect.  Quid pro quo deals of the kind just mentioned are expressly against the law.   Additionally, the amount of money any one person can give is limited to the indexed campaign finance caps as set by the United States Code and enforced by the Federal Election Commission.  Lobbying in and of itself is a protected right by the Constitution in the First Amendment under the right to petition the government. [2]

More troubling is the notion that lobbyists are attempting to use Super PACs as an implicit threat against the members in Congress.   It is obvious that Super PACs have played a fundamental role in this year’s elections.   Super PACs have spent inordinate amounts of money without having to worry about the same disclosure restrictions or the same funding restrictions because of their independent nature.  Numerous Super PACs have had significant influence in both the primary and the ongoing general elections this year.   Ousted member Silvestre Reyes lost his seat in the last weeks of his primary campaign when the Campaign for Primary Accountability poured over $360,000 of advertising into the race. [3]  With the large amounts of money that Super PACs can utilize against a candidate, it stands to reason that members would be hesitant to deny an audience with a lobbyist who is tied to a Super PAC.    As Super PACs come into their maturity in this and future cycles, it will be interesting to see how these new finance creatures change the landscape of other related activities on Capitol Hill.

---

[1] I am trying to post more often on this blog rather than putting out long and detailed articles roughly once a month.   This is the first of what I hope becomes at least a weekly update to my blog. 

[2] Granted, when a lobbyist gives to a member the lobbyist generally has access to many more individuals who can also donate maximal amounts of money to a candidate.   For example, Congressman Bilbray has received over $17,000 from one company, but further investigation reveals that the company's lobbyists, and many of its employees have all contributed within the allowable limits.

[3] The Campaign for Primary Accountability, a Super PAC, has promised to spend its money against vulnerable incumbents to make the primary process more competitive.