January 16, 2005
Rell Is Taking Aim at Lobbying
By STACEY STOWE, NY TIMES

LINK

OR the lobbyists he favored, former Gov. John G. Rowland was a gold mine. The door to his office was open to a select few whose access to the state's highest official helped them land clients and thousands of dollars in fees.

The lobbying industry is a particularly lucrative one in Connecticut, a state that ranks eighth in the nation for most lobbying expenditures. In 2003, special interests spent more than $30 million lobbying the state, according to a study by the Center for Public Integrity, a nonprofit group in Washington that researches public policy.

There is nothing illegal about governors meeting with lobbyists, but the ethics scandal that drove Mr. Rowland out of office has made his predecessor, Gov. M. Jodi Rell, focus on ethics reform and changing the way she and other elected officials do business with lobbyists.

On the day she took office last year, Mrs. Rell pronounced ethics reform her top priority. Mrs. Rell has since said that, unlike past administrations, she will not meet with lobbyists. On Monday, she announced that she would propose legislation that would ban legislators and elected state officials such as herself from accepting political donations from lobbyists or a lobbyists' political action committees. South Carolina is the only other state to ban such donations.

"Her action is an acknowledgment that there is a problem with the amount of influence of the lobbying game in Connecticut," said Tom Swan, who is the executive director of Connecticut Citizen Action Group, a government watchdog organization that has studied the lobbying industry.

But changing the lobbying business is not going to be easy, and not just because the industry or legislators will resist. The business, and the clients they represent, have been so interwoven in the democratic process that there is often not a clear line of what may be improper.

"Lobbyists are legitimate players in the process," said George C. Jepsen, chairman of the Democratic State Central Committee. "The challenge of a democracy is to create a level playing field. Just because an interest is unique and special doesn't mean it's not legitimate."

Passing the legislation Mrs. Rell proposed on Monday could be difficult. Donations from lobbyists account for as much as 70 percent of the money in the political action committees of legislative leaders, and political donations, while subject to regulation, are provided some measure of protection under the First Amendment. Legislators and lobbyists said it was more likely that Mrs. Rell will end up with a compromise that further restricts, but does not eliminate, donations from lobbyists. But floating the idea was considered bold.

"I think she's setting a tone," said Christopher Healy, a Republican lobbyist.

Still, the nexus between lobbyists, legislators and the executive branch is a thicket of connections, many thorny. A birthday party last summer for the governor's chief of staff is an example.

M. Lisa Moody, the chief of staff, was honored with a party at a Hartford restaurant that a Democratic official, who was at the restaurant, said was given by the lobbyist Patricia LeShane, a friend of Mrs. Rell since she served in the Legislature in the 1980's. The official did not want his name used for fear of offending the governor. Ms. Moody said on Tuesday that she couldn't remember who gave the party or the name of the restaurant.

Ms. LeShane's lobbying and public relations firm, Sullivan & LeShane, is one of the most successful in the state. She and Patrick Sullivan, her husband and partner, wrote $25,906 in checks and in-kind donations to individual candidates, political parties, and political action committees between 2002 and 2003, according to a disclosure filed in the Secretary of the State's office. Ms. LeShane, who could not be reached for comment, contributed $762.43, including expenditures for signs, wine and cake, directly to Mrs. Rell in 2002. Another party, this one for Ms. LeShane's birthday held last July, was attended by Ms. Moody and another member of the governor's staff, Rachel Rubin, the state's ethics chief.

And before her breast cancer was diagnosed last month, Mrs. Rell had planned to attend at least one Republican caucus fund-raiser before the opening of the legislative session on Jan. 5. Caucus fund-raisers are routinely dominated by lobbyists.

Mr. Jepsen criticized Mrs. Rell's decision to attend such functions as "hypocritical."

"She won't meet with lobbyists, but she'll allow the Senate Republicans to build an event around her that everyone knows will be swarming with lobbyists and she'll be the draw for them," he said, in remarks made before Mrs. Rell's illness.

Her spokesman, and defenders like Mr. Healy, had a different reaction.

"She can't operate in a bubble," Mr. Healy said. "If people run into each other on a social basis, that's perfectly appropriate."

Ms. Moody and Ms. Rubin, who both said they were invited to Ms. LeShane's birthday party as her friends, also said they wrote checks to cover the cost of their refreshments and comply with state ethics laws. Does Ms. LeShane have an advantage over other lobbyists because of her friendships within the governor's office?

"No," said Ms. Moody. "It's just social. People have a life outside the Capitol."

Dennis Schain, Mrs. Rell's spokesman, said that staff members have longtime friendships that date back years before they had their current positions.

"They set proper limits with friends as well as anyone else they socialize with," he said

The flurry of parties and check-writing earlier this month is a good example of lobbyists in action. Under state law, state legislators and other elected state officials cannot accept donations during the legislative session (although fund-raisers for political parties can continue). In the days and nights before Jan. 5, the legislative leadership held several fund-raisers.

About 150 people, several literally with check in hand, attended the Senate Republican "Vision 21 Kick-Off Reception in Celebration of the 2005 Legislative Session" held on Jan. 3 at Carbone's Ristorante in Hartford. Senate Minority Leader Louis C. DeLuca and John McKinney, the assistant Senate minority leader, were hosts of the event. Tickets were $250. About three-quarters of attendees were lobbyists.

There is another method of fund-raising: the book of ads bought by lobbyists and their clients. At the Senate Republican caucus, there was a book of 75 ads at $250 each for a total of $18,750.

After leaving Carbone's - some attendees stayed as few as 10 minutes - many drove across town to the fund-raiser for the Senate Democratic Caucus. This party, which raised about $51,000, was held in an opulent, high-ceilinged room at the Bushnell theater in Hartford and included at least 200 guests. As at the Republican fund-raiser, there was an ad book, which raised about $17,500.

"The way it works is, you take an envelope and you put in checks, from yourself, from people in your firm and from your clients, and you hand over the envelope when you walk in," said one lobbyist. She echoed others interviewed, many of whom discussed how careful they were to follow state laws and ethics guidelines regarding lobbying, but who would also speak only on condition of anonymity for fear of damaging their relationships with legislators.

On Jan. 4, Lt. Gov. Kevin B. Sullivan, a Democrat who has gubernatorial aspirations, was host to a breakfast fund-raiser at the Connecticut Culinary Institute in Farmington that raised an estimated $25,000, according to Dan Tapper, his spokesman. The exact amounts must be reported to the office of the Secretary of the State by the end of the month.

James A. Amann, a Democrat from Milford who is speaker of the House, held fund-raisers on Jan. 3 and Jan. 4. He said he thought he raised about $80,000, money that will be used for campaigns of other Democrats and to help pay expenses for the House Democrats and their staff during the session.

In other words, the money is not just for one campaign, but can be used for many purposes. A legislator could, for example, authorize his campaign treasurer to write a check to pay for a special election or the campaign debt of a fellow House member who helped elect him. The money can also be used to fund future political ambitions.

The chairmen of the legislative committees are key targets for donations. For instance, State Senator John W. Fonfara, a Hartford Democrat, held a fund-raiser before the session opened that was heavily attended by lobbyists for electric utility industries. These same companies are monitoring proposals to deregulate the industry. Many of these lobbyists will have clients before the energy and technology committee, which is run by Mr. Fonfara. It is estimated that between $18,000 and $22,000 was raised at the event, according to a legislative aide who spoke on the condition that his name not be used.

Patrick Scully, director of communications for the Senate Democrats, said the utility industry was among a number of industries represented at the fund-raiser and said Mr. Fonfara often sides with consumers against the utilities. Mr. Healy said, "If you were representing energy clients and didn't go to Fonfara's event, you'd be fired."

Although he admitted there are those who place special interests above their constituency, Mr. Amann said: "Just because somebody gives you a $250 check, they don't own you. The only people who own you are your constituents."

Several Republicans noted that another lobbying powerhouse, the unions, donate hundreds of thousands of dollars typically to Democratic candidates and political action committees with money from dues paid by union members. For example, between 2002 and 2003, the Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ, donated more than $21,000 to largely Democratic candidates and action committees.

The lobbying business gets even more interwoven with government when a legislator also appears to act like a lobbyist. Catherine W. Cook is a Republican senator from Mystic and for a few years she was paid by Pfizer, the pharmaceutical company based in her district, to conduct national research. Some legislators call her "Senator Pfizer." Last year, Ms. Cook, a member of the Public Health Committee, worked against state efforts for the pool-buying of pharmaceuticals, said State Representative David McCluskey, a Democrat from West Hartford who was vice chairman of the committee. Pool buying would make cheaper drugs available to the state where the annual budget for pharmaceuticals is between $500 million and $700 million.

"She's been a crusader against that," Mr. McCluskey said.

Ms. Cook said she ended her contract with Pfizer last year. She said she now owns a company that focuses on patient advocacy nationwide, but not in Connecticut. She draws criticism in the Legislature, she said, because she votes against price controls and government-run health care, which she said would reduce money for research.

"I don't lobby for Pfizer," she said. "I'm not employed by them. I happen to represent a district that has 7,000 people who work there."

A question has also been raised by legislators about Lawrence F. Cafero, a Republican state representative from Norwalk, who is a partner at the Hartford law firm of Brown Rudnick Berlack Israels. He said he meets with municipal officials on behalf of private developers, but as a lawyer, not a lobbyist.

Municipal lobbyists are not required to register with the state. Connecticut Common Cause, a good-government advocacy organization, has sought legislation for the past five years that would regulate municipal lobbyists. Last year, the judiciary committee, where Mr. Cafero was a member, voted for an amendment that would delete the entire bill and replace it with a study. During the discussion preceding the vote, Mr. Cafero asked if such a bill would require him to wear the same lobbyist badge worn by state lobbyists, said Andy Sauer, the executive director of Common Cause who attended the meeting.

On Monday, Mr. Cafero said the quote was taken out of context.

"I also said that if you looked at the language in the bill it so defined lobbyists as to be any advocate for a client that is appearing before or will have a decision made by a local legislative body, that includes all attorneys who appear before any local planning and zoning board," he said.

Mr. Sauer acknowledged that Connecticut has a part-time legislature, where people work a day job.

"But I have a problem when the two cross paths," he said. "When legislators' actions on the floor of the House and Senate benefit their employers, it becomes a clear conflict of interest."

In fact, the Legislature is often a steppingstone to a career in lobbying. Mr. Cafero's law partner, Thomas D. Ritter, a Democrat who was the former speaker of the house, now lobbies his former legislative colleagues. William DiBella, a Democrat, who was the former Senate majority leader, is a lobbyist who also sits on the board of the quasi-public state agency, the Metropolitan District Commission. Christopher DePino, a Republican from New Haven, opened his own lobbying firm a few years ago after serving eight years in the Legislature. Michael Martone, a close friend and former aide of Mr. Rowland, lobbied Connecticut on behalf of Enron. David O'Leary, a lobbyist, was Mr. Rowland's former chief of staff. Brendan Fox, once Mr. Rowland's deputy chief of staff and legal adviser, now works for Gaffney, Bennett & Associates, a top lobbying firm based in New Britain.

Lobbyists said their business is among the most regulated professions in Connecticut.

"We're required to file the most extensive reports and we can be audited at any time," Mr. Healy said.

Jeffrey B. Garfield, the director of the State Elections Enforcement Commission, also noted the influence of lobbyist money on various races.

"Besides raising suspicions about undue influence and possible quid pro quo, it also further diminishes the process because they don't give to challengers, only incumbents," he said.

Jay F. Malcynsky, one of the state's most successful lobbyists, expressed little concern about the proposed ban on donations. Mr. Malcynsky established a political action committee in 1987 that each year distributes tens of thousands of dollars to parties and candidates, according to records with the office of the Secretary of the State.

"If the governor and others feel that financial contributions by lobbyists convey the perception of an adverse impact on the current system, I have no problem with the ban," he said. "I've never felt pressured to make a campaign contribution to get access."

If there is any doubt of the influence wielded by lobbyists, consider the fees that a company is willing to pay them. According to State Ethics Commission filings for 2003 to 2004, Northeast Utilities had agreements to pay a monthly fee of $8,333 to registered lobbyists with Levy & Droney and yearly fees of $65,000 to Cranmore, FitzGerald & Meaney; $73,000 to Malloy & Associates, $155,000 to Gaffney, Bennett and $100,000 each to Avallone, DiBella & Associates and Updike, Kelly & Spellacy.

Just how corrupting is money to the legislative process? It's difficult to link how legislators vote with the campaign donations they receive. For one, lobbyists' influence on legislators extends beyond money. They represent companies and industries that may employ hundreds of a legislator's constituents.

But studies done at the Congressional level indicate that at the very least, a legislator will devote more time to a bill that involves an entity or individual that supported his campaign, said Howard Reiter, chairman of the political science department at the University of Connecticut.

"It's a more subtle quid pro quo," Mr. Reiter said. "There's a whole network of relationships between lobbyists and legislators."

Banning donations from lobbyists to political candidates would not shut down the industry.

"I think most lobbyists would say 'that's great,' " Mr. Healy said. Other lobbyists admitted they often write checks because they can't afford to say no.

David McQuade, a Hartford lobbyist, said: "Money gives you access, but the thing is that legislators are citizens who don't have the expertise needed to understand every issue. Donations or not, I still think there is a role for lobbyists out there just to provide information."