Wednesday, Jan. 25, 2006 | 7:44 a.m.
Jon Ralston hosts the news discussion program Face to Face with Jon Ralston on Las Vegas ONE and also publishes the daily e-mail newsletter RalstonFlash.com. His column for the Las Vegas Sun appears Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. Ralston can be reached at 870-7997 or through e-mail at [email protected].
"Unfortunately, it takes scandal to get reform. People don't want to change. It's human nature, particularly if they're being asked to change themselves."
"How could it be worse?" he asked.
I didn't have a good answer.
As the paper of record detailed this week how some states are overhauling their laws to try to reduce lobbyists' influence on lawmakers, here in Nevada the game remains the same. There are no rules, except for almost meaningless expenditure reports. And this week the spotlight shone on the incestuous nature of the contest putting legislators and lobbyists essentially on the same team and pitted against the public.
Less than a week after Democratic lawmakers here -- mirroring their counterparts where Jack Abramoff used to do business -- presented their "Honesty in Government Agenda," the Rolling Stones played an encore that drowned out the message.
The story, first broken by the Reno Gazette-Journal, has been making the rounds of the media in Nevada about how mostly Democrats, and mostly leadership Democrats, were feted by mortgage behemoth Ameriquest at the Stones concert last year. Seems the company, with former Attorney General Frankie Sue Del Papa peddling the hoped-for influence, gave free tickets, worth hundreds of dollars, to a bunch of legislators.
Oh, there were some Republicans along for the fun, but this was mostly a Democratic scandal -- to reverse paraphrase Democrat Numero Uno Harry Reid on the Abramoff mess. To make matters worse for the concertgoers, the company this week agreed to pay $325 million in fines to settle predatory lending allegations. But while we are all having fun with Rolling Stones riffs, let me pause for some sympathy for the devil -- in this case, the lobbyist class.
If Del Papa wants to hasten through the revolving door to represent Ameriquest, so be it. But the tap-dancing by some of her Democratic pals about how a concert ticket can't influence them and how they are so above it all is just too much to bear for anyone who has watched the Carson City Cuisinart produce laws that began as idealistic ideas and then were reduced to mush by lawmakers influenced by paid advocates. The difference is the lobbyists were just doing their job; the lawmakers were abdicating theirs.
Or as one ingenuous freshman lawmaker said at a convention last year, "I wrote the law and then a lobbyist helped me make it better." No doubt.
The issue in Washington is no different than in Carson City or Tallahassee, Fla., or Salem, Ore. The line between campaign fundraising and lobbying is almost nonexistent. And making that line brighter is almost impossible without raising serious First Amendment concerns.
In Nevada, just as in D.C. and elsewhere, lobbyists raise money for candidates and then bring clients before them asking for favors. Sometimes they will toss in other goodies, too -- fancy dinners, golf outings, concert tickets. It's all about keeping the door closed so everyone continues to sleep in the same bed.
The Times reports this week that states are mulling reforms "designed to eliminate privately financed junkets, require the disclosure of spending on lobbying, ban gift-giving by private interests and curb the hiring of lawmakers' relatives as an under-the-table kickback scheme."
Bully for them. And some of this stuff, especially the laws that emphasize transparency, will help. But no amount of feel-good schemes will render illegal the legalized incest that afflicts state capitals and the nation's political locus; no law will stop foolish legislators from thinking it's fine to accept free Stones tickets or prevent corrupt lawmakers from taking much worse.
That legalized incest is practiced almost daily during the 120 days that is commonly referred to by the misnomer, "legislative process." There are some quality folks among the Gang of 63, but too often you get what you pay for -- and $7,800 every other year will buy wealthy dilettantes and people who think that is a good salary.
The so-called process too often is a bazaar where lobbyists seeking a bill or wanting one killed get to choose from any 22 assemblymen, 11 senators and one governor. The price -- high or low -- depends on the issue.
How could it get worse?
I still don't have a good answer.
archive
