G.I., “Capitol Watchdog,” doing more than a little lobbying on the side

by David Safier

The Goldwater Institute likes to bill itself as a good government Capitol Watchdog. But when its employees testify in front of the Arizona legislature on a regular basis with a clear agenda, simply declaring themselves neutral on the legislation doesn't cut it. And when they actually write bills . . . it sounds like in real life, G.I. really wants to be a Big Dog, not a watchdog.

The Capitol Times (subscription only) has an article about a push to make more G.I. staffers register as lobbyists. Right now, only Starlee Rhoades, vice president of external affairs, is registered. But she doesn't really do much lobbying. It's mainly done by people who bill themselves as "analysts."

Check this out from a Republican lobbyist.

“I’ve always viewed them as an activist organization that was passionate about their cause,” said Republican lobbyist and former legislator Mike Gardner. “They have a definite opinion, and they share that opinion, just like any lobbyist. I don’t care how you register, it’s what you say about the bill.

An activist organization? Wash your mouth out, sir. They're watchdogs and analysts, not activists!

And check this out, from Amy Bjelland, elections director for the Secretary of State’s Office.

“The Goldwater Institute made 26 requests to speak before the 49th Legislature alone,” Bjelland wrote. “The Ninth Special Session was called at the institute’s urging relating to putting the issue of the right to a secret ballot before the voters… to the extent that employees of the principal will be engaging in the conduct regulated by Arizona law as noted above, each of these people must be added to the principal’s registration.”

A Republican lobbyist and the Republican-run Sec of State's office agree. So do a few lobbyists on the progressive side.

To try to argue that analysts are just providing technical information and not lobbying is “absurd,” said Sandy Bahr, director of the Grand Canyon chapter of the Sierra Club and a registered lobbyist.

“You’re not just here giving technical advice, you’re here because you think there’s a good idea,” she said. “There’s a fair amount of rolling of the eyes when they try to claim that.”

Dana Naimark, president and CEO of the Children’s Action Alliance who is also registered as the organization’s lobbyist, agreed with Bahr and called the “technical information” argument “a distinction without a difference.”

Call me crazy, but it looks to be like the self-described Government Watchdog group bears watching.