Kill this Bill: The Goldwater Institute is a lobbyist organization

Posted by AzBlueMeanie:

No single organization has caused more harm to the state of Arizona or contributed more to its image as an ideological backwater than the Goldwater Institute. The Goldwater Institute operates as a non-profit 501(c)(3), which means it does not have to disclose the donors who fund it, and it does not have to register as a lobbyist organization — even though the Goldwater Institute has its so-called "experts" testifying on bills at the state legislature on a routine basis. They also draft model legislation as a member of ALEC.

The Goldwater Institute is the lobbyist organization trying to kill Arizona's Citizens Clean Elections and is all-in for expansion of Citizens United v. FEC to allow unlimited direct corporate contributions to candidates on the specious legal theories that "money = speech" and "corporations are people."

You may recall that Arizona Secretary of State Ken Bennett had quite enough of the Goldwater Institute operating as lobbyists without registering its members as lobbyists last year. Goldwater Institute ‘lobbies’ against registering more lobbyists - Arizona Capitol Times (subscription required):

In March, Amy Bjelland, elections director for the Secretary of State’s Office, sent the Goldwater Institute a letter urging it to register their analysts — who are testifying in legislative committees and contacting legislators — as lobbyists.

“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.”

Secretary of State Ken Bennett said he disagreed with the Goldwater Institute’s interpretation of the exemption from the statute.

“When you start to express positions on whether legislation is good or bad, that is no longer answering technical questions and that is no longer technical information,” he said.

Bennett said his office would look into new legislation to clarify the language before the impasse with the institute could be laid to rest.

Well, quite the opposit has occurred. The Goldwater Institute had one of its ready and willing stooges, Rep. Justin Olson (R-Mesa), sponsor HB 2565 defining non-profit groups as being outside the scope of "lobbyist" organizations, and thus exempt. Bill eyes definition of who is lobbyist:

The bill is designed to resolve a running debate between the Goldwater Institute and the Arizona Secretary of State's Office by putting non-profit groups such as the institute outside the definition of "lobbyist."

That would mean no need to adhere to state laws that limit gifts to public officials or to identify the interest a person represents when testifying to the Legislature. It also would exempt such groups from requirements to file quarterly public reports on spending.

Olson said he doesn't believe the Goldwater Institute lobbies, agreeing with the conservative think tank's assertion that it is merely providing expert testimony.

"From the Goldwater Institute's perspective, they're an academic institution out there to make sure people understand constitutional law and that constitutional limits are adhered to," Olson said.

And, he added, the institute views the requirement to register as a lobbyist as an infringement on its First Amendment protections.

The Secretary of State's Office, which oversees lobbyist registration, has a different take.

"We sent them two letters saying, 'We believe you're lobbying, you should sign up,' " Assistant Secretary of State Jim Drake said.

The exchange started last spring, when one Goldwater staffer registered as a lobbyist, triggering inquiries from the secretary of state about the need for other staffers to follow suit. Goldwater economists and attorneys are regular fixtures at the Capitol, meeting with lawmakers and testifying before committees on legislation — often legislation they themselves have drafted.

The disagreement between the secretary of state and Goldwater is at a standstill because the institute argues it is an association, an exemption allowed under law.

Meanwhile, other non-profit groups registered as lobbyists say they don't understand what the fuss is all about.

Dana Naimark, president and chief executive officer of the Children's Action Alliance, said the reporting requirements are not onerous. And for the sake of transparency, it's important for the public to know who is speaking for or against any given issue at the Legislature, she said.

If non-profits such as hers were exempt from lobbyist registration, Naimark said it wouldn't make much difference.

"We would certainly still identify ourselves as being there as the Children's Action Alliance, as a voice for Arizona's children," she said.

Stuart Goodman is a lobbyist whose clients range from for-profit groups to associations to non-profits. He said their varying tax statuses make no difference in how he lobbies on their behalf.

The essence of lobbying, he said, is educating legislators and legislative staffers on an issue.

"They're all expressing a point of view," he said of lobbyists.

Others have questioned why a group's tax status should be a barometer of who must register as a lobbyist. If being not-for-profit is a reason for exemption, government lobbyists, from city halls to state agencies, could also argue for an exemption.

Olson said the requirement for government representatives was a decision made by previous Legislatures. As for transparency, he said non-profits are required to make plenty of disclosures, although primarily to state and federal tax agencies.

G. Michael Williams, whose clients include associations, a government agency and various for-profit companies, predicted only half-jokingly that if HB 2565 becomes law, many groups might consider reorganizing as a non-profit to avoid legislative disclosure.

Which is exactly the kind of "bad government" result the Goldwater Institute regularly lobbies on behalf of in the Arizona legislature.

The bill is scheduled for a hearing Tuesday before the House Government Committee. Kill this bill. The committee should be doing quite the opposite, making the Goldwater Institute register as a lobbyist and comply with the minimal disclosure requirements that other 501(c)(3) organizations are already doing with their registered lobbyists. No special treatment for the Goldwater Institute. Let's have transparency in government.

UPDATE: The Arizona Republic in an editorial opinion on Tuesday joins me in calling to kill this bill. Don't shroud Ariz. lobbying:

In the interest of creating a tailor-made exemption for Goldwater, this bill exempts all non-profits from state laws that limit gifts to public officials. It strips away the requirement that representatives of non-profits have to identify their organizations when testifying. It eliminates quarterly lobbying reports on spending.

It cloaks special-interest lobbying.

The Fiesta Bowl scandal demonstrated that non-profits need as much scrutiny as any other entity.

HB 2565 is a barrier to every taxpaying Arizonan who wants to keep a careful watch on what the Legislature is doing.