To Lobby, Or Not To Lobby? That Is The Question.
 By Mark Forsythe The Kansas City Post For the past few years Kansas City has had to deal with a shrinking budget. Because only a very small percentage of the city budget is actually discretionary there is very little flexibility as far as cutting programs or finding efficiencies. 2009 is shaping up to be a very lean year and city leaders are already evaluating next year's budget to try and figure out what to cut. Contrary to what you may hear I believe there is still some fat in the budget. For example, did you know the City of Kansas City pays a lobbying firm to work the corridors of Jefferson City? For the next two years we have contracted with the lobbying firm of Gamble & Schlemeier at the rate of $187,563 for the first year and $193,708 for the second year. What exactly do we get for our money? I am not trying to disparage Gamble & Schlemeier. I'm sure it is a fine firm which represents its clients admirably, but does Kansas City need professional lobbying at the state government level? I would maintain we already have elected representatives in both the house and the senate who while working for their individual constituencies within Kansas City should also be working for the greater good of the city in which their constituents live. (Phew! I'm tired just from typing that sentence!) I was once specifically asked by a community organization to commit to keeping the lobbying firm under contract. When I replied that I would not, and put forth that our state representatives and senators are already fine advocates for Kansas City issues they appeared stunned. I asked for one example of how having a professional lobbyist had worked out for them and there was confused silence. They had no idea what, if anything a lobbyist had done for them, they just felt like they needed one! A $200K contract is just one example of what I consider to be tax dollars not well spent. Not to pick on lobbyists exclusively, we also spend a great deal of money every year on marketing. I don't have those dollar amounts handy but I'm sure across the board the total easily outdoes the $200K lobbying expenditure. In these financially difficult times I think we need to take a hard look at each of our city contracts and ask the question, "Is it worth it?" Perhaps the most telling tale of all is told by our lobbying firm's website where they detail their city and county clients' agendas. Clicking on Kansas City agenda comes back blank. Maybe that's accurate. Sometimes I too wonder what our agenda is. |
posted by Mark at 10:01 AM
Comments on "To Lobby, Or Not To Lobby? That Is The Question."
-
Anonymous said ... (1:45 PM) :
-
Mark said ... (2:20 PM) :
-
Lance Weber said ... (3:40 PM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (8:07 PM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (9:30 AM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (10:18 AM) :
-
alan birch said ... (11:46 AM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (1:33 PM) :
-
Mark said ... (2:00 PM) :
-
Political Parties are for Pussies said ... (2:36 PM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (4:08 PM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (6:21 PM) :
-
Anonymous said ... (11:49 PM) :
-
the wife said ... (11:35 AM) :
post a commentI'll redirect the question to you Mark. What have our elected officials done for KC in Jefferson City?
anon 1:45PM,
That sounds like a loaded question. Without getting into the specifics of any particular legislators' performance I'll just say that we don't pay them $200K from our City budget to advocate for Kansas City. In my opinion, the advocacy of issues important to KC is intrinsic for a state legislator from Kansas City.
What a great post. Thanks for enlightening me, Mark. Since there are so many House Reps whose Districts are entirely within KC city limits, it would be smart if they had their own organization devoted to Kansas City's concerns. Maybe an intelligent and insightful person among them will take the initiative to put together a small group like this.
While state elected officials may represent constituents in the city, they don't see the city itself as a constituent. State governments oversee programs and spending that directly impacts municipalities. The City needs to employ lobbyists to make sure that the state elected officials are aware of how policies impact the City as an entity, not only how those policies impact their constituents.
If elected officials don't see the city itself as a constituent then we need to vote them out and put somebody in who does.
Exactly what has this lobbying firm done to earn $200,000?
Taken a lot of white dudes out to lunch, probably a couple of rounds of golf, and maybe a hooker or two. $200,000 does not go very far, really.
Let's not forget that the state house and senate are controlled by the Rebuplican party and our state delegation are mostly democrats.
There are also times when we are fighting against forces within our City. As one example,the Police Dept. has it's own lobbyist and believe it or not sometimes they have different views than the City.
Another example came several years ago when companies that represented the mutual fund industry, went to Jeff City and had the Legislature create an exemption for this industry from the City's business license fee; that decision cost the City over $1million per year.
Even effective legislators lose sight of a bill as it winds its way thru the legislative process and that is exactly why lobbyist are important. Their job is to protect your interest not just in promoting legislation but watching for unforseen attacks that make there way inot the process especially late in the legislative term.
While 200K looks like a significant amount of money and it is, the negative impact of damaging legislation can cost millions.
Jim
"Let's not forget that the state house and senate are controlled by the Rebuplican party and our state delegation are mostly democrats."
That argument holds no water with me. If our elected representatives cannot accomplish anything because they are Democrats then we need to elect Republicans. Period. Represent the people, not your party.
"Even effective legislators lose sight of a bill as it winds its way thru the legislative process and that is exactly why lobbyist are important."
I personally have more faith in our legislators. They have themselves and paid staff to monitor the progress of legislation. That's their job. We elect them to see legislation through to its completion, not throw a bill over the wall and wait for the lobbyists to handle it.
"While 200K looks like a significant amount of money and it is, the negative impact of damaging legislation can cost millions."
I'm from Mizzurra. Show me. How about an ROI every year to determine if it's worth the taxpayers' dime? If indeed we're saving millions for the expenditure of $200K, then I'll be the first to sign on. To use an example of something that happened a few years ago which may or may not have been influenced by the presence of a paid Kansas City lobbying effort is pretty thin.
"Let's not forget that the state house and senate are controlled by the Rebuplican party and our state delegation are mostly democrats."
That is the same tired argument used by partisan hacks on both sides of the aisle. If politicians would spend more time worrying about their constituents and less time worrying about who is wearing a donkey or an elephant pin this country wouldn't be in so much trouble.
Naive to believe that the Republican controlled legislature will allow Democrats to get some things done; noble but you must not watch the MO legislature operate much. Look at any meaningful piece of legislation that the City has requested in the last few years and it was spearheaded by Repubilcans.
It is nieve to believe the elected officials from the Kansas City metro are going to advocate for KC issues.
Have you heard anything from any of them concerning money to help pay for the sewer system repairs? What have local state-level elected officials done for economic development in the KC metro area?
KC needs lobbists in Jefferson City if they have any hope of influencing legislation favorable to the City.
Originally I wrote a long post detailing the failure of every representative from Kansas City but I chose to not go politico on your website.
If you visited any hearings in Jeff City last year, you would understand that Kansas City needed some serious help in getting anything accomplished on our behalf. $200,000 sounds awfully high but in the "pay to play" world of politics I hope Kansas City will benefit from the investment.
Seriously - the "republican vs. democrat" Jeff City argument is TERRIBLE and holds no water with me. Reasonable minds can disagree – and if you can’t negotiate then you shouldn’t be elected.
I would like to see what lobbying firms have brought to Kansas City from the state. From what I hear Jeff City is just one big party when the legislature is in session and actually sounds like a fun place to collect a paycheck while you claim to be tracking bills through committee. I don't mind spending the money - if they are paying for themselves. I can't think of any state legislation that has benefited Kansas City in excess of $200,000/year. Maybe someone can help me out with this one...