State lawmakers are contemplating changing how the state defines a lobbyist following a new ruling dramatically widening that definition.
A new opinion by the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Commission found that people who meet with state legislators, even once, to discuss pending legislation must register as lobbyists if they are acting as advocates for their employers. They also would be required to pay a $300 registration fee.
The commission said state law does not require that those people be professional lobbyists.
“Instead, the General Assembly drafted a broad provision which can only be interpreted to mean that any individual compensated by another, whether as a consultant or an employee, is acting as a lobbyist if such person attempts to influence legislation by the General Assembly,” Commission Executive Secretary Stacey Kalberman wrote.
Tim Callahan, a spokesman for the Professional Association of Georgia Educators, said the new ruling gave many people pause.
Last week, PAGE officials joined hundreds of PTA parents at the Capitol to talk to lawmakers about budget priorities for schools. While the opinion states that volunteers need not register, Callahan said the expanded definition of lobbyists might mean that PTA officers might be required to register.
“I think we have to be careful not to interpret it too broadly,” he said.
Such gatherings are common at the Capitol, he said. “That’s just participatory democracy. I don’t think there is anything wrong with that," he said.
Patrick Millsaps, chairman of the commission and the lone dissenter in the opinion, said he believes the commission’s ruling limits too much the right of individuals to petition their government, including requiring them to pay to register as lobbyists.
Although he voted against the opinion, Millsaps said he sees how the rest of the commission could vote in favor.
“We’ve got to look at the statute as written and try to make an advisory opinion as to what it actually says,” he said. “The statute, as written, is broad. We just confirmed it.”
Millsaps said the ruling does not affect the right of private citizens to voice their opinions on legislation as long as they are not getting paid to do it.
“The more unclear one was if a CEO of a company goes down to talk about legislation that affects that company,” he said. “Does that CEO have to register or not? ... My personal opinion is that it becomes problematic.”
The Georgia Chamber of Commerce asked the commission for the opinion to clarify a portion of last year' ethics overhaul.
“We felt the way the law was written it was unclear who was required to register," chamber spokeswoman Joselyn Baker said. "We do believe that this is an unintended consequence, that the Legislature did not mean that the average small-business person needed to register to be able to express an opinion.”
Baker said the chamber has registered two additional employees as a result of the commission's guidance.
House Majority Whip Edward Lindsey, R-Atlanta, said the opinion “raises very troubling questions.”
“I believe if implemented the advisory opinion would provide a chilling effect on the ability of the public to interact with their elected officials,” he said. “It is absolutely paramount we take steps to correct the crisis being created.”
Lindsey said his bill, HB 232, which is designed to fix another problem created by last year's legislation, is before the Senate Ethics Committee now, having already passed the House. Lindsey is working to amend his bill to address the problem but would not provide details of those changes until the amendment is ready.
Millsaps was relieved to hear that a legislative fix was in the works.
“That’s something that makes sense in my mind," he said. “This is brand-new legislation. It’s a year old. It’s not uncommon to ... tweak it a little bit.”
About the Author
