Since resigning from Congress two years ago as a result of some seriously icky tweets, Anthony Weiner has cashed in... View Article
Continue readingEvaluating Municipal Lobbying Data: Chicago
“Consistent” is not the first word one would use to describe the landscape of lobbying data released by municipalities. As revealed by our research, the formats and range of information local governments collect and disclose about lobbying activity varies quite a bit from one community context to another. After exploring the best practices for collecting and releasing this information, we created and recently published a Municipal Lobbying Data Guidebook. This guide addresses not only what kinds of information should be included in an ideal lobbying dataset, but also information about how that data should be collected and shared, regulated, and examples of the impact of having this information made available in an open way. (Something we’ll continue to explore in future posts.)
So how do municipalities measure up to these standards? We took a close look at three cities -- Austin, Chicago, and Philadelphia -- to explore what they’re doing well and where their lobbying disclosure can improve.
Last week we covered Austin. Now we turn to Chicago.
I. What data is available
Chicago has two hubs for its information related to lobbying: One is on the Board of Ethics website, and the other is in its data portal, though you can also find these records in the reports section of the Electronic Lobbyist Filing System, which links to a search function and back to the data portal. As we noted when we surveyed the landscape of municipal lobbying data, Chicago appears to release some of the most detailed lobbyist data among U.S. cities. The city's data portal contains information about registered lobbyists, activity, compensation, gifts, expenditures, and termination. Many cities don't collect this much detailed information, let alone post it online.
This data includes many of the form fields mentioned in our Guidebook and some further levels of detail. Registration and termination forms for 2013 include lobbyist names, addresses, and contact information; the filing date and termination date, if relevant; and client information including their address, contact information and industry.
Activity reports include the name of the agency contacted by the lobbyist along with the client being represented and the topic of the action requested. The reports also show how many administrative or legislative actions were requested.
Continue readingEvaluating Municipal Lobbying Data: Austin
“Consistent” is not the first word one would use to describe the landscape of lobbying data released by municipalities. As revealed by our research, the formats and range of information local governments collect and disclose about lobbying activity varies quite a bit from one community context to another. After exploring the best practices for collecting and releasing this information, we created and recently published a Municipal Lobbying Data Guidebook. This guide addresses not only what kinds of information should be included in an ideal lobbying dataset but also information about how that data should be collected, shared, regulated, and examples of the impact of having this information made available in an open way (something we’ll continue to explore in future posts).
So how do municipalities measure up to these standards? We’re taking a close look at three cities -- Austin, Chicago, and Philadelphia -- to explore what they’re doing well and where their lobbying disclosure can improve. Today, we turn to Austin.
I. What data is available
Austin's City Clerk oversees lobbying activity and reporting, sharing some related information with the public in an online portal page. The page includes downloadable template forms for lobbying registration, termination and quarterly activity. The city also posts online lists of registered lobbyists and their clients, along with address information and the nature of business for certain clients.
Downloading any of the template forms shows Austin requires several of the form fields recommended in by our Municipal Lobbying Data Guidebook. The registration form requires information about the lobbyist and their clients. The activity form requires information about the lobbyist and a breakdown of expenditures. (Any expenses less than $100 each can be aggregated.) Campaign finance reports are also linked to from the lobbying portal page. These reports require the name of the contributor, the amount contributed, and the date of the transaction.
Continue readingIn years before Waco explosion, fertilizer trade groups lobbied for lax oversight
The tragic explosion north of Waco, Texas, was preceded by years of lax oversight. As Reported by Bloomberg, OSHA had not inspected Adair Grain’s West Fertilizer Company facility since 1985. Mark Drajem and Jack Kaskey also reported that when other agencies—including the U.S. Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency—did swing by, they found violations and issued thousands of dollars in fines. With a dubious track record, how did the Texas plant avoid regulation?
Part of the blame rests with Congress and the special interests that target it. Consider ...
Continue readingA Roadmap for Releasing Municipal Lobbying Data
Information about who is trying to influence our government should be available to the public with as few restrictions as... View Article
Continue readingPro-CISPA forces spend 140 times more lobbying than opponents
Interests backing a controversial cyber security bill up for a vote in the House today have a big edge in campaign donations and lobbying reserves. But opponents have President Barack Obama's veto pen.
Continue readingUntangling the webs of tax lobbying
It’s tax day today, and while Americans all over the country are scrambling to pay what they owe, in Washington there is a different kind of hustle taking place. About 6,500 lobbyists are busily working to make sure that their more than 2,000 client organizations can pay a little less in taxes. Some want a new tax credit passed. In this year that threatened comprehensive tax reform, many are focused on protecting existing loopholes, credits, and exemptions.
To understand the vast and busy world of Washington tax lobbying, a new Sunlight Foundation analysis and visualization has mapped out the networks of tax lobbying from the 112th Congress (2011-2012), which should also be a pretty good guide to what lobbying in the 113th Congress will look like. Our interactive component lets you follow the industries and issues that you care most about.
Graphic by Alexander Furnas and Amy Cesal. Click to explore the network interactively.
The visualization draws on the complete record of tax lobbying in the 112th Congress. For those keeping score at home, that covers:
- $773 million in reported lobbying spending
- 1,454 bills
- 2,221 organizations
Ten ways special interests want to change the U.S. tax code
Sunlight’s new tax lobbying analysis gives the big picture on what tax lobbying looks like, visualizing what happens when 2,221 organizations in 336 sectors spend an estimated combined $773 million to hire 6,503 different lobbyists to advocate on 1,454 bills in a single two-year Congress. Here, we take a closer look at some of the specific proposed changes to the tax code. The ten bills highlighted here offer a window into the ways in which narrow interests work with lawmakers from both parties to tweak the tax code in narrow ways. Though none of these proposals have been enacted into law (yet), they offer a sampling of the many ways that particular interests work to benefit a particular industry, company, or set of professionals, or to incentivize a particular behavior.
Continue readingMeasuring Lobbyists with Raspberry Pi
A few of us in the labs dabble in hardware hacking, and we were all pretty excited by the debut of the Raspberry Pi. So when we saw that MAKE Magazine was running a contest for creative uses of the Pi, we figured we'd better enter. As it happens, I had picked up a handsome vintage voltmeter at Uncommon Objects during a recent trip to Austin, and had been toying with the idea of making it Pi-enabled. With this competition for inspiration I decided to take the plunge.
Continue readingLooking back to predict what FWD.us means for tech and immigration
When Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg formally launched his new immigration advocacy effort today with an op-ed in the Washington Post, it... View Article
Continue reading
59063
