MINOT —
if passed, would have made it a misdemeanor crime for registered lobbyists to enter any part of the state Senate or House of Representatives, with the exception of the public viewing gallery or the majority leader’s offices upon the invitation of said leader.
SB2315, sponsored by Sen. Jeff Magrum, R-Hazelton, went down in flames with 46 “no” votes and just one “yes” from Magrum himself.
ADVERTISEMENT
There was some drama on the way to that vote, but first, allow me to pause and defend lobbying as a vocation.
Lobbyists occupy the same space in the public’s imagination as lawyers do. We’re cynical about them until we need one. Lobbyists get a bad name, but it’s worth remembering that most of those registered to work in North Dakota
(you can see a full list here)
are North Dakotans.
What’s more, they primarily represent interests — companies, civic organizations, churches, interest groups, etc. — that, in turn, represent thousands of North Dakotans who are members, owners or employees.
The National Rifle Association, which represents thousands of firearms enthusiasts in North Dakota, has a lobbyist. North Dakota United, which represents our state’s teachers and public workers, has lobbyists. The tobacco industry has lobbyists, as do the people who want to ban tobacco.
Lobbyists are hired because most people — from powerful business and advocacy interests down to rank-and-file citizens — don’t have the time to track and participate in the fast-paced and often overwhelming legislative process.
It’s fashionable to dislike lobbyists who represent interests you don’t like, but there are many who are advocating for things you support. There are lobbyists on both sides of just about every issue before the Legislature, and just about all of them represent the various interests of North Dakota citizens.
But back to the legislation. Among the lawmakers who spoke out against Magrum’s bill was Sen. Dick Dever, R-Bismarck, who argued that lobbyists are citizens, too, and have the same right to access the people’s legislative chamber as anyone else.
ADVERTISEMENT
This prompted Magrum to stand up and note that Dever has a son who lobbies.
“I didn’t mean to offend anybody. I know the young man behind me that has a son is a lobbyist,” Magrum said, “and there’s others that have spouses in here that are lobbyists or have been lobbyists. I’m not trying to offend them, but perhaps they do have a conflict of interest on even voting on this bill.”
“Well, Mr. Chairman, the sponsor said I might have a conflict, so I think I should declare that conflict. Same as no vote,” Dever said in response, referring to Magrum. “So, I’m happy to not vote, but do I have a conflict because I have a son who’s a lobbyist? How many other people here have conflicts?”
This set off a cascade of lawmakers declaring conflicts of interest because their spouses or other family members are engaged in lobbying. Sens. Diane Larson, Michael Dwyer and Sean Cleary rose to disclose family members who lobby, at which point Majority Leader Sen. David Hogue cut off the disclosures and debate by moving to call the question.
Hogue’s motion was approved, and Magrum’s bill was killed in a landslide, with every Senator voting.
The rapid-fire disclosure of conflicts will likely raise some eyebrows for people outside North Dakota’s tiny political community, though perhaps it shouldn’t.
It’s not surprising that Bismarck-area lawmakers in particular — Cleary, Larson, Dwyer and Dever are all from that community — would have these conflicts. Bismarck is the state capital. Politics is one of the biggest industries there. There’s a lot of overlap in that community.
ADVERTISEMENT
Still, in the wake of Rep. Jason Dockter
getting convicted of a misdemeanor last year
for his failure to recuse himself from a vote relevant to his pecuniary interests, lawmakers are very sensitive to any ethical issues, be they real or perceived.
That’s probably a good thing.
The number of lawmakers who have familial relationships with lobbyists — who, indeed, are sometimes married to them — illustrates the absurdity of Magrum’s bill. Lobbying, for better or worse, is an immutable part of the democratic process. One that’s protected by the First Amendment.
Banning lawmakers from the legislative chambers wouldn’t accomplish much, though perhaps requiring that elected officials disclose any close relationships they have with registered lobbyists, in addition to the already available online registry of lobbyists, would be a good thing.