The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1921-02-17
TOPEKA STATE JOURNAL
Information Bureau
FREDERIC j. HASIKIN. Director.
Washington. d. c.
WHEN is A LOBBYIST.
Washington, d. c.

regulate his operations, and senators
and representatives denouncing him on
the floor of the house, the Washington
lobbyist seems to be in for one more
of those attacks upon his honor and
his salary of which he has already
weathered several.
All of these bills propose to control
the lobbyist by making him register
his name, his salary, his intentions and
1.-THE name of the organization he repre-
Isents.
Senator Kenyon seems to base his
iobjection to lobbyists chiefly on the
ground that they are pest. He de-
Iclares that he cannot get from the
street car to his office without being
lbuttonholed. Whether a registered
lobbyist would be any less persistent
tabout buttonholing, other legislators
think, may be reasonably doubted.
The whole situation appears to be
confused by a lack of exact informa-
ton as to what a lobbyist is. When
does a man who wants to talk to
congressman about a bill become
lobbyist? We have been hearing about
l'insidious Hobbies" and invisible gov
ernments' every few years for half a
century, and yet there seems to be no
general agreement as to the character
| of this sinister creature, the lobbyist.
He seems to have made his first sensa-
| ton BACK IN the udyS Oh Inc SISuie
Mobilier when the lobbyists made their
| HEADQUARTERS in the house committee
on appropriations. The first lobby IN
vestigation happened in those days,
| too, and one of the lobbyists made the
sensational admission that he had re-
ceived a large sum of money TO De
used in influencing congressman, and
that he had used it to build himself
large house, feeling that his influence
would be increased more in that way
than in any other.
| A Bar to Corruption.
| The methods of lobbyists have be-
| come more subtle since those days.
no doubt, even as their numbers have
| increased, but it may be said that they
still favor this method of indirect in
sluence rather than direct. Far from
corrupting legislators by the use OF
money, the lobbyist usually stands
heroically between the congressman
and the funds which are raised by
various interests to influence legisla-
ton. Some sugar planters few years
ago raised a hundred thousand to keep
a tariff on sugar. Where did 1t go!
Well to the lobbyists first And there
a good deal of it stuck. The lobbyist
courageously hurls himself before the
congressman and takes in his own
breast the poisoned dart of the slush
fund. He does all that he can to keep
the legislator the clean-hearted, 1nno-
cent, impecunious creature that ne
should be. He dispenses talk with a
lavish hand. He directs it both toward
the congressman and toward his en-
ployer. But he shows a fine sensitive
conscience about the use of money,
especially on others.
The methods and achievements OF
the lobbyist were given good airing
a few years ago when the lobbyist
for a great organization of manufac-
turers was duly investigated by the
lobby committee. 1t was shown IN
deed that this lobbyist had talked
much and eloquently' that ne nad 1lleo
many newspaper clippings, bills, reso-
lutions, ard the like. "A reasonable
suspicion was created that he had
once given a congressman lo-ceht
cigar. 1t was shown that every time
a bill passed which might be consid-
cred favorable to his employers he
sent them a telegram of congratula-
lions in which he said I'VE have won
a great victory" or words to that eff
feet.
What was hard to prove was that
he had actually influenced the course
of legislation by so much as fly on
the steering wheel influences the
course of a car.
OF course, there may be lobbyists
who exercise a sinister influence, Out
how are you going to find out which
ones they are? How are you going to
legitimately asking for what he wants
and the one who is trying to be an
invisible government or a baleful in
fIuence? This is the question that Is
pi1zzling some students of the lobby
question.
Supreme Court Decisions.
The difficulty of drawing this line
seems to be indicated by the fact that
it has never been successfully drawn.
There is a whole bunch of dec1sio1 rs
by the supreme court and other courts
bearing on the question. but they seem
to differ widely. Some of these de-
cisions seem to imply that any man
who seeks to influence the course of
legislation is a lobbyist, and therefore
doing something wrong. But a de-
cison of the supreme court upholds
the obvious right of the citizen to
plead his cause, and to have it pleaded.
"It is the right of every citi-
zen 4. to employ a paid agent to
collect evidence and draft his bill"
this decision says, and it goes on to say
this agent can explain the bill and
urge it's merits both before committees
and to individual legislators.
In other words, it seems that you
have a perfect right togo to Washing
ton and to urge congress to place a
tariff on hides, for instance. You can,
do this for yourself. or you can go as
the paid agent of others who want
duty on hides.
But what if you hand a congressman
a cigar, or take him to lunch, or give
him a tip on the stock market. At
just what point do you cease to be
legitimate agent and become a lobby
list? Likewise how is it possible to
find out which agents or lobbyists use
only logic and eloquence, and which
ones also slip the congressman quarts
of liquor, invite them to parties, and
tell them what to buy and when?
Some critics of the lobbyist say they
fear not so much the danger of actual
corruption which he brings, as that he
offers the congressman distorted facts
and sophistic arguments. In other
words, he presents the congressman
an eX-parte view of the matter, and so
adds to his confusion rather than to
his enlightenment. But that, perhaps is
/ inevitable, since he is paid to plead
special cause.