What's A Lobbyist Worth?

RIGHT TO REPAIRWhat's A Lobbyist Worth? CHICAGO - At ground zero - within the shops and trenches where service professionals battle everyday - just what does lobbying deliver to a shop or technician's bottom-line? While many understand the nature and nuances of the issues facing the automotive aftermarket, fewer understand what lobbying - the marketing of a position - is all about. When it comes to Washington, understanding the selling of a position for or against an issue tends to be much like a black hole - funds pour into an effort, yet what and how things get done that have tangible and personal impact can leave one in the dark. Consider this. We know what a technician does. Yet, explaining that to the public in a manner that transfers a value and appreciation is a much more difficult feat to affect. So too, we know lobbyists exist - as a necessary enabler or necessary evil - yet our impressions of them and their work can be framed by headlines, such as those involving Jack Abbramoff. Ensuring that all lobbyists are not painted with the same brush and gaining some insight about their day to day effort can be like trying to change a customer's general opinion of all technicians after they have had a bad experience with just one. Let's have a look at that daily grind, and then consider a recent case. Motor Age interviewed Sandy Bass-Cors of the Coalition for Auto Repair Equality (CARE), and then delved into a recent case first noted on CARE's Web site pertaining to Right-to-Repair (R2R).A day in the life According to Bass-Cors, lobbying is an ongoing process of a mix of activities. They're centered on educating and informing elected representatives, usually through their legislative aides (LAs) - such as a congressman or senator's Energy LA, Commerce LA or Transportation LA. In addition, the general public needs educating and informing through vehicles such as press releases, interviews or hiring a public relations firm.  First contacts are usually made by phone to introduce and to explain why the call is being made. This progresses to sending e-mails with background information and, eventually, to face-to-face contacts. A typical day can involve as many eight face-to-face contacts and many more phone or e-mail messages. With regard to R2R, Bass-Cors said that LAs and other staff have familiarity with many of the nuances, as they own vehicles and computers and have seen engine warning lights illuminate.  In making contacts, especially with those not directly involved with a bill, the nature of information provided to LAs, to pass onto their elected representative, tends to be concise and basic. Bass-Cors said, "They want to know: Is there movement in the bill? What's new? Where is the bill headed from here? Who's supporting the bill, such as other representatives or advocacy groups within an industry and the public?" The content of a brief can be short and sweet, yet still provide a relevant update for a representative. For instance, a short message might go like this:  We currently have 88 sponsors as of last week, in addition to Representative Barton. The proposed bill has two underlying strengths. First it is bipartisan. Second it is a good consumer bill, evidenced by the diverse group of supporters from within the automotive industry, but also by public groups such as Retiresafe, National Grange and others. Once the legislation is passed, a bill will be introduced in the Senate, with wording that mirrors that in the House. We expect it to be marked up in early March, contingent of course on other issues and recesses. In less than 100 words, a clear, clean message is delivered. It's easy to recall and transfer that information to a representative. Yet away from this daily routine, sometimes there are matters that arise with regard to an issue such as R2R, that precipitate actions outside the norm. A case in point Following testimony on Capitol Hill last November, a number of elected representatives and/or their staff were visited by CARE, with a view to educating where necessary, and trying to garner more support for proposed R2R legislation (HR 2048). While representatives who are part of the committees involved directly are well informed regardless of their position, there are many more who are not regularly involved, and therefore, less cognizant of the issue. Representative Lynn Westmoreland (R-GA) was one such person. According to Brian Robinson, the communications spokesperson for Westmoreland, David Parde of CARE made such a visit. After listening to Parde, Robinson said the Congressman responded that he did not support the proposed legislation and would discuss his position with his party colleagues.  Robinson said the Congressman provided several reasons for his position. Westmoreland felt that "there is a private sector solution that is working." With a Republican party theme being the avoidance of "big government," he wished to prevent the "expansion of government that would create another large, costly bureaucracy." He also noted, "The Federal Trade Commission was on record that it 'didn't want, or feel it could be the administering bureaucracy.' " Finally, Westmoreland wanted to prevent the risk that "the acquisition of intellectual property and erosion of revenues from those who developed tools and systems, by that knowledge being shipped offshore, tools made cheaper elsewhere, and then resold in the U.S. aftermarket." Shortly after the visit, beginning near the Thanksgiving holiday, Robinson stated that CARE initiated a negative advertising campaign, comprised of radio ads and telephone calls (automated and personal) to those living within the Congressman's electoral district. The radio ads were repeated at Christmastime. Clearly, this was disturbing to the Congressman, Robinson said, especially as it came in the holiday season: Having a position, whether for or against an issue, should be respected, and not subjected to this kind of behavior, whether it is a congressman, a shop owner and anyone else. Robinson added, "It's eyebrow-raising that a principal proponent for Right to Repair legislation - CARE - doesn't even service or repair cars." A check to verify the campaign was made with Bob Kemper, Washington correspondent for he Atlanta Journal-Constitution. Kemper's story also was posted on CARE's Web site. In his confirmation, Kemper stated, "I asked CARE directly if they were behind the ad and phone campaign, as Westmoreland claimed. They freely acknowledged that they were."A different view CARE met this challenge head-on. Bass-Cors said straight up that there had been a CARE-initiated campaign run in the congressman's home district. She also stated that the actions of Westmoreland warranted it. Barton's committee has jurisdiction for the proposed R2R legislation, she noted. In an attempt to get informed and assess the impacts on small businesses, a separate committee without jurisdiction over H.R. 2048 - the House Small Business Committee's Subcommittee for Workforce, Empowerment and Government Oversight (WEGO) - held a hearing, which Barton and industry stakeholders attended. She added that Westmoreland is a member of WEGO.  According to Bass-Cors, Westmoreland didn't stay for the whole meeting, but did speak while he was there. She added that Westmoreland opposes the R2R bill and was critical in his questioning of Barton. While both are Republicans, she noted Barton is a senior Republican, and Westmoreland is a freshman in Congress. When Westmoreland left the hearing, she alleges he winked at some in attendance who were not in favor of legislation. After the hearing, Bass-Cors was informed that Westmoreland went to a Republican study group meeting with a "Dear Colleague" letter, that urged others to oppose the R2R bill. She maintains that Westmoreland at no time provided the more senior Barton with the courtesy of informing Barton of his intention to do this. She added that this was " 'back-dooring' and wasn't upfront" - actions that were inconsistent with unwritten working protocols in Congress. "It's unusual for a freshman Congressman to go out of his way to kill a bill," she stated. "It is without justification and lacked the courtesy to a fellow party member and the bipartisan WEGO subcommittee members." In this case, CARE displayed an ability to react, both in words and actions.Do the ends justify the means? For the service and repair industry, the benefits derived from lobbying need to at least offset the time, effort and costs invested by those footing the bill - in this case, directly and indirectly, shops and technicians. Doing so in a legal and ethical manner may seem obvious, yet the line can get blurry in the heat of any moment. Regardless of where one stood on any issue, differing views should be respected by all parties. This premise may seem obvious; in fact, when it was posed to industry stakeholders for or against H.R. 2048, all parties answered aid yes, with some being more expansive. But the message was the same. Bass-Cors said, "This issue speaks to itself. The absolute truth of the issue is out there."  She added that people or organizations who are open and upfront with their view, whether for or against, are respected. "We can discuss any issue openly." Yet, as evident in the comments and actions in the case described above, both Westmoreland and CARE appear to question each other's ethic of respect. Time, or the lack of it, may also be a factor in play. As mentioned earlier, CARE and others expect that markup of H.R. 2048 in early March. That has also been said for February, January and backing up over prior sessions of Congress. This is also the second half of this session, leaving a limited number of legislating days left, and less so when discounted for week-long monthly recesses. Being an election year, many representatives want, and need to be preparing for and campaigning for re-election.  Other major issues do exist - Iraq, surveillance, port management and others come to mind. As well, the last weeks while in session will be required to pass appropriation bills to keep the country running in the interim till after elections and the next session of Congress. Representatives would also like to avoid a divisive decision that might impact support for them in an election. Even if marked up before close of session, whether the bill could be entered and passed in time remains uncertain. Finally, regardless of what transpires in the House, the Senate would still have to do likewise. Time and money continue to ratchet up each month. There is also the issue of whether the end ever will come. In the years that R2R has been an issue before Congress, two absolute truths exist. One is that proposed R2R legislation has yet to be passed. The second is that throughout this time, an industry-driven alternative has existed and operated in some fashion. Will the end, even if a passing of H.R. 2048, even work effectively, or will Fed World II ensue? And given the resources expended so far, what if the bill doesn't pass or isn't even introduced? Perhaps unpleasant to contemplate, but the possibilities exist, each of them with impact in the trenches. Lobbying doesn't come cheap. Rather, it comes at a higher price than some are ever aware of. Organizations or associations hire independent professional lobbyists - sometimes more than one - who are well connected with congressional staff and elected representatives, are contracted by organizations on both sides of the R2R or other issues to further their causes. The typical price range for a professional lobbyist is $7,500 to $15,000 per month for each single issue, with more prominent lobbyists commanding a higher monthly fee. In addition, public relations firms and other specialists are often hired where and when necessary.  When one thinks about an issue, be it R2R or some other long-running issue, years of lobbying can incur huge expenditures of funds, often as an expense paid for by membership fees or other fundraising - whether the original goal of an organization is met or not. For issues that divide this industry, the combined lobbying costs incurred on both sides over years takes time, funds and other resources away from other issues faced by shops today.  For or against H.R. 2048, the same three questions can be asked of anyone: Do you know how much your organization has spent on lobbying? Second, have or will the benefits from lobbying outweigh those costs? Last, is there a need for preventative maintenance here? After all, it is your bottom line.(Sources: U.S. House of Representatives, CARE, Atlanta Journal-Constitution)