Commentary; Posted: 4/21/04

Impact of big time lobbying felt at Capitol

T.W. Budig
ECM Capitol Reporter

Humorist Mark Twain was fond of saying Americans enjoy the finest government money can buy. If that tongue-in-cheek adage is accepted, then Minnesota state government is deluxe.

According to Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, some $46 million was spent in 2003 by associations trying to influence events under the Capitol dome.

This lobbying expenditures represents almost a 19 percent increase over the previous year.

Some 117 associations spent $100,000 or more last year on lobbying. A look at the Top Ten defines the big issues at play in St. Paul.

Topping the list was Xcel Energy, spending $1.1 million last year ó a year that saw Prairie Island nuclear plant legislation allowing for more dry cask storage put on the books.

The Prairie Island Dakota Community, located within a stoneís throw or so of the plant, spend $460,000 lobbying.

Just one other group qualified for the exclusive $1 million lobbying club in 2003, and that was the powerful Minnesota Chamber of Commerce.

Peeking into the club windows and rustling the ivy was Education Minnesota, the teacherís union, which spent $940,000 watching out after its membersí interests.

That there was a bitter local government aid struggle last session can be seen in the $620,000 spent by the Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities.

Indeed, the phenomenon of government lobbying government is well established in the top 117, with local government and school associations in 2003 spending about $2.5 million on lobbying.

This is, government lobbied government for funding.

The Taxpayers League of Minnesota could only muster $280,000 and David Stromís gee-whiz exuberance to counter the avalanche of government money.

Other major issues are well defined by the free-spending groups in the Top Ten.

That gambling expansion is afoot can be inferred by the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indiansí expenditure of $600,000 on lobbying.

Canterbury Park Holding Corporation, with more than a passing interest in the future of racino, spent $580,000 on lobbying last year.

The amount all parties spent on gambling-related lobbying was about $2.5 million.

ìWhose image is on this coin,î someone once asked.

If it was Caesarís, it may have been spent by Caesars Entertainment Inc., a huge casino gaming corporation, which spent $380,000 on lobbying in 2003.

Southwest Casino and Hotel Corporation spent $320,000.

The Minnesota Indian Gaming Association, which is fighting gambling expansion and may be losing, had an outlay of $300,000 in 2003.

The Red Lake and White Earth bands from northern Minnesota, who couch their bid for a metro casino on poverty, spent $40,000 apiece on lobbying last year.

The Minnesota Vikings and Twins are the lower entries in the Top Ten spendersí list, shelling out $560,000 and $480,000, respectively, in their quest for stadiums.

A glimpse down the long list of associations lobbying at the Capitol last year reveals a great diversity of interests and specificity.

The Minnesota Weapon Collector Association spent $20,000 on lobbying. The Minnesota Civil Liberties Union exercised their First Amendment rights and spent $6,500.

The Cigar Association of America pulled $40,000 from its financial humidor.

Specificity seems the by-word among agricultural associations.

There are associations for corn growers, ethanol producers, soy bean growers, turkey growers, sugarbeet growers, wheat growers, milk producers, elk breeders, cattlemen, and broiler and egg.

The latter association spent $3500 of its egg money on lobbying last year.

Lobbying expenses only partially represents the financial power of special interest as many groups, through their political action arms, also make campaign contributions.

Twainís pickled observation may not be entirely fair, but thereís no question the phalanx of lobbyists squeaking down the Capitol corridors greatly shape the legislative process.

Top of Page