PDC talks of Internet's influence

The state Public Disclosure Commission is taking a go-slow approach to regulating the use of low-cost Internet tools in campaigns and lobbying.

Political operatives are making more and more use of e-mail, social networking sites, Web sites and the like, but the commission did not broach the topic until a month ago. Last week, PDC staffers followed up with an informal roundtable discussion with lobbyists, a prominent blogger and others who try to influence public policy.

At issue is how online communications — which can range from a Web site with information to a blizzard of e-mails sent to a legislator from members of an interest group — should be reported as a lobbying expense, if at all.

Also in the shadows of the debate: whether highly partisan bloggers who advocate for a candidate or issue should ever be considered lobbyists, and whether their expenses are lobbyist expenses.

Blogger David Goldstein, who writes from a partisan Democratic view at www.horsesass.org, urged the commission to keep its hands off the Internet. Michael Reitz of the conservative Evergreen Freedom Foundation was just as concerned about interfering with free speech of outspoken people in what he calls "the new town square" of the Internet.

The PDC waded into a similar issue a year ago about campaigning via the Internet, but it backed away from writing regulations. Its five members did offer a few guidelines, but it took a hands-off approach to partisan bloggers such as Goldstein who might champion a candidate but are not paid for doing so — except, perhaps, for donations from readers or "tips" sent as thanks.

Growth of groups

Lobbyists who already report their expenses have noticed an increase in the use of e-mail or Web sites by groups that do not register with the state.

Steve Gano, a contract lobbyist with high-profile clients that have included Wal-Mart, gave a hypothetical example of a large group that might engage in nearly invisible lobbying by avoiding any physical contact at the Capitol but would hire someone to do low-cost e-mail campaigning that would not be reported.

Gano questioned whether that might need to be disclosed, so people could know the lobbying was being carried out. Gano also said he heard from many people in the most recent legislative session who noticed a lot of e-mails from the left-leaning advocacy group Fuse, which has a political action committee but is not registered as a lobbying firm.

PDC lawyer Nancy Krier and agency executive director Vicki Rippie spoke of existing requirements that lobbying be reported if it exceeds $500 in costs in a month or $1,000 in a three-month period.

Toby Nixon, leader of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, said his group likely would not oppose any disclosure of its activities, but it operates on a low budget of $50,000 a year and would need help figuring out how to allocate its costs for lobbying separately from the general public education it does.

And lobbyist Van Collins of Associated General Contractors cautioned that it can be difficult to walk the line between lobbying and simply communicating with members about an issue of great concern.

The PDC waded into a similar issue a year ago about campaigning via the Internet, but it backed away from writing regulations.

Its five members eventually resolved to offer a few guidelines, but they took a hands-off approach to partisan bloggers who might champion a candidate but are not paid.

The PDC drew a clear line at paid advertising, saying that paid activities such as online ads would be reportable. The agency could well move in that direction again — putting its focus on the disclosure of spent money, which reflects its mission since voters created it by initiative in 1972.

The PDC plans a hearing Dec. 4 to consider the online lobbying issues. Doug Ellis, assistant director of the PDC, said a 1970s-era court ruling on the PDC's jurisdiction could be the guiding light for how and whom to regulate.

"The court basically said if they are getting paid if there is compensation involved, then the state has the ability to regulate. Looking at that, we've always been 'follow the money,' 'who's paying for what?' " Ellis said in an interview.

He said he expects that PDC commissioners weighing in on the subject next month will "stick to the money piece."

Goldstein cautioned against any move to encroach on bloggers who, he argued, are blurring the lines between advocacy and journalism. He warned that any meddling with Internet activity could "open a Pandora's box," and he questioned why his activities should be treated any differently from, for instance, those of a Seattle newspaper that runs pieces advocating the repeal of an estate tax, which its owner and friends happen to favor.

Brad Shannon is political editor for The Olympian. He can be reached at 360-753-1688 or bshannon@theolympian.com.