THE LOBBYING WEB

Senate hearings to reform lobbying practices began last week before the Homeland Security and Governmental Reform Committee, with the most important point made by both its chairman, Susan Collins, and ranking member, Joseph Lieberman. They appealed to colleagues’ interest in getting something accomplished in Washington beyond enjoying a free dinner on Jack Abramoff’s tab.

Said Sen. Lieberman, “In government, we must hold ourselves, and be held to, a higher standard – to do not just what is legal, but what is right.” Said Sen. Collins: “No major legislation can pass without the support of the American people. And the public’s trust in Congress is perilously low.”

That is the crux of the issue – some members of Congress seem to have a hard time divining what constitutes an improper contribution and how they might be allowed to show gratitude for it. This curious inability leads to a drop in public trust – why shouldn’t it? – followed by a lack of major achievement.

The committee will certainly find many ways to establish clear lines that members of Congress may not cross. But rather than debate when travel counts as work and when it is a vacation or what level of gifts, however bundled, is too low to count as financial inducement, disclosure should be the leading answer.

But not the sort of disclosure that requires the Freedom of Information Act and a legal team to obtain. Instead a Web site, with a page for every member of Congress and simple enough for most constituents to use, would answer much of the problem.

A page would list all paid travel, with a link to the itinerary of whatever the member of Congress attended, gifts of all sorts and honorary dinners, etc. All earmarks, should they survive new scrutiny by their authorizing committees, would be listed and categorized by subject. And so would all campaign donations, grouped by affiliation or family relation, if possible.

The benefits of thorough public disclosure are several. Politicians would be aware that were they to accept a fabulous vacation from International Geegaw Inc. and later try to insert into a spending bill a measure that provided tax breaks for makers of geegaws, someone would notice. That awareness has a salutary effect on behavior. Just as political opponents could follow the Web site, so too could party leaders and more easily insist party members set a high standard. As a means for public understanding of the pursuit of money in politics, the site would be an unparalleled civics lesson.

During one of the many versions of campaign-finance reform in the early 1990s, some conservatives insisted that all that was needed was disclosure of donations. Now, with the widespread understanding and use of the Internet, disclosure could be a powerful answer to the related area of lobbying abuses.