The public doesn’t generally make a distinction between a lobbyist working in the State House or in state office buildings, so state rules shouldn’t either. When a lobbyist meets with a state agency to make a case that a new rule be crafted a certain way or suggests that a department oppose a particular bill, most people would consider that lobbying. Under current state statute, however, such activities are not reported or monitored. Thankfully, both Republican and Democratic lawmakers, as well as the governor, want to improve Maine’s laws by requiring reporting on lobbying of executive agencies, not just the Legislature.

Maine is one of 15 states that do not require lobbyists to report their work with both the legislative and executive branches. This means that preparing testimony and speaking at a legislative hearing on a bill counts as lobbying, but meeting with department officials to ensure that a bill is submitted by that department does not. In 1993, the definition of lobbying in state law was expanded to include the governor as well as the Legislature. It is time to expand the definition again to include the rest of the executive branch.

According to the Center for Public Integrity, a Washington passed group pushing for more restrictions on lobbyists, more than $3.5 million was spent on lobbyists in Maine last year. In 2003, when lawmakers met for longer, more than $4.6 million was spent. Maine ranks second to last nationally for the number of lobbyists per lawmaker. With 168 registered lobbyists and 186 legislators, the ratio is about 1-to-1. Nationally, it is 5-to-1. Despite Maine’s low ratio, broadening the definition of lobbying will provide a more accurate picture of how persuasion is used to affect state policy.

As Senate President Beth Edmonds put it: “The more transparency there is, the better. The more people understand how things work and what people are asking for, the better.”

If the purpose of Maine’s lobbying regulations is to monitor who is exerting influence, the executive branch should be included, says House Minority Leader Rep. David Bowles, who says he would support a bill to include executive branch activities in lobbying reporting requirements. Such a requirement could also make the public more aware that lobbying often involves supporters of social service agencies meeting with officials from the Department of Health and Human Services or the Department of Labor, not just industry officials talking in the halls with lawmakers.

Rep. Bowles also sponsored a bill requiring lawmakers to wait two years before beginning lobbying activities. There are now no restrictions on former lawmakers lobbying their former colleagues and some do so just months after leaving the Legislature.

Lawmakers will likely consider such changes when they convene early next year. A more comprehensive definition of a lobbyist will enable citizens to know who is trying to influence state policy-makers, not just those in the State House.