Lawmakers in the Maine House have rejected a legislative committee’s notion that a bill requiring lobbyists to disclose their work with government agencies was a solution in search of a problem. Rather than waiting for a problem to arise, members of the House saw this bill for what it is – an effort to increase government transparency at a time when the public is increasingly skeptical of elected and appointed officials, and lobbyists – and revived it. The Senate should similarly support it.

The public doesn’t generally make a distinction between a lobbyist working in the State House or in state office buildings, so state rules should not 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.

LD 1727, sponsored by Rep. Marilyn Canavan, D-Waterville, would fix this by requiring that lobbyists report their work at government agencies. Last week, the Legal and Veterans Affairs Committee voted 8-to-4 against the bill. It later passed the House, however, and now heads to the Senate.

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.

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.

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. It also fits well with another bill that was passed by the House and will soon be considered by the Senate. LD 1822 requires the creation of an online lobbyist registry. Such a Web site must be easily searchable so the public can find out what companies or groups lobbied on what issues or bills and how much money was expended.

The more transparency, the better and these two bills move Maine forward on that front.