No More Public Funding for Lobbyists?

Thomas Jefferson once wrote:  "To compel a man to furnish funds for the propagation of ideas he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical."  In the 1910 case of Sargent v. Clark, the Vermont Supreme Court ruled that the town of Pawlet could not lobby the Legislature at public expense.  And yet we have groups, such as the Vermont Superintendents Association and the Vermont League of Cities and Towns, that use dues money paid by local taxpayers to lobby the Legislature for bills to spend more tax money.

My organization has decided to take on one of those groups:  the Vermont School Boards Association.  First Class Education for Vermont and its attorney, Paul Gillies, have filed suit in Rutland Superior Court for a declaratory judgment.  It is on behalf of the taxpayers of Fair Haven.  The defendant is the Fair Haven Town School District.  The amount of money in question is only $1800 in dues, but it could mean a substantial amount to certain organizations, and it could mean that there won't be as many lobbyists in the State House.

Comments

[G. Cross]

I am wondering, Curt, if your concern about using taxpayer money to lobby the legislature extends to the Douglas administration. As I recall Douglas folks such as Betsy Bishop, Tim Hayward, Mike Smith,
Suzanne Young and several others spend several hours each day lobbying legislators related to the Governor's position on issues. I believe each of these folks is paid by taxpayer money. So does the limit on using taxpayer money to lobby the legislature apply to all or only to selected groups? "Be careful what you wish for!!"

[Curtis Hier]

If George's response is what the Vermont School Boards Association attorney uses in Superior COurt, I'm confident we'll prevail.

I first thought George was going to mention the idea of Vermont sending a lobbyist to Washington, which I opposed because it's the job of our congressional delegation to look out for Vermont.

But the Governor's staff meeting with members of the Legislature to forge compromises and work together on legislation? That's their job. Obviously I don't have a problem with that, and Sargent v. Clark wasn't at all about that.

[G. Cross]

The distinction escapes me. The VSBA spends a minimal amount of taxpayer money in an attempt to influence legislation in a way that is helpful to local school districts. Governor Douglas spends taxpayer money to influence the legislature to pass legislation which fits his opinion on an issue. (To be fair, all other Governors in recent times have done the same; although Douglas appears to have a much larger staff dedicated to this effort than previous Governors.) So in one case, the effort is a collective one and in the other it is a personal/political one. In one case, it is one arm of government trying to influence the other and in the other case it is a collective of people trying to influence government in general. If one wants to argue that no lobbying should be allowed, fine. But if it is "good for the goose it is good for the gander."

[Curtis Hier]

Well, maybe this distinction won't escape you: John Nelson of the VSBA is registered with the Secretary of State's Office as a lobbyist. So is Jeff Francis of the Vermont Superintendents Association. Betsy Bishop is not.