The Washington Post reports that, "President Obama is escalating his war on K Street, proposing a series of tough restrictions a year after he first issued policies aimed at tamping down the influence of lobbyists." On Thursday, Feb. 18 OMB Watch will host a webcast where panelists will discuss a review of the administration's efforts to reform lobbying and ethics during the past year. RSVP here for the webcast.

Obama has issued some of the most stringent restrictions ever seen on employing former lobbyists in executive branch agencies and the White House. Panelists will explore questions such as whether the Obama administration has thus far been successful in reducing the influence of lobbyists in Washington; if the focus on lobbyists is the right way to root out corruption; and what it means to reduce the influence of special interests on policymaking.

Tune in to the OMB Watch webcast, "The Obama Administration's Approach to Lobbyists – A One-Year Review" on Thursday, Feb. 18 at 3 p.m. Eastern Time

Location: 2040 S St., NW, Washington, DC 20009 and live on the web There's still time to RSVP for this event!

During President Barack Obama's State of the Union address, he said he came to Washington "to end the outsized influence of lobbyists; to do our work openly; to give our people the government they deserve. [. . .] That's why we've excluded lobbyists from policymaking jobs, or seats on federal boards and commissions." However, as a group of nonprofits have recently noted, in the process of attempting to limit the influence of special interests, the administration has successfully "[excluded] the voices of citizen- and community-based organizations."

A coalition of thirteen nonprofit organizations, including OMB Watch, sent President Obama a letter requesting changes in the executive order issued last year restricting lobbyists from jobs in the administration. The letter details the current ban as well-intended, but imperfect. While the order excludes registered lobbyists that work for nonprofits for example, "the vast majority of 'special interest' insiders like corporate executives and their public relations and legal advisors" continue to exercise the same influence as before.

The Washington Post highlights an example; "Caroline Smith Dewaal, the director of food safety at Center for Science in the Public Interest, a lawyer and nationally known food safety expert who has spent 20 years working on policy and trade issues. But Dewaal's nomination came to a halt in August because she was a registered lobbyist, which violated the administration's policy against hiring lobbyists."

The letter stated, "Using it [the Lobbying Disclosure Act] to restrict public service has the perverse result of decreasing transparency and driving real influence peddlers into the shadows and out of the sunlight. By using the LDA, the Ethics Order is broadly under-inclusive for its purposes." Further, the Citizens United v. FEC decision, "has increased the urgency of such actions."

"The solution should focus on issues like campaign finance reform and the disproportionate influence that large financial interests have over our nation's politics and public policies."

Despite, the unintended consequences of the policies instituted last year, Obama should be applauded for discussing during the State of the Union his plan to expand lobbyist transparency. Yet, the focus should not remain solely on federally registered lobbyists.

Obama announced, "It's time to require lobbyists to disclose each contact they make on behalf of a client with my administration or with Congress." He also put forth a proposal to limit how much lobbyists can contribute to candidates for federal office. "It's time to put strict limits on the contributions that lobbyists give to candidates for federal office." Such changes must be crafted so that many can not simply steer clear of federal disclosure requirements.

President Obama still has not nominated an undersecretary for food safety at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, as Congress Daily reports today. Almost a year into his administration, the Food Safety Inspection Service – the federal agency in charge of making sure meat, poultry, and eggs are safe and labeled properly – is still without a leader.

President Obama made food safety a high priority in March when he announced the formation of his Food Safety Working Group. The working group has made progress, but the lengthy vacancy at USDA is beginning to cast doubt on the seriousness of the administration’s commitment to ensuring a safe food supply.

Meanwhile, food safety scares continue, including the December recall of tons of beef from an Oklahoma wholesaler. Congress Daily reports, “Late last month, after 21 people in 16 states had become infected with E. coli and National Steak and Poultry recalled 248,000 pounds of beef products, [Rep. Rosa] DeLauro said the problem was caused by practices that USDA could easily regulate if it had an appointee to make decisions.”

The recall came the same week as a new CBS News Poll which found that Americans are less than confident in the safety of the food they eat. (Polling occurred before news of the recall.) When asked, “How would you grade the U.S. on ensuring the safety of the food supply in the U.S.?" 34 percent of respondents said “C.” 33 percent said “B” while only 7 percent said “A.” 18 percent said “D” while a possibly very bitter 6 percent gave the U.S. an “F.”

The Congress Daily article intimates that the administration may be dragging its feet on finding a nominee because of Obama’s own ethics order which prohibits lobbyists from entering government. “Administration officials have acknowledged they have had trouble filling the slot because the White House does not want to nominate a candidate who has been a lobbyist for either food companies or consumer groups.”

At this point, if the best and most-qualified person for the job also happens to be a lobbyist, I think the administration should just suck it up and issue a waiver (a move that is permissable under the ethics order). The administration should not refuse to grant a waiver at the expense of the national food safety net.

Image by Flickr user Jeremy Brooks, used under a Creative Commons license.

The most recent effort to curb lobbyists' influence, excluding registered lobbyists from federal advisory panels, continues to get press coverage since first announced in September. The Washington Post predicts that it, "may turn out to be the most far-reaching lobbying rule change so far from President Obama, who also has sought to restrict the ability of lobbyists to get jobs in his administration and to negotiate over stimulus contracts."

The Industry Trade Advisory Committees (ITACs), which includes an estimated 130 lobbyists, asserts that the policy is harmful to U.S. business interests. Some are concerned that the policy, "will severely handicap federal regulators, who rely heavily on advisory boards for technical advice and to serve as liaisons between government and industry."

An opinion piece in RollCall ($$) addresses this concern of "brain drain," and suggests that instead of banning lobbyists, there should be "uniform regulations for all advisory committees parallel to those that govern federal employees. Members should recuse themselves when a committee's work directly affects their personal or financial interests and file financial disclosure forms as well."

The administration's focus on federally registered lobbyists has made for an interesting discussion at the National Journal's new experts forum. The first weekly conversation tackles the new rules meant to curb "special interests."

Gary Bass, OMB Watch executive director, is among the responding experts. He argued that "administration paints all lobbyists with the same brush, creating unnecessary disincentives to lobby, particularly in the nonprofit sector. The Obama administration would be better served by attacking the corrupting influence of money rather than focusing on lobbyists."

He also wrote; "My fear is that the attack on lobbyists simply drives the activity underground, away from disclosure." Indeed, it does, as the Huffington Post discusses the transformation from lobbying to "influence laundering." The article uses former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle to highlight the practice of doing work similar to that of a lobbyist, but being able to manipulate it so that it does not fall under the definition of "lobbying activity." Daschle started his new job as a "senior policy advisor" at DLA Piper, a law and lobbying.

The Sunlight Foundation proposes, "a world where the entire influence economy in Washington were available to the public, online and in real time. A daily updated database of lobbyist contacts would show which special interests were involved in the secretive Baucus Gang of Six meetings over the summer."

Despite the rhetoric and broad commentary reacting to the administration's policies, what remains is an issue that should not be overlooked, the role money plays in gaining influence.