By the Numbers: Lobbying in America
By on Jan 9th, 2006 at 5:59 pm
By the Numbers: Lobbying in America
With the Jack Abramoff scandal making headlines across the country, the issue of lobbying and other forms of influence peddling at the federal level has reemerged. Below are a few quick facts showing the size and scope of this burgeoning Washington, DC industry.
| Amount spent on federal lobbying, 1999 | $1.5 billion |
| Amount spent on federal lobbying, 2004 | $2.1 billion |
| Percent increase in federal lobbying from 1999-2004 | 40 |
| The amount Interpublic Group of Companies, the top lobbying firm from 1998-2004, spent during that time | $265 million |
| Number of federal lobbyists, 2000 | 16,000 |
| Number of federal lobbyists, 2005 | 35,000 |
| Percent increase in the number of federal lobbyists, 2000-2005 | 119 |
| Number of companies that lobbied the U.S. House of Representatives from 1998-2004 | 17,300 |
| Number of companies that lobbied the U.S. Senate from 1998-2004 | 17,200 |
| Number of former members of Congress or heads of federal agencies now working as lobbyists | 240 |
| Number of former senior government officials now working as lobbyists | More than 2,000 |
| Average salary for a lobbyist | $89,944 |
| Number of congressional earmarks, FY1996 | 958 |
| Number of congressional earmarks, FY2005 | 14,000 |
| Total value of congressional earmarks in 2004 | $32.7 billion |
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Thanks, TP, amazing, and revealing, information! It’ll be interesting to find out the total value of 2005 earmarks, as I’m sure that the amount will beat that $32.7 billion in 2004 hands down.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:05 pmno wonder we can’t get congress to impeach anybody,their all on the take!
January 9th, 2006 at 6:11 pmI think you added 100 to both your percent increases. It should be 44% and 118%.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:11 pmThanks, we fixed it.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:16 pmIf I’m not mistaken, you’ve mistaken “percent of” and “percent increase” in several of your numbers.
For example, the dollars spent on lobbying in 2004 is about 144.1% of the amount spent in 1999, but it is only a 44% increase. The different is “only” $0.6 billion (which is about 44% of $1.5) and there is no way that $0.6 is larger than $1.5 billion, which is what is required for an increase of more than 100%.
Same thing with the precentage increase of number of lobbyists. Again, I may be mistake, but I believe how I’ve laid out is how the term “percentage increase” is normally used, as “increase” means the same as “difference between two numbers that is greater than 0″. Or something.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:16 pmThat’s right. The real crooks develope symbiotic, binding relationships with donors. But noone talks about it. They hide the pictures when it get’s too hot to handle.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:20 pmVery interesting info Judd.
Now the only question is how to stop this train wreck of a system we have created. Any ideas?
January 9th, 2006 at 6:24 pmThere’s always the 25th Amendment. As he is brain dead, Bush would be a fitting subject.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:38 pmCynicon,
The solution is clear and should be blatantly obvious to all americans:
1. Vote responsibly (yes, you may actually have to miss an episode of Lost or Survivor so that you can do some real research)
2. Hold your elected officials responsible (regardless of party affiliation)
3. Remind yourself of our core values (Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness) and apply them with your decisions when voting.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:38 pmThere is a downside to #8, Cheney would formally assume the Presidency.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:40 pmI can see how our environmental policies are taking such a downward turn. logging, mining companies have much deeper pockets for lobbying than the sierra club and greenpeace.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:48 pmSo where do you think the lobbest get their money. From the company or individuals who want somthing. They should be held to the same standard as the other sleeze balls. Their all a bunch of crooks.
January 9th, 2006 at 6:53 pmNavy Vet,
The lobbying money comes from the prices you pay for the product. So, when you pay those outrageous (and unjustified) fuel prices, you are giving them the money to lobby. Sad but true.
This is why I shop with a conscience. And it’s not easy.
January 9th, 2006 at 7:01 pmThe market has spoken. Lobbying got a lot more profitable since Dubya assumed the throne.
January 9th, 2006 at 7:11 pmWill Rogers was right when he said, “We have the best Congress money can buy.”
January 9th, 2006 at 7:11 pmNumber of federal lobbyists, 2000: 16,000
Number of federal lobbyists, 2005: 35,000
That one, and the increase in the number of earmarks are what immediately jumped out at me. Damn, no wonder.
January 9th, 2006 at 7:22 pm“Number of federal lobbyists, 2000 16,000″
“Number of federal lobbyists, 2005 35,000″
This is pretty interesting considering that Abramoff is republican and the republicans own all three branches of the government. Why do you think they needed all that money?
With the republican owning all three branches and the democrats being competely stalled on everything, there couldn’t have been that big of a job market for democratic lobbiest. So they had to have been republican for the most part.
I don’t have time to look through everything right now. Do any of these links provide republican vs democrat lobbiest numbers?
January 9th, 2006 at 7:23 pm[...] Check out this post from ThinkProgress. One figure in particular troubles me, the earmark figure. In FY 1996 there were 958 earmarks while just 9 short years later there are 14,000. The other figure that troubles me is the number of companies that have lobbied the Senate and the House: 17,200. These numbers are staggering and, in my opinion, indicate the need for some kind of reform. [...]
January 9th, 2006 at 7:38 pmmaterialism is the mother of corruption
January 9th, 2006 at 8:00 pmpoliticos remind me of ferengi on the starship enterprise. one ship, alone in space, with many people, yet the ferengi still believes that money is class, and hoardes it uselessly.
January 9th, 2006 at 8:03 pmThis is a bulemian’s paradise. Just reading about all of this just makes ya want to puke. And it just keeps going, and going, and going…I’ll have achieved my New Year’s Resolution by the end of this month, the way it’s going! It’s a hurling marathon!
January 9th, 2006 at 8:04 pm$ 1 Billion for Conservative Ideas
The Nation
April 26, 1999
David Callahan
Last year the Heritage Foundation celebrated its twenty-fifth anniversary. For a progressive think tank, a birthday such as this might have been the occasion for a fancy banquet and perhaps a modest fundraising drive. For Heritage, it was an excuse to mount a massive “Leadership for America Campaign” designed to raise $85 million. This effort yielded more than $40 million in 1998, and Heritage expects easily to bring in the full amount before the end of 1999.
Heritage’s success at filling its coffers is dramatic testament to the growing financial resources available to conservative think tanks in the nineties. These institutions have long been familiar players on the political scene. But in recent years, following the Republican takeover of Congress, the scope of their operations has grown dramatically. This decade has proven to be a boom time like no other.
A recent report that I wrote for the National Committee for Responsive Philanthropy estimates that spending by the top twenty conservative think tanks will likely top $1 billion in the nineties. In 1996 alone, these organizations spent $158 million to develop and disseminate policy ideas–an amount comparable to what the GOP raised in soft-money political donations that year. The $158 million represents a significant increase from 1992, with many organizations more than doubling their budgets over that period. Partial data from 1997 and 1998 suggest that the budgets of conservative think tanks are continuing to grow rapidly.
Much of this money comes from corporations and wealthy businessmen.
No wonder minimum wage is poverty level.
January 9th, 2006 at 8:08 pmAnnoying someone via the Internet is now a federal crime.
It’s no joke. Last Thursday, President Bush signed into law a prohibition on posting annoying Web messages or sending annoying e-mail messages without disclosing your true identity.
In other words, it’s OK to flame someone on a mailing list or in a blog as long as you do it under your real name. Thank Congress for small favors, I guess.
Welcome to Orwellia
January 9th, 2006 at 8:16 pmBulemian? From the little known Eastern European country of Bulemia?
January 9th, 2006 at 8:17 pmIt’s bulemic, not bulemian. But yes, it does make one want to ralph!
Maybe lobbying should no longer be allowed? And lawmakers can make decisions on thier own?
January 9th, 2006 at 8:20 pm#25,
January 9th, 2006 at 8:44 pmBut wouldn’t that mean the loss of 35,000 jobs?
Thanks for the correction, SKdeA. After I posted it I realized my error. My neuronal synapses had a major misfunction there. Sorry.
January 9th, 2006 at 9:11 pmLobbying in Washington, DC, must be OUTLAWED! AS long as lobbyists can hang out in the capital giving out cash and favors to our elected officials, there will always be corruption! The Abramoff Scandal shows how disgusting DC has become, so call your Reps & Senators to OUTLAW Lobbying!
January 9th, 2006 at 10:05 pm#
#25,
But wouldn’t that mean the loss of 35,000 jobs?
Comment by WaltTheMan — January 9, 2006 @ 8:44 pm
You Call what Abramoff and others did for ’special interest’ Jobs?? When those people paying for it are the ones helping to screw the People?
How, Sir, can you consider Lobbying a Job?
January 9th, 2006 at 11:39 pmIdeologues with designs of War, and Profit, names such as Enterprise, thats Business,to me, not people.
Defend your Position , Sir.
Walttheman, Does or does not The Constitution speak these words; for, and of, and by, and the, and People?
FIRST, before all these other Words added at later Dates?
Did someone slide business groups, or Special interest groups in there somewhere Before this?
Let me See, it does not say ‘Christ the creator’ does it? No it says, and I quote verbatim;
IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America,
When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Think About it.
January 9th, 2006 at 11:50 pmOther countries legistate that media give free airtime to political parties to put their message across. If the airtime is free, then the parties don’t need to raise masses of cash to get any visibility at all. No cash, no corruption?
January 9th, 2006 at 11:52 pmThanks for putting it into perspective. Now you need candidates and elected officials to repeat these things in public. Make more media to spread the truth.
Just because you say something doesn’t make it true, but hard evidence backed by real numbers are hard to dispute no matter how much you try to spin them.
It’s all politics within this administration and this republican congress. No actual policy.
January 10th, 2006 at 12:14 amBy the Numbers: Lobbying in America…
Think Progress as a nice fact check that shows the size and scope of the lobbying industry in Washington, D.C. Here are a couple of quick snapshots:
Amount spent on federal lobbying, 1999
$1.5 billion
Amount spent on federal lobbying, 200…
January 10th, 2006 at 6:19 am#29, #30: Um, I believe Walt is being sarcastic – although, I wouldn’t be surprised Scotty-boy makes a statement to this effect ;)
January 10th, 2006 at 8:26 amEver notice how many people make the claim that “Democrats took Abramoff’s money too!”
Ever notice how not one of them has any link or information to back up that claim? Well, at least not a site that isn’t Rush Limbaugh or Sean Hannity or some other radical-rightist.
I guess that providing proof for your statements is asking too much of some people. Or maybe, it’s the vast left-wing conspiracy that’s stifling the information! Or the liberal-bias in the news that’s keeping this information out of the public’s eye! Like how ‘they’ kept the impeachment of Pres. Clinton off the front page of most newspapers!
January 10th, 2006 at 9:14 amJAYZUS!!! Those are some mind scrambling numbers. I suppose that those are the stats “Whore-Hey” is alluding to when touting the strong economy and job creation he likes to boast about, while we scratch our heads and think “what the h*ll is he rambling about now?” All lobbying has to GO!!! Right now! No pathetic attempts at “reform”, or “increased oversight”. GAAAWWWD!! It just keeps coming, and coming, and coming….. I am treading water in their ocean of lies, and I am getting tired. Just keep swimming…..
January 10th, 2006 at 9:18 am[...] Think Progress With the Jack Abramoff scandal making headlines across the country, the issue of lobbying and other forms of influence peddling at the federal level has reemerged. Below are a few quick facts showing the size and scope of this burgeoning Washington, DC industry. [...]
January 10th, 2006 at 9:33 amStill haven’t been able to find a Democrat name to whom money was donated by Jack Abramoff . . . .
Anyone have any links that show that info? Anyone? (Please, no links to NewsMax or other radical right web site.)
http://www.opensecrets.org/indivs/search.asp?NumOfThou=0&txtName=Abramoff&txtState=%28all+states%29&txtZip=&txtEmploy=&txtCand=&txt2006=Y&txt2004=Y&txt2002=Y&Order=N
January 10th, 2006 at 9:53 amNumber of federal lobbyists, 2005: 35,000
Wow. That’s a lot of bullets we’re gonna need.
January 10th, 2006 at 2:27 pm.
What would be really interesting would be to see a breakdown congresscritter by critter of how much and who was lobbying them and for what reason AND the results. I
January 10th, 2006 at 2:50 pmwould bet that that the pattern would show systematic and widespread CRIMINAL CORRUPTION. Too bad the critters are above the law as they make ‘em. Pick any one of them and look at their personal record of campaign pledges and actual results and I ask you HOW CAN YOU BELIEVE A SINGLE WORD OUT OF ANY OF THEIR MOUTHS!!?!!?!?!?!?!?!?!
We the People create this mess when we decided that corporations have to pay tax too. Somehow or another, we got corporations declared to be a “person”, so they would have to pay taxes like the rest of us. Smart weren’t we? Now, our greed has bitten us the butt. We didn’t count on the corporations being able to throw money at our politicians. So long as corporations are declared to be persons with a tax liability, we are going to have this problem. I suggest that stop taxing corporations and take away their definition as a person and voila, problem solved. But don’t blame the corportions for doing what they are doing. They are just fighting to pay less taxes like everyone else. But, put bribe taking congressmen in prison in Iraq or some other secret CIA prison.
January 10th, 2006 at 3:30 pmThe SYSTEM is broken. Human beings will bribe, extort, and blackmail, and buy, sell and trade anything and everything. The human heart is deceitfully wicked. Who can know it. Making government small like it was designed to be would be a big part of the solution as it would remove the power and the money from the system. But I have seen this kind of crookedness demonstrated in little children and in very small systems. I wonder if our government ever operated any differently. I have a quote of Woodrow Wilson in the late 30s commenting, upon looking out over the capital area, that the city was swarming with lobbyists. Maybe it is the twisting and bending of the Constitution that has allowed government to get so big. Charles Lewis (Center for Public Integrity) has written a series of books – The Buying of the President 2000, 2004 etc. It shows what corporations gave what amounts to a presidential campaign and what the corporation got in return for their investment. It is a nonpartison reference book and tells it like it is. One thing is clear, we the people are completely superfluous to the lawmaking process. We do not count. We do not matter. We cannot be heard because we do not have enough money. There will be NO completely thorough of the Abramoff scandal as it played out in the states. Texas was particularly hard hit by Ralph Reed’s so called “grassroots” efforts upon John Cornyn (then Texas Attorney General), though the Lietenant Governor, though numerous lawmakers and through at least 50 Texas pastors of large congregations. I believe ALL of these people knew that the money came from the Texas Indians through Abramoff and Scanlon to Reed. Abramoff and the Texas players were using the Indians money to hornswagle the Indians. I guess that is what makes this particular scandal particularly nauseating. Are we disgusted yet?
January 10th, 2006 at 4:20 pm#42, I believe that it was a decision by the courts that Corporations were denied the right of free speech, because they were not allowed to give donations to politicians,and therefore were being denied their first amendment rights of “free speech” (how ironic). So by granting them the right to give money to politicians, as an expression of free speech, they essentially became defacto “people”. Them paying taxes has absolutely no bearing on the matter. As it is, most of them pay no taxes whatsoever. Ahhh, the wonders of free speech.
January 10th, 2006 at 5:09 pmLobbying should be outlawed. Lobbyists are the perfect example of some people being more “equal” than others. It is blatantly unfair that people with money should get better access to government than regular citizens.
January 11th, 2006 at 9:40 pm#35 & #38,
Democrat Soldier,
That’s a good name for you. You follow orders, instead of thinking on your own.
Do a Google search, it’s not hard to find all of the politicians on both sides of the aisle tripping over themselves trying to give the Abramoff money back.
That link to the opensecrets.org was nice, but it was only for Abramoff’s personal donations, which isn’t how lobbyists work. You need to look for all of the donations from their clients and PAC’s.
Here’s a Wash Post article from December.
January 11th, 2006 at 9:42 pm
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/13/AR2005121301582.html
January 11th, 2006 at 9:43 pm– the law prevents people from getting near voting areas to influence the vote and the same law should apply to lobbyists who are influencing the way our politicians vote.
MONEY IS NOT FREE SPEECH, regardless of the what some courts may declare and CORPORATIONS ARE NOT PEOPLE either~
It’s way past time that we take our country back!
January 11th, 2006 at 9:47 pmthere are hundreds of pro-israeli lobbiests in wash dc. there is not one congress person that tells those lobbiests NO TO THE DEMANDS OF ISRAEL. GO TO THE AIPAC WEB SITE AND THAT IS JUST ONE EXAMPLE. WE ARE BEING GOVERNED BY THE ISRAELI KNESSET
January 15th, 2006 at 3:28 pmDoes anyone know of a site that shows how much lobby money each member of congress gets, and from whom?
January 18th, 2006 at 12:45 pmIn our country’s first hundred years, politicians who took corporate money were put in prison and the company was dissolved. We need nothing short of an ammendment to the Constitution forever making that a law, for all local, state and federal electees. The Bible is great. Capitalism is great. The American government is great. These three things can only remain great when there is a clear seperation of all three.
January 28th, 2006 at 1:44 pm