Bill Overview
Title: Lobbying Disclosure Reform Act of 2022
Description: 2022 This bill makes a series of changes to requirements relating to registered lobbyists, including by requiring unique identification numbers for lobbyists, clients, and providers of strategic lobbying services, and by requiring additional disclosures and reporting with respect to such individuals and activities.
Sponsors: Rep. Phillips, Dean [D-MN-3]
Target Audience
Population: People involved in or affected by lobbying activities
Estimated Size: 300000
- Lobbyists are directly affected because the legislation specifically requires them to have unique identification numbers and mandates additional reporting and disclosures.
- Clients of lobbyists will be impacted since their interactions with lobbyists will now be more transparent and heavily documented, potentially affecting how they engage with lobbyists.
- Providers of strategic lobbying services will need to adhere to new identification and disclosure requirements, affecting their operations and possibly their business models.
- Policymakers and government officials may experience changes in how lobbying activities are presented and documented, influencing how they interact with lobbyists.
- The general public could be indirectly impacted by increased transparency in lobbying activities, potentially affecting public trust and engagement in political processes.
Reasoning
- Given the budget constraints and target population, the policy's direct impact will likely concentrate on individuals and organizations most closely associated with lobbying, particularly in political centers such as Washington, D.C. The impact on the general public is anticipated to be more indirect and revolve around changes in transparency and public trust.
- Lobbyists and their clients will see the most direct effects through compliance costs and logistical adjustments to new disclosure requirements, which could impact their self-reported wellbeing based on professional demands and stress.
- Providers of strategic lobbying services might experience operational disruptions, leading to variations in their satisfaction and stability concerning their business.
- Given the nature of government policies, the long-term effects on public perception and trust regarding regulation and lobbying transparency could manifest more gradually over the 20-year projection.
Simulated Interviews
Lobbyist (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy will increase our administrative workload significantly.
- I am concerned about the possible increase in operational costs.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Policy Analyst (New York, NY)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased transparency could lead to better public understanding of lobbying.
- The reforms might complicate strategy discussions with lobbyists.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Strategic Lobbying Service Provider (Chicago, IL)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 6.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Our business model needs to adapt to these new requirements.
- We might face a reduction in client base initially.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 4 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Tech Startup Manager (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 29 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We hope this leads to better representation as smaller entities wouldn't afford extensive lobbying.
- Concern remains on how smaller lobbyists adapt.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Dallas, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Increased transparency is positive, though real impact depends on implementation.
- Skeptical about significant changes without further reforms.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Academic Researcher (Boston, MA)
Age: 41 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy could serve as an excellent case study on regulatory impact.
- Increased data access may enhance research opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Government Official (Raleigh, NC)
Age: 47 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This may help in maintaining ethical standards and accountability.
- Ensuring government relations teams comply will be crucial.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
University Student (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 21 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 18/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could make a difference in youth engagement with politics.
- Students often feel disconnected from such processes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Corporate Lawyer (Houston, TX)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Compliance costs for clients may rise but impact on practices remains minimal.
- Understanding new compliance framework is key.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Non-Profit Director (Miami, FL)
Age: 38 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- A step towards greater transparency is welcomed.
- Maintaining momentum will be critical.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $12000000 (Low: $10000000, High: $15000000)
Year 2: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 5: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 10: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $8000000, High: $12000000)
Key Considerations
- The implementation costs associated with creating and managing a new identification and reporting system.
- The scale of impact depends on the effectiveness of increased transparency to justify the administrative burden.
- Long-term benefits of transparency could include enhanced trust in government, although these are not directly quantifiable.