For Washington lawmakers, ‘infrequent’ freebies lack definition, consequences
Apr 18, 2014, 5:41 AM | Updated: 7:29 am
Lawmakers are allowed to accept free meals from lobbyists. The only rule when it comes to free meals is that they are "infrequent." But, what does "infrequent" mean? The state Ethics Committee is hoping to define that word. (AP Photo/File)
(AP Photo/File)
When you’re in Olympia, there is such a thing as free lunch. And free dinner. And free drinks. And, well, you get the idea.
After the most recent legislative session, Washington State legislators gave themselves a 33 percent bump in their per diem. That gives each member about $120 a day for food, travel and housing expenses.
In addition, lawmakers can also accept free meals from lobbyists. The only rule when it comes to free meals is that they are “infrequent.” But, what does “infrequent” mean? The state Ethics Committee is hoping to define that word.
“Doesn’t, in my view, mean 62 times in four months, but also plainly doesn’t mean never-ever,” said Senator Jamie Pederson, a Democrat of the 43rd District.
Pederson sits on the Ethics Committee and is referring to another Washington Senator who accepted free meals on 62 occasions in the 2013 legislative session, according to the Associated Press. The freebies totaled $2,000.
Public comment was taken this week in Olympia before the Ethics Committee. Only a few people spoke, but those who did were vehemently against lawmakers accepting free meals from lobbyists.
“My suggestion to you is to just simply say ‘no free meals, no free lodging, none of that is acceptable’ and the reason is logical,” said Robert Cavenaugh. “If I come in to a legislator and buy him meals and pay for his lodging, that means I expect him to do something.”
Cavenaugh said he’s spent time sitting outside the offices of senators and representatives trying to bend their ear on an issue and is disheartened when he sees special interest groups waltz right in with no wait.
“When Boeing comes before you, you should see people scatter, that is where the influence is. The influence is in the money and we, the public, perceive all these free meals and goodies that legislators get as improper and unethical,” said Cavenaugh.
There was an attempt to limit free meals in the 2014 session. The House passed a measure that would have made it easier for the public to see which special interest groups are paying for which lawmakers meals. That bill died in the Senate.
Right now, it’s up to lobbyists to report free meals, but only if they’re more than $25.
After this week’s meeting, the Ethics board agreed to hold three more public hearings and then come up with proposals to define “infrequent meals” by June.
