Lobbying SC legislators gets $1 million more expensive

Lobbying the S.C. Legislature was $1 million more expensive in 2017.

The total spent by companies, interest groups and public entities to influence lawmakers during this year’s session rose to $10.3 million, according to disclosures filed with the S.C. Ethics Commission at the end of June.

VIEW: Database of groups that lobbied S.C. legislators this year

Last year, in 2016, groups spent $1 million less — $9.3 million — in their quest to safeguard their interests.

This year’s spending went to convince lawmakers to see it the interest groups’ way on the state’s medical needs, its transportation infrastructure and even plastic grocery bags.

Gas money

The most anticipated piece of legislation passed in 2017 was the plan to repair South Carolina’s roads and bridges – and the higher gas tax to pay for those repairs.

A direct line can’t be drawn between money spent by interest groups and a legislative outcome.

But in 2016, when a similar effort came up short, Koch Cos. and the Koch-allied Americans for Prosperity, two opponents of the gas-tax increase, spent a combined $82,124.68 to lobby at the State House. The S.C. Chamber of Commerce, a supporter of the gas-tax hike, spent slightly less — $81,802.14 — in 2016.

This year, the chamber boosted its spending to $162,574.19, the second-highest amount spent by a lobbyist “principal” in 2017. Meanwhile, the libertarian Koch brothers of Kansas and their AFP ally dropped their spending to $50,432.80. And the gas-tax hike passed.

“The reality is by continuing to do nothing, we were costing businesses money and costing South Carolina residents’ lives,” said Ted Pitts, president and chief executive of the S.C. Chamber.

Pitts said business leaders could put dollar amounts on the damage done to company cars driving on the state’s deteriorating roads or the cost of rerouting trucks around deficient bridges.

The chamber also tracked other pieces of business-friendly legislation through the State House.

More state money to improve the Palmetto State’s workforce-development efforts, for example, was a priority “whether you’re a McDonald’s franchisee or a national or international CEO,” Pitts said.

But the chamber wasn’t always successful. An effort to streamline the business license process statewide stalled out at the end of the session.

Health care a priority here, too

The biggest spender at the State House was the S.C. Hospital Association, which spent $194,876.86.

Advocating for Medicaid spending is an ongoing priority for the state’s hospitals, said communications director Schipp Ames. But this year, with a new Republican administration in the White House and the national focus on repealing the Affordable Care Act, the issue has been under an even bigger spotlight.

“It’s a huge concern,” Ames said of the on-again, off-again GOP efforts to repeal Obamacare.

In particular, Ames said he worries that some GOP proposals could leave South Carolina, which already spends less on health care than many other states, with a permanent “cap” on its ability to meet the health-care needs of poor and disabled citizens.

“We’re continuing to try for (Medicaid) coverage expansion, believe it or not,” Ames said. “But, with recent events in D.C., there’s not much appetite for expansion right now.”

Keeping an eye on the future

Rounding out the top five groups lobbying the Legislature this year were three utilities: the Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina, AT&T Services and Duke Energy Carolinas.

Partly that is a reflection of “defensive” lobbying by industries with a perennial interest in how government actions could affect them. That is one reason that AT&T was 2016’s top spender.

But the activity also could reflect a potential shake-up in South Carolina’s energy market.

“Duke is interested in buying SCANA,” said John Crangle, a longtime government watchdog who now does government relations for the S.C. Progressive Network.

North Carolina-based Duke expanded its S.C. footprint by buying Progress Energy a few years ago. Meanwhile, SCANA is tied down trying to keep two new nuclear reactors under construction.

“If they don’t finish the reactor(s), SCANA could have financial problems,” Crangle said. “Duke’s thinking ... they could buy them out.”

Other groups already have an eye on 2018’s legislative session, when many of the bills that didn’t pass this year will return to the docket.

For example, two of this year’s top-paid lobbyists, Dwight Drake and Edward Poliakoff with the Nelson Mullins law firm, represented the American Progressive Bag Alliance during the 2017 session. This year, the plastic bag manufacturers’ group spent $25,547 in an effort to halt coastal communities from restricting the use of plastic grocery bags, which can become litter.

That effort ultimately was tabled for the year in the S.C. House. But lawmakers return in January 2018.

This story was originally published July 20, 2017 at 8:08 PM with the headline "Lobbying SC legislators gets $1 million more expensive."