Lobbying

Republican House leadership told Facebook, Google and Amazon that overly aggressive net neutrality activism could make it harder to work together on other policy issues the firms care about, according to two sources familiar with the conversation.

The message was delivered in a meeting the day before dozens of internet companies protested the Federal Communications Commission's plan to unwind network neutrality rules. Tech companies are walking a fine line in speaking out against Trump administration policies — and net neutrality is particularly sensitive. On one hand, they generally support the rules (even though they are now so big that they don't necessarily need them) and their employees care deeply about the issue. On the other, they are asking Congress for help on touchy issues like consumer privacy and legal liability for content on online platforms that would have major business ramifications.

Three of the largest internet service providers and the cable television industry’s primary trade association have spent more than a half-billion dollars lobbying the federal government during the past decade on issues that include network neutrality, according to a MapLight analysis.

Comcast, AT&T, Verizon and the National Cable & Telecommunications Association (NCTA) have spent $572 million on attempts to influence the Federal Communications Commission and other government agencies since 2008. The amount represents more than $100 for each of the 5.6 million public comments on the FCC’s proposed elimination of net neutrality rules. Despite the resources devoted to the rollback by the big internet service providers, net neutrality advocates haven’t been totally bereft of support in the nation’s capital. Amazon, the world’s largest online retailer, has spent $41.1 million lobbying in the nation’s capital. Facebook, which boasts 2 billion unique monthly users, has spent almost $43.3 million.

Google operates a little-known program to harness the brain power of university researchers to help sway opinion and public policy, cultivating financial relationships with professors at campuses from Harvard University to the University of California, Berkeley. Over the past decade, Google has helped finance hundreds of research papers to defend against regulatory challenges of its market dominance, paying stipends of $5,000 to $400,000, The Wall Street Journal found.

Some researchers share their papers before publication and let Google give suggestions, according to thousands of pages of e-mails obtained by the Journal in public-records requests of more than a dozen university professors. The professors don’t always reveal Google’s backing in their research, and few disclosed the financial ties in subsequent articles on the same or similar topics. The funding of favorable campus research to support Google’s Washington, D.C.-based lobbying operation is part of a behind-the-scenes push in Silicon Valley to influence decision makers. The operation is an example of how lobbying has escaped the confines of Washington’s regulated environment and is increasingly difficult to spot.

President Donald Trump entered office pledging to cut red tape, and within weeks, he ordered his administration to assemble teams to aggressively scale back government regulations. But the effort — a signature theme in Trump’s populist campaign for the White House — is being conducted in large part out of public view and often by political appointees with deep industry ties and potential conflicts.

Most government agencies have declined to disclose information about their deregulation teams. But ProPublica and The New York Times identified 71 appointees, including 28 with potential conflicts, through interviews, public records and documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. Some appointees are reviewing rules their previous employers sought to weaken or kill, and at least two may be positioned to profit if certain regulations are undone. The appointees include lawyers who have represented businesses in cases against government regulators, staff members of political dark money groups, employees of industry-funded organizations opposed to environmental rules and at least three people who were registered to lobby the agencies they now work for.

The proposed $13.7 billion merger of Amazon and Whole Foods is primed to set off a massive lobbying effort in Washington. Amazon has been moving into new markets and seeking ways to deliver products faster to customers, including a drone fleet for local deliveries, making the Whole Foods deal just the latest example of its growing ambitions. Some industry analysts say the deal should face a relatively smooth path to federal approval because Whole Foods only represents a 1.2 percent share of the $800 billion grocery market, while Amazon only has a 0.2 percent share. Under antitrust law, regulators examine whether a deal would eliminate competition and whether consumers, through price changes and other factors, would be harmed. Amazon, which serves as both a traditional retail outlet and a platform for other sellers, has metrics more complex than just any other store.

Several organizations representing or serving rural telco and electric/utility providers have launched a campaign aimed at facilitating rural broadband deployment partnerships between telecommunications, municipals and electrics/utilities in unserved or underserved communities. The campaign, dubbed Partners in Broadband, comes from NTCA – The Rural Broadband Association and several key rural broadband supplier organizations, including National Information Solutions Cooperative, NRTC and National Rural Utilities Cooperative Finance.

Attorneys general for the District of Columbia and the state of Maryland say they will sue President Donald Trump on June 12, alleging that he has violated anti-corruption clauses in the Constitution by accepting millions in payments and benefits from foreign governments since moving into the White House.

The lawsuit, the first of its kind brought by government entities, centers on the fact that Trump chose to retain ownership of his company when he became president. President Trump said in January that he was shifting his business assets into a trust managed by his sons to eliminate potential conflicts of interests. But DC Attorney General Karl Racine (D) and Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh (D) say President Trump has broken many promises to keep separate his public duties and private business interests. For one, his son Eric Trump has said the President would continue to receive regular updates about his company’s financial health. The lawsuit alleges “unprecedented constitutional violations” by President Trump. The suit says Trump’s continued ownership of a global business empire has rendered the President “deeply enmeshed with a legion of foreign and domestic government actors” and has undermined the integrity of the US political system.

Network neutrality continues to make headlines and draw millions of Federal Communications Commission comments, but the top organizations and companies lobbying the FCC have also been focused on other issues, such as the video relay service and fund for rural deployment. In recent weeks, the agency has received over 170 ex parte filings, or lobbying communications companies and associations make with agency staff and commissioners by phone, in person, or in writing. Here are the top five groups lobbying the FCC between May 8 and June 2:

• 1. Sorenson Communications and 2. ZVRS Holding Company: two providers of video relay services, which allow people with hearing disabilities to communicate by phone using sign language.
• 3. NCTA – The Rural Broadband Association submitted eight filings to the FCC, focused mainly on issues related to the Connect America Fund.
• 4. Benton Foundation submitted five filings focused on the net neutrality proceeding.
• 5. NCTA – The Internet and Television Association also submitted five filings on several topics including spectrum policy issues and paper versus electronic notice requirements for consumers.

Federal agencies issued just a handful of waivers exempting political appointees from conflict of interest rules in the first three months of the administration, a reflection in part of how President Donald Trump has made it easier for lobbyists to work in agencies they once sought to influence. Documents released by the Office of Government Ethics on June 7 show that through April 30, just 10 Trump appointees who work outside the White House received exemptions from aspects of federal ethics rules.

Although dozens of lobbyists have joined the Trump administration, only one received an ethics waiver addressing his previous lobbying work: Lance Leggitt, the chief of staff for the Department of Health and Human Services. That’s because an executive order that Trump signed in January did away with a rule laid down by former president Barack Obama banning lobbyists from joining agencies they had lobbied in the previous two years. Instead, Trump’s order allows former lobbyists to enter the administration, but prohibits them for two years from working on a specific issue that they lobbied on during the previous two years.

Christopher Liddell, the White House director of strategic initiatives, was granted a 90-day waiver to conduct White House business while his trust divested assets that were deemed to be in conflict with his new position. Liddell, previously a CFO for Microsoft, has been a go-to on tech policy matters and helps run the newly formed Office of American Innovation. Also granted an ethics waiver is Charles Herndon, the White House information technology director. Prior to joining the administration, Herndon worked for IT contractor CSRA. The waiver will allow Herndon to provide technology services to the White House, though he is barred from participating in work related to a Defense Information Systems Agency contract in which he "participated personally and substantially while an employee of CSRA."