Lobbyists spend thousands in charter school debate

A look at charter school lobbying expenses

Lobbyists on both sides of the charters schools debate have spent thousands on meals and gifts for state lawmakers since January as the Legislature debates a constitutional amendment that would expand the state's ability to create charter schools. Here are a few of those expenses:

For the constitutional amendment:

— The Georgia Charter Schools Association spent $3,423 on a reception for state lawmakers during a screening of the documentary "Waiting for 'Superman'" on Jan. 17.

— The American Federation for Children paid $75 for frames for photos of state lawmakers with former Braves pitcher John Smoltz.

— The Georgia Family Council spent $410 on lunch for the House Education Committee on Feb. 7.

— The Georgia Chamber of Commerce spent nearly $2,000 on meals for lawmakers from January to early March.

Against the constitutional amendment:

— The Georgia School Superintendents Association and the Georgia Schools Boards Association split $1,600 worth of coffee for state lawmakers.

— The Professional Association of Georgia Educators spent $872.77 on a lunch reception for lawmakers.

ATLANTA (AP) Lobbyists on both sides of the charter school debate have spent thousands trying to woo Republican and Democratic lawmakers alike, shelling out for a documentary film screening, coffee and pricey meals, some topping $100 a person.

The tab is growing as a constitutional amendment allowing the state to create and fund charter schools is hanging in limbo in the Senate. The state Supreme Court outlawed the Georgia Charter Schools Commission in a May ruling, and it cannot restart its work unless the amendment is approved.

The bill already has passed the House. If it passes the Senate with the needed two-thirds majority, it would go on the November ballot for voters to decide.

"If you don't have lobbyists in today's legislative world in Georgia, then you really can't get anything done because everybody uses the service of lobbyists," said Tony Roberts, head of the Georgia Charter Schools Association, which has paid for at least three lobbyists this legislative session to help get the constitutional amendment passed.

An Associated Press analysis of the bi-monthly reports that lobbyists turn in to the state ethics commission shows that charter school supporters have spent at least $7,800 since January on everything from breakfast to framed photos for state lawmakers. On the other side of the debate, groups representing teachers, school administrators, school boards and public school parents have spent at least $2,400 on lunch and coffee for lawmakers.

The lobbyist expenses are only the tip of the iceberg because organizations don't have to report lobbyists' salaries, travel expenses for parents and students who visit the Capitol or the cost of printed materials handed out to lawmakers.

The biggest single expense was by the charter schools association, for a reception and screening of the pro-charter school documentary "Waiting for `Superman"' for lawmakers and others Jan. 17. That event cost more than $3,400.

The American Federation for Children, which also lobbies for charter schools, spent $75 on frames for photos of state lawmakers with former longtime Braves pitcher John Smoltz.

The Georgia Family Council, which pushes for charter schools each year, paid $410 for lunch for the House Education Committee and has offered $10 Starbucks gift cards to parents willing to talk to lawmakers about charter schools and other school choice options. Council officials have declined to say how many gift cards they've given away.

"The heightened lobbying on the charter constitutional amendment shows how much is at stake for the future of public education in Georgia," said Jerri Nims Rooker, director of the council's Center for an Educated Georgia.

Often state lawmakers' office will contact lobbyists asking for them to host a lunch or dinner. And the lobbyists involved in the charter schools debate frequently represent multiple clients on a laundry list of issues, not just education, so expenses for a meal can be split among several organizations.

The Professional Association of Georgia Educators, which represents more than 82,000 educators statewide, spent $872 on lunch for lawmakers during a day of events hosted by the teacher organization. And the Georgia School Boards Association and the Georgia School Superintendents Association, along with two other non-education organizations, split the cost of coffee for lawmakers throughout the session about $800 per group.

Both groups have lobbied against the constitutional amendment, though they said their expenses are related to all education legislation, not just charter schools. The organizations collect dues from members which can include money that school boards get from taxpayers to use for their expenses.

"K-12 education in Georgia is a multi-billion dollar business," said Tim Callahan, spokesman for the educators' association. "There are (companies) anxious to get a piece of this business in league with some of our politicians who seem eager to privatize it."

The critics say the constitutional amendment would allow the state to siphon money from cash-strapped districts at a time when they're facing $1 billion in cuts and lagging property tax revenue. GOP leaders have promised no money will be taken from school districts but have not said where they will find the funding in lean budget times.

The charter school issue has brought a "different dynamic" to education lobbying at the statehouse, said Angela Palm, lobbyist for the school boards association.

"We typically focus on the issue, research, impact on students and implementation issues if any," Palm said. "Now we are faced with committee rooms filled with contract lobbyists from top firms, radio ads against legislators, movies, Starbucks cards for rewarding people for contacting their legislators with a specific message and who knows what else."

Radio ads targeting lawmakers opposed to the constitutional amendment have aired in Augusta and Gainesville. In Augusta, the ad paid for by a coalition that includes the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, the American Federation for Children, the Georgia Charter Schools Association and the Georgia Public Policy Foundation asks listeners to call Democratic Sen. Hardie Davis and ask him to vote for the constitutional amendment.

"The rest of us are working hard every day just to make ends meet, and have only one choice: public schools. Don't we deserve better choices for our kids, too?" the ad asks.

Roberts declined to say how much his organization spends on contracting with outside lobbyists, but the association reported it spent $90,000 for a lobbying firm in 2009, the most recent federal tax data available. The association also has lobbyists on staff fulltime.

The associations for teachers, school administrators, school boards and parents typically don't hire lobbyists from outside firms, instead relying on their own staffs.

The fight between the sides has grown increasingly bitter as Senate Democrats refuse to budge on their opposition to the measure, despite multiple back-room meetings with GOP leaders hoping to sway the vote of the state's minority party. No members of either party would discuss the meetings.

Gov. Nathan Deal has even been involved in the push to get the legislation passed.

Such lobbyist spending is nothing new in Georgia. Lobbyists line the halls of the state Capitol building, crowding around the entrance to each chamber in hopes of talking with lawmakers and provide meals, snacks, sodas and gifts for legislators throughout the session.

There are nearly 1,200 lobbyist registered with the state who have spent $630,371.62 on lawmakers so far this year.

"What adds to the erosion of public trust is when people see legislators are getting ... pictures of John Smoltz," said William Perry, executive director of Common Cause Georgia, a government watchdog group. "They don't see that as educating lawmakers about the benefits of a law."

Follow Dorie Turner at http://www.twitter.com/dorieturner.


FactChecker 3 years, 5 months ago

I thank the GDP for publishing this article. It helps highlight how lobbyist are attempting to influence our representatives with gifts. We should also recognize the importance of this (and any other) legislation that could alter our constitution. It is easier to add to the constitution than to take away from the constitution so everyone should have a full understanding of the issues before making a decision. I do not wish to make a stand for either side; however, I think a clarification is necessary. Some might read the first paragraph to mean that the court decision struck down the formation of charter schools. This is not the case. Charter schools can still operate and new charter schools can be formed. The courts said that a public board of education cannot be forced to fund a charter school while having no control over how it operates. The Georgia Charter Schools Commission, formed by a 2008 law was disbanded for its sole purpose was to circumvent local control and establish charters with local BOEs forced to help fund them.


NewsReader 3 years, 5 months ago

FactChecker, you have made it abundantly clear what your agenda is. Your interest in GDP publishing this article only extends to your interest in supporting your own liberal agenda, so spare me the "...I do not wish to make a stand for either side..." LOL, your very own comment here is very reassuring. And BTW, did you preach the same sermon over the constitutional amendment for Tax Allocation Districts? I doubt it.


kevin 3 years, 5 months ago

when will the people stop politicians from taking anything from lobblyists?This is simply buying a vote, period. this makes them more powerful and greedy, two basic ingredients to becoming a long-time politican.


ptm4936 3 years, 5 months ago

What is wrong with interested parties, both pro and con, spending money to educate and make their case to legislators who are voting on the issue. Given there are 179 Representatives and 56 Senators, this represents average expenditure of $43.14 per person. Does anybody think any Rep or Senator will sell his/her vote for $43.14?


FactChecker 3 years, 5 months ago

Two problems with your argument. First, the $43.14 per person counts those that have elected to avoid accepting perks from lobbyist or lobbyists don't offer them perks because they know it will not influence votes. Second, the legislature should air both sides of an issue equally, if they have to be bribed to listen to your sides reasoning, then they will put more weight to that side. Second, the total gifts from lobbyist averages $2500 per lawmaker this year. Check out Dick Yarbrough's column on the opinion page and you will see that House Speaker David Ralston has accepted over $1800.00 in perks from lobbyists in the first two months this year. Extrapolating, this implies over $10,000 for the year for him. If a educator accepted gifts from students worth a fraction of this, we would be calling for their resignation.


NewsReader 3 years, 5 months ago

"Check out Dick Yarborough's column on the opinion page..." Did you even get that Mr. FactChecker? "Opinion Page"? LOL, you just can't make this crap up can you FactChecker? Everybody goes to the "Opinion Page" to gather their FACTS like good little liberals don't they?


BuzzG 3 years, 5 months ago

"If it passes the Senate with the needed two-thirds majority, it would go on the November ballot for voters to decide."
Let the voters decide. It is the teachers unions and the public school industry that wants to prevent us citizens from voting on it. They want to continue to enslave us in a mandatory mediocre school with us having no decisions over the education of our kids. They want us to be forced to send our kids to schools where Federal Gov't sends inspectors to examine our kids lunchboxes and teach our third graders that homosexuality is good.


Jan 3 years, 5 months ago

If voters were given the proper information, this might work; however, truth in advertising does not apply to political ads. Check past constitutional amendments and you will even find some that were worded on the ballot to imply something different or apeal to prejudices. It would become a contest to see which side could get their point of view before the public. You would not hear that over one third of charter schools perform below public school average in the same demographic area while only 17% exceed regular public school and many of these are run by public school systems. We have had charter schools since 1992, we will continue to open new charter schools. Most of you would be upset if the federal government chose to authorize charter schools in your neighborhood for which you had to provide some funding, why would you support the same thing from the state?


Sign in to comment