1977, April, Pg. 647. Legislative Action Report.

• Author: by Charles R. Roos

6 Colo.Law. 647

Colorado Lawyer

1977.

1977, April, Pg. 647.

Legislative Action Report

647Vol. 6, No. 4, Pg. 647Legislative Action Reportby Charles R. RoosLawyers have a special stake in Senate Bill 21, "Concerning the Regulation of Lobbyists," which has cleared the Colorado Senate and been referred to the House State Affairs Committee.

The bill originated as a compromise, put together by diverse and sometimes hostile interests which included Atty. Gen. J. D. MacFarlane's staff, Secretary of State Mary Estill Buchanan, Common Cause and a group of lobbyist-plaintiffs in a pending case in Denver District Court.

As a compromise worked out by adversaries, the bill doesn't really satisfy anyone. Senate amendments have perhaps weakened the fragile agreement holding the parties together. But as Mrs. Buchanan, who administers the lobby registration program, has said, the proposal would improve the present situation and would, hopefully, create an atmosphere in which all parties could get along together for a change.

The bill, in its present form, would take care of a special problem that has arisen for lawyers who practice before state administrative bodies.

A further hope is that passage of the bill can bring about settlement of the pending court case, in which certain lobbyists challenged the sunshine law and recent rules and regulations issued by Mrs. Buchanan on MacFarlane's advice.

The Colorado Bar Association, which employs a registered lobbyist and routinely reports all lobbying activities and spending, isn't a party to the suit.

Many lawyers have become concerned, though, about one aspect of lobbying---whether lawyers who represent clients in legal proceedings before the Public Utilities Commission and other state boards and commissions are "lobbyists" under the law and must therefore register and report.

This was not an issue in the first two or three years after the voters adopted the sunshine law in 1972. It was generally assumed that lawyers who appeared as lawyers before state boards and commissions weren't lobbyists.

(It has always been different, of course, for lawyers who appear for a fee to try to influence House and Senate committees---for lawyers who buttonhole legislators in the Capitol corridors, seeking to influence votes on legislation. These lawyers have always been considered lobbyists and have commonly...