08-28-08 by dugan
Oil distributor’s lobbyist Tim Columbus wasn’t done with the Weights and measures meeting when I finished the last post. His next move was to pull from his pocket a list of items for discussion that he said would "clarify our thinking," or something like that. I wasn’t really listening, just agape as he handed over his agenda and the moderators accepted it. He who controls the questions largely controls the answers. Another panelist on this board, which is supposed to be considering technical issues on fixing "hot fuel," started typing up the lobbyist’s list, word for word, so it would appear on the big-screen projector at the front of the room.
How could anyone think this was OK? His agenda demanded the "quantifying" of benefits (as though fairness was a monetary value). The list also skewed toward cost, encouraging dealers to throw out vastly exaggerated dollar figures for switching to temperature compensated pumps.
I was trying to keep quiet and learn the landscape, but this was too much. I raised my own hand for the first time and said something like:
"This meeting is being hijacked bgt a Washington lobbyist with a prepared agenda. You’re letting him shape the argument so that it will come out the way he and his clients want it.
"I represent a small consumer organization. This meeting, looking at the other attendees, is already intimidating to anyone who might hold an opposing view.
"Our goals are fairness and transparency in the selling of gasoline. If you don’t want to sell temperature-adjusted gallons, then you should buy wholesale without temperature adjustment and sell it to us the same way. All we’re saying about the current system is that it is opaque and fundamentally unfair. It feels even more so when a lobbyist takes over the meeting, and no one bats an eye."
Much eye-rolling ensued, but the Weights and Measures panelists and the NCWM officers did respond. They didn’t throw out the lobbyist’s list, but they did erase or change many of the more loaded words and added some items of their own. They bent over backward to assure me that they wouldn’t ignore consumers in the final decision. They asked us for more input for the next day’s discussion. A numer of people later gave me a quiet thumbs-up. But…
That an advocate whose only intention was to shift the discussion to his own issues could so casually succeed says a lot. The NCWM prides itself on being a "consensus" group, but the strongest voice in the room was of the businesses this quasi-governmental body is supposed to regulate. It’s hard to believe in the panel’s earnest assurances of their consumer focus. The scene is too much like what goes on in the state Legislature as it swarms with lobbyists at the end of session.