ALEC estimates about one in four state lawmakers nationwide are members of its group. As critics gain, ALEC gives ground

ALEC is putting 2013 in its rearview mirror.

The American Legislative Exchange Council, a conservative group of state lawmakers and corporations that, among other things, drafts model legislation, saw an exodus of members and a sharp decline in fundraising after it was tied to controversial “stand your ground laws” like the one made infamous following the shooting death of Florida teen Trayvon Martin.


ALEC has denied being the source of Florida’s law and says it has no model policy today bearing resemblance to it. But the group says its practice of keeping draft bills secret has allowed opponents to pin the organization unfairly to such measures.

( Also on POLITICO: Who will survive? 2014's top primaries)

So now, ALEC’s leaders say they are putting in place a key change that will make sure that never happens again. As part of what it calls a move toward more transparency, the group has decided to post online all the “model legislation” it develops so that lawmakers, the public and the press will be able to see exactly where ALEC stands.

“We all acknowledge there were challenges in our past, but challenge oftentimes gives you the opportunity to be introspective and see what you can do differently, what you can do better, how you can better serve your constituents and your community,” said Bill Meierling, senior director of communications and public affairs.

It’s the draft bills where the group has run into the most trouble. Opponents charge that the model legislation is written in secret, then translated into real bills — sometimes word for word — and passed by lawmakers as if it were their own work and with scant understanding of the implications.

The move toward greater openness comes in the wake of dozens of corporate members pulling out earlier this year after ALEC was drawn into the Martin case. By some estimates, as many as 400 lawmakers and 60 companies, including brand names like Coca-Cola, Pepsi and McDonald’s, bolted.

( Also on POLITICO: Ads hit vulnerable Dems on Obamacare)

But critics say the transparency effort is a smokescreen, and they charge that ALEC remains the same corporate-driven “bill mill” designed to push right-wing business interests in statehouses with as little notice as possible.

Lisa Graves, executive director of the Center for Media and Democracy, points out what she says is the root of the problem and which hasn’t changed: Corporate members sit on closed-door task forces with lawmakers to develop the model policies. While ALEC says a board of only lawmakers makes the final calls on which bills the organization gets behind, Graves and other critics complain the decision-making takes place in secret and allows corporations to essentially buy influence over the state lawmakers.

“What ALEC does is provide a secretive forum where these corporate lobbyists aren’t just asking for a bill and registering in a particular state, it provides a forum where corporate entities vote as equals with our lawmakers on legislation without the press or public present, and I think that’s harmful to our democracy,” Graves said. “They say it’s just a dialogue; it’s not. These bills are real; they are introduced sometimes without a comma or period changed. It subverts the American democratic process.”

( PHOTOS: Governors’ offices up for grabs in 2014)

About one in four state lawmakers nationwide is a member of ALEC, by its own estimate, and the organization has cultivated a strong position as one of the leading conservative influencers of state laws. A recent analysis from the Brookings Institution found that 132 ALEC model policies were introduced in statehouses during the 2011-2012 session, and 9 percent passed. The study compared that with a less than 2 percent passage rate of bills introduced in the 112th U.S. Congress.

ALEC consists of two types of members: “Public members” are state lawmakers, and “private members” are companies, nonprofit groups and think tanks. They work together to advance ALEC’s core principles of free-market enterprise, limited government and federalism.

ALEC’s leadership predicts that 2014 will be a big year for federalism. While the group eschews the term “states’ rights,” much of the model legislation it plans to put forward focuses on policies that seek to restore what it sees as a balance between state and federal authority. ALEC’s main model bills for next year will target allowing states to propose a federal balanced budget amendment, fighting unfunded federal mandates, and ways to escape what it calls over-regulation from federal agencies, especially in the areas of the environment and education. In previous years, ALEC has been more opaque about its agenda in the states.

Heading into the new year, ALEC is also pushing back on the perception that it is walled off from the public and media.

For example, at the group’s annual meeting in Washington, D.C., earlier this month, ALEC boasted that three dozen journalists were present, up from 10 at the previous meeting in August and just one the spring before. For this article, ALEC, which has beefed up its communications team, invited POLITICO to its new Arlington offices to meet with five members of its leadership team. But the criticism hasn’t abated. Journalists at the December gathering, including The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank, noted security kept the media out of certain ALEC task force meetings.

Certainly, not all the secrecy is being lifted. As a nonprofit organization, ALEC is not required by federal law to disclose its members, and it continues not to do so, in part because of fears of harassment, the group says. “Tons of organizations don’t talk about their members for fear of political intimidation,” Meierling said.

In continuing bad press, timed with ALEC’s December conference The Guardian in Britain posted online several internal documents which showed revenue coming in far below expectations, the formation of an organization with a different tax-exempt classification to allow the group to carry on certain advocacy activities, an oath required of state chairs to put ALEC first, and an effort to lure back former members labeled the “Prodigal Son Project.”

ALEC admits that it had a rough year, but it says it has balanced its budget and it makes sense to want to recruit back members. “I would be a pretty terrible membership person if I didn’t think about picking up dropped members,” said Jeff Lambert, senior director of membership and development.

Meanwhile, critics complain that the rapid spread of ALEC’s model policies around the country remains the problem.

ALEC opponent Chris Taylor, a Democratic state representative from Wisconsin, says she joined the organization to be able to attend its meetings to see firsthand what she was up against. She said she was curious where certain bills introduced in Wisconsin had originated, including one similar to Florida’s stand your ground law.

“Sure enough, some of these come from ALEC, so I wanted to see what ALEC was about, and I have to say, I was both horrified and fascinated by the system,” said Taylor, who attended the group’s meeting in August. “It’s a three-legged stool: You have these corporations, the right-wing think tanks that are in every single state, and the third leg of the stool are the lawmakers who are tasked with going out and getting these laws passed, and in exchange they are promised campaign donations.”

Nebraska state Sen. Jeremy Nordquist used to be a member of ALEC — along with all but three of his legislative colleagues at the time — which he said he found useful on certain issues in the early years of his tenure. But the lawmaker, whose state has nonpartisan legislative elections, says he noticed a shift in ALEC after the 2010 elections toward controversial legislation like voter ID and immigration, leading him to drop his membership.

“Initially, their agenda was certainly center-right and it was focused more on economic issues,” Nordquist said. “But their agenda has gone farther right, and they certainly have the right to do that, but the biggest concern is the lack of transparency in who their donors are and the lack of transparency in really who is driving their agenda.”

ALEC’s national chairwoman, Iowa state Rep. Linda Upmeyer, counters that the characterizations of ALEC and its corporate members are way off.

“It’s really no different than our legislatures in that it’s people in the same room talking about the issues,” Upmeyer said.

“Certainly not everybody agrees; it’s really interesting to have that discussion, oftentimes talking about things that you hadn’t considered. This type of process makes it much more likely that we’ll have more well-thought-out legislation, so I’ve always appreciated that of ALEC and the expertise I can find there from folks of all different walks of life and some of the industries.”

This article tagged under: States

Florida

Republicans

Legislation

Conservatives

ALEC