California experienced its most significant increase in registered lobbyists during the last legislative session since at least 2011, when a major law change led to more than a doubling of lobbyist numbers.
For the 2023-24 session, the number of registered lobbyists rose approximately 10% compared to the previous session, setting a new record at 3,245 individuals, as reported by the Secretary of State’s office.
The rise in lobbyists can be attributed to high turnover within the Legislature, according to seasoned lobbyist Chris Micheli. This turnover has resulted in a “flight of legislative staff” transitioning into advocacy roles.
Notably, the “Great Resignation” of 2022 saw 26 members choose not to run for re-election, alongside seven who reached their term limits.
Moreover, Micheli mentioned an increase in rule-making by state agencies, which energizes both supporters and opponents of regulations to engage in lobbying efforts. He pointed to the Air Resources Board as an example of an entity whose regulatory activities have expanded significantly in recent years.
Since the mid-1990s, the number of legislative staff has remained relatively stable, as noted by data from the National Conference of State Legislatures. This limited growth in staff can affect the legislators’ capacity to create and research legislative matters. Interestingly, the current increase in lobbyists now reflects a ratio of at least one lobbyist per staff member, compared to the two staff members per lobbyist recorded in 1995, the earliest year for which data is available from the Secretary of State’s office.
Trent Lange, the executive director of the California Clean Money Campaign—an organization dedicated to mitigating the influence of money in politics—emphasized that the disparity between registered lobbyists and legislative staff highlights a system increasingly weighted toward affluent interests that dominate campaign financing, rather than ordinary constituents.
Under the state’s Political Reform Act, which was enacted as a response to the Watergate scandal in 1974 to counter political corruption, lobbyists must register with the Secretary of State and report their activities quarterly.
The law defines lobbyists as individuals compensated to sway legislation or regulations through direct engagement with lawmakers, outside of public forums. Such individuals may work as contractors or employees, although those who dedicate less than one-third of their time to lobbying are exempt from registration.
Furthermore, former lawmakers and state agency employees must wait a year before they can lobby, although this rule does not apply to legislative staff.
The latest surge in lobbyist registrations marks the highest level of growth since 2011 after a law was implemented by former Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger mandating that placement agents—financial personnel soliciting investments from state workers’ and teachers’ retirement funds—register as lobbyists.
This law nearly doubled the number of lobbyists, jumping from 1,237 in the two-year session concluding in 2010 to 2,353 by 2012.
The second-largest increase occurred in the 2020 session, with an additional 257 lobbyists joining compared to the previous session.
In tandem with the rise in lobbyists, spending on lobbying activities has also surged, with industry and advocacy groups reaching record spending levels since 2022.
In the first nine months of 2024 alone, lobbying expenditures nearly reached $420 million, compared to $484 million throughout all of 2023 and $443 million in 2022. A notable contributor to this spike was a summer lobbying effort by Google, which sought to influence regulations requiring payments to news outlets for content publication.
Jonathan Mehta Stein, the executive director of California Common Cause, a public interest advocacy organization, described the nearly $1 billion spent on lobbying during the last session as “absolutely wild.” He expressed concern that those involved in legislative dealings often overlook the staggering implications of such spending on constituents, highlighting that it often diverts policy decisions away from public welfare, which is the original purpose of government.
