The Washington Post addressed a concern we have noted before, the possible ways registered lobbyists can avoid restrictions on communications with the administration regarding Recovery Act funding; just simply send someone who is not registered. This way those who are unregistered would be the ones lobbying for funding, and the communications would go undisclosed. "As lobbyists adapt, a look at summaries of lobbyist contacts that federal agencies are posting online shows the rules being applied inconsistently and departments reporting just a few such communications. Lobbyists complain that many bureaucrats are overzealously enforcing the curbs."

Some agencies including the Department of Defense and Housing and Urban Development have not posted any contacts. Norm Eisen, the White House counsel for ethics and government reform, "attributes the paucity of lobbying contacts on agency Web sites to the stimulus still being in its early stages and to agency meetings attended by mayors or corporate executives."

USAToday also notes that there will not actually be an increase in lobbying disclosure, observing that the new policy "has shed little light on a behind-the-scenes special-interests' fight for billions in economic stimulus money." A Washington Post editorial calls for changes to the restrictions. "But why distinguish between lobbyists and corporate executives or local government officials seeking the funds, who have the biggest interests at stake? The rules are up for review soon. They should be rethought."

Doug Pinkham, the president of the Public Affairs Council, wrote a letter to the White House suggesting that all conversations about Recovery Act projects are disclosed, not just those of federally registered lobbyists. Pinkham believes that in fact the most important group to track is members of Congress. "The fact is, there is no proof whatsoever that federally registered lobbyists deserve a higher level of scrutiny than any other group."