To lobbyists working in Olympia, their reality of the expression "What's good Boeing, is good for the state" reads more like "What's good for Boeing, is."
No one, not even Boeing officials, would deny that the company has enormous, almost insuperable political clout within the state Legislature and administrative agencies, particularly the Department of Ecology. Boeing lobbyists usually have a hand in shaping environmental and land-use policies from before the time they're drafted as bills to their final implementation by various state agencies.
Rather, opinions diverge over whether the weight that Boeing throws around is keeping state officials from updating environmental protection laws to where they belong - in the 21st century, not the 1930s. Observers also worry that whenever Boeing blocks or weakens an environmental reform, thousands of other businesses in Washington also benefit from the resulting looser standards.
Boeing is so powerful, in fact, that even the use of disingenuous lobbying techniques is tolerated, though grudgingly. During the debate over the 1991 clean air act, for example, lawmakers and environmentalists complained that Boeing lobbyists hoodwinked them into passing a watered-down piece of legislation. "No other lobbyists could get away with that type of thing. For them to do it, though, it's something else," one observer said. "They wanted to send a message: No one fucks with Boeing." Rep. Nancy Rust (D-Seattle) was more forgiving. "I got over it," she said recently.
From kicking legislators out of their offices in order to conduct lobbying tete-a-tetes, to thrteatening other lobbyists with political retribution, to getting the Association of Washington Businesses to "play the heavy" so they can avoid "leaving fingerprints," Boeing lobbyists - according to those who watch them - are as effective as they are stealthy.
Here are a few examples of Boeing lobbyists' recent handiwork:
1988: Boeing supports the weaker of two proposals to set up a statewide program to clean up hazardous waste sites. Voters, rejecting a Boeing-assisted campaign, approve a stronger version through a ballot measure, Initiative 97. Boeing continues to oppose a bill that would warn would-be property buyers if a piece of land is a potential or confirmed Superfund site.
Spring 1990: Boeing lobbyists - sitting behind legislators' own desks and using their offices to work lawmakers face-to-face - help push through legislation that guts the pollution-fighting Puget Sound Water Quality Authority. The state agency's chair, Kathy Fletcher, resigns in disgust and forms her own organization, People for Puget Sound.
Spring 1991: Boeing lobbyists in Olympia say they'll support an already weakened, House-approved clean air package when it is sent over to the Senate. When the time comes, they change their mind and succeed in softening the Clean Air Washington Act even more. "I was pretty upset," remembers Rep. Rust, chair of the House Environmental Affairs Committee.
Spring 1991: Boeing lobbyists succeed in weakening a state law that would have allowed the public to view the company's hazardous waste reduction plans. Only state officials can see the plans - but they can't have their own copy. Boeing also helps to make sure that the law doesn't force it and other companies to actually follow through on the plans.
Spring 1993: Boeing officials seek to weaken the already disabled 1991 Clean Air Washington Act by intervening in the state Department of Ecology's procedure to implement the law. It will take several years for the law to go into effect completely, during which time observers expect Boeing to win concessions over the strength and timing of its many provisions
Spring 1993: Boeing officials say they may have to build any new facilities somewhere else unless state laws with environmental implications, including the State Environmental Protection Act and the new Growth Management Act, are loosened. Boeing supports bills that would weaken SEPA, the state's most important environmental protection law.
Spring 1993: Boeing lobbyists oppose a bill that would ensure that any hazardous waste incinerators built in Washington truly are needed, and legislation that would classify waste burning as "energy recovery" instead of "recycling."
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |