The headline of Civil Beat’s Sunshine Blog this week told one story: “Influence Peddling By The Numbers“.

But the numbers actually reported were newly released statistics about lobbying — a very different story, in my view.

The two topics are intimately related, but they are not the same, and it seems to me that the failure to distinguish “influence peddling” from “lobbying” is a mistake, creating confusion for those who care about how our democracy actually works.

Let me explain.

Lobbying is a protected constitutional right. It’s part of the First Amendment, alongside freedom of speech, the press, and religion — protecting our right “to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

In plain terms, you have the right to speak up, organize, demonstrate, and advocate for the laws and policies you believe in — whether you’re an environmental group, a business association, a labor union, or just a group of concerned neighbors.

Individuals, groups, companies, and unions all have the right to advocate for their interests. That’s political influence — and it’s how democracy works.

Political influence isn’t inherently bad. Voters have it. Organized communities have it. Elected officials have it. And yes, people and organizations with experience, information, or resources can use that influence to help shape laws. That’s not a scandal — that’s the process.

Lobbying isn’t inherently shady. It’s one of the ways people make sure their voices are heard. Of course, it must be transparent and well-regulated — which is why we have ethics laws, conflict-of-interest rules, and requirements for lobbyist registration and disclosure. Done properly, lobbying is a necessary part of how our political system works.

Many years ago, I served as director and registered lobbyist for the public interest group Common Cause in Hawaii, working to represent our members’ commitment to open and honest government at the State Capitol.

I was a neophyte in the legislative process — more accustomed to energizing public opinion than trying to change the minds of sometimes hostile or disinterested legislators. The process itself was far from self-evident. But in my on-the-job training, I found that professional lobbyists were often generous with their advice, insights, and tips for making sense of the legislative maze.

Hours spent “talking story” on the capitol building railing with other lobbyists taught me more than any university degree. They understood the nuances of politics and power, and shared lessons that proved invaluable.

But influence-peddling? That’s something else entirely.

Influence-peddling is when someone tries to sell access or power, not to advance a public cause, but for private gain. It’s when a former official gets paid because of their connections inside government, or when someone with political access to an elected or appointed official, a family member, old school friend, or business associate, offers to “fix” something behind closed doors or for a price.

The Hawai‘i State Ethics Commission said it clearly in a 1999 newsletter: influence-peddling happens when insiders are “compensated to assist individuals or businesses in obtaining special benefits or treatment.” That’s not lobbying. That’s corruption.

Taken to the extreme, influence peddling can lead to bribery and become a criminal matter.

That’s what happened when former Senate Majority Leader Kalani English and Rep. Ty Cullen took bribes — luxury travel, poker chips, cash — from businessman Milton Choy in exchange for influencing legislation. It wasn’t just unethical — it was illegal. Choy and both legislators were convicted and went to prison.

To conflate legal lobbying with these kinds of abuses — as the Civil Beat column does — isn’t just misleading. It risks turning the public against all forms of advocacy and civic participation. That’s not a recipe for reform; it’s a recipe for cynicism.

We should be fighting to root out corruption — not stigmatize the act of speaking up.

We need strong lobbying disclosure laws, strict ethics rules, and real enforcement. Civil Beat’s review of lobbying statistics doesn’t necessarily show influence-peddling, but it does highlight concentrations of lobbying power — and that could signal potential misuse. These numbers can serve as red flags — starting points for watchdog agencies, activists, investigative journalists, and political challengers looking to uncover real evidence of corruption.

But we also need to defend the right of individuals and organizations — regardless of their cause — to speak to their government openly and without fear of being tarred with the brush of scandal.

Reform starts with clarity. Let’s be clear: lobbying is a right. Influence-peddling is a problem. And mistaking one for the other won’t help us fix what’s broken.