Lobbyist Disclosure Failures Disadvantage Maryland Climate Advocates , According to Audit

insideclimatenews.org · Mar 2, 2026 · Collected from GDELT

Full Article

As Maryland lawmakers weigh proposals aimed at reining in utility companies, lowering electricity prices and expanding the state’s low-carbon energy system, a new audit report has found that the lobbyists who want to influence those decisions have largely operated in the dark—and done so legally. The audit, conducted by the nonprofit research group F Minus, found that lobbyists for fossil fuel companies complied with Maryland’s requirement to disclose which specific bills they lobbied for only 55 percent of the time during the first half of 2025. Without that information, the authors say, it is nearly impossible for the public to know which bills industry representatives opposed or what, if any, positions they took on key climate and energy bills at the time those decisions were being made. The report examined 95 activity reports filed between November 2024 and April 2025 by 68 lobbyists representing 25 fossil fuel and waste-to-energy companies, and documented what it describes as a pattern of systematic noncompliance that not only obscures industry opposition to climate legislation but also exposes conflicts of interest wherein firms simultaneously represented health organizations and fossil fuel companies accused of contributing to pollution and climate change. Under Maryland law, lobbyists are required to file activity reports twice a year, in May and November, and include their earnings and expenditures. Maryland Ethics Commission (MEC) guidance says these reports should include legislative bill numbers “where possible,” which advocates say leaves open a loophole resulting in uneven compliance. Reports covering the January through April legislative session are not due until May 31, after the legislative session ends and key signing or veto decisions have already been made.​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ Violations include civil penalties of up to $5,000 per violation, and late activity report filing fees of $10 per day, up to a maximum of $1,000 per late report. The ethics commission can suspend a lobbyist’s registration for certain violations. Criminal penalties for willful violations can include misdemeanor charges with fines of up to $1,000 and imprisonment, with each day counting as a separate offense. While the F Minus report suggests enforcement has been inconsistent, it noted that “an uptick in fossil fuel lobbyists disclosing bill numbers in 2025 over 2024 suggests that an MEC focus on this issue in its own audits is beginning to instill a greater culture of compliance.“​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​​ “Maryland’s disclosure system is designed to fail because lobbyists don’t have to report what they’re doing during the … session until the end of May, when it’s too late for the public or even their own clients to hold them accountable,” said James Browning, founder of F Minus. “When the most consequential climate decisions are being made, the paper trail is basically blank.” Under Gov. Wes Moore, the state has expanded its renewable energy and climate commitments, but those ambitions are undermined by a lobbying system that operates with “a high degree of secrecy,” F Minus argued. The Maryland audit is part of a broader campaign to expose lobbying firms working simultaneously for polluters and for schools, hospitals and community groups affected by pollution, identified in the audit as “double agents.” The audit focused on lobbyists who indicated on their disclosure forms that they had lobbied on legislation, but then did not mention any bill numbers. F Minus pieced together their activity bill by bill, using committee agendas, written testimony and video archives, examining 14 significant measures related to climate, energy or environmental justice. The audit found that three Annapolis firms—Capitol Strategies, Cornerstone Government Affairs and Evans & Associates—did not disclose a single bill number for their fossil fuel clients despite extensive evidence of their legislative activity. In one instance, Cornerstone’s Bernie Marczyk submitted testimony for the American Petroleum Institute opposing the Better Buildings Act but his disclosure form described his work as “general representation.” The legislation was aimed at limiting fossil fuel use to power new buildings and construction. Years earlier, Marczyk and Cornerstone did not disclose that the firm had lobbied against Maryland’s Climate Solutions Now Act in 2022 on behalf of API even as another Cornerstone client, Johns Hopkins University, publicly supported the bill. A similar F Minus audit in Washington State found that lobbyists were far more likely to disclose bill numbers when representing public-interest clients than fossil fuel accounts, a pattern F Minus described as “selective transparency.” The report says fossil fuel lobbyists were “most likely to omit from their disclosures” while working to defeat the Better Buildings Act. Sarah Peters of Husch Blackwell Strategies lobbied against the bill for the Maryland Coalition for Inclusive Energy Solutions without listing it in her filings. Brittany Jones did the same for Baltimore Gas and Electric. The bill failed to reach the floor for a vote and died in committee. “We can’t conclusively prove intent,” Browning said in his written response to Inside Climate News. “But it’s striking that this was the bill with the most nondisclosure and that it ultimately failed. These lobbyists were, to varying degrees, able to keep their fingerprints off that outcome,” he said, and added that some of the lobbyists the audit flagged for nondisclosure later filed corrected activity reports for 2025. In their analysis, the auditors found multiple instances of this “double agent” activity. Schwartz, Metz, Fine & Kauffman, for instance, lobbied for the RENEW Act on behalf of the state medical society, MedChi, which testified that fossil fuel production is linked to respiratory disease, heart disease, strokes and cancer. At the same time, the firm lobbied against environmental justice protections and renewable-energy reforms for the National Waste & Recycling Association. The firm also represents the Maryland chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which warned of “preventable” pediatric health risks from air pollution, and BGE. “That’s the essence of the double-agent problem,” Browning noted. “[E]ntities like MedChi and the American Academy of Pediatrics work to raise awareness about the threat that indoor air pollution poses to child health, and then they go out and hire lobbyists who work for companies whose incinerators are exposing children to toxic fumes.” Neither MedChi nor the Maryland chapter of AAP responded to Inside Climate News’ requests for comment. “Those matters have been disclosed and discussed. We are comfortable with how our lobbying firm is managing its portfolio,” said Nellie Power, executive director of the American Academy of Pediatrics Maryland chapter. Gene Ransom, CEO of MedChi, said Schwartz, Metz, Wise & Kauffman “does a fantastic job for MedChi, always discloses conflicts and we work collaboratively to manage them appropriately.” In emailed comments, Ransom added that his organization has “other lobbyists” to represent its “environmental health agenda.” This action is particularly menacing for places like Curtis Bay, the South Baltimore neighborhood ranked among Maryland’s highest-burden communities for cumulative environmental and health risks. Curtis Bay residents live next to the CSX coal export terminal and a medical-waste facility whose operators previously pleaded guilty to criminal violations over improper waste handling and were fined $1.75 million total in 2024. A view of the CSX facilities from the Curtis Bay neighborhood in Baltimore. Credit: Jessica Gallagher/Baltimore Banner Win Waste, which operates the incinerator seen along I-95, bordering Curtis Bay, shares a lobbyist with Johns Hopkins University. “It’s disturbing to see Johns Hopkins, whose researchers are trying to quantify health harms from that incinerator, sharing a lobbying firm with the incinerator’s owners,” Browning said. “Student tuition and donor dollars are funding the research, and the same lobbying shop.” The F Minus audit also found that CSX retained Capitol Strategies in 2025 to oppose legislation that would have imposed a tax on coal transport, but the firm’s activity reports made no mention of the bill even though testimony records show lobbyist Sushant Sidh appearing before the House Environment and Transportation Committee to argue against it. In a 2023 interview, Sidh described his firm’s conflict-of-interest checks as “exhaustive.” The opacity also extends to campaign finance. The auditors found that in 2024, Gov. Wes Moore received contributions from lobbyists at Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, a Washington firm whose clients include ExxonMobil and multiple fracking companies, and which F Minus describes as “one of the most pro-Trump and most pro-fossil-fuel Congressional lobbying firms.” In response to questions from Inside Climate News, Rhyan Lake, a press representative for Moore, said in an emailed statement: “Gov. Moore is unequivocally committed to advancing climate action and protecting Marylanders from the impacts of pollution and climate change — and he has the record to prove it. No contribution has any influence over his decisions, and the Governor supports strong transparency laws in Maryland.” This story is funded by readers like you.Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.Donate Now Inside Climate News reached out to the lobbying firms and the lobbyists mentioned in the report for comment. The only firm to respond was Evans & Associates, which said, in a statement, that the firm is “fully committed to compliance with all applicable ethics and disclosure requirements.” Climate advocates were caught off guard when Moore vetoed three climate-related bill