Intrigue surrounding legislation that would all but ban Internet cafes in Ohio could easily have given voters the impression that the key to getting a legislator’s attention is an open wallet.

More than two-thirds of the House voted for the bill that targets the sweepstakes parlors in mid March, just before a two-week recess. During the recess, an appellate court in Cleveland upheld gambling convictions against three cafe owners, asserting they were running casino-style establishments. Attorney General Mike DeWine cites that ruling in support of a crackdown.

But when the bill came up in the Senate after the Legislature returned, there were allegations that Senate Republicans were foot dragging. That followed announcements that members needed time to deliberate and decide what to do.

The same day a Senate committee took up the bill, some of its members had a dinner with representatives from the Internet cafe industry -- a dinner that was hastily moved after a reporter showed up at the restaurant, The Columbus Dispatch reported.

The next week, Cuyahoga County Prosecutor Tim McGinty announced that records seized when police raided a company that supplies software to Internet cafes in Ohio included a March 5 email that targeted 20 legislators in the Senate for campaign contributions. The email offered a rare glimpse behind the scenes of the legislative process and rekindled an ages-old debate over whether money buys access.

On April 24, Senate President Keith Faber, a Celina Republican, announced the bill would move through the Senate quickly. He also urged lawmakers to return any campaign contributions they had accepted from the industry.

At the least, the drama illustrates a need for greater scrutiny of which lobbying groups are giving lawmakers donations when legislation that could affect their interests is under debate in the General Assembly, says an advocate for government openness and accountability.

And while Faber insists there was no undue persuasion, he acknowledges that contributions, in general, could help a lobbyist get a legislator’s ear.

“Do I think contributions don’t do anything for access? They probably do,” Faber said. “But I don’t think they ever determine public policy.”

That may be true, but the problem is that the public can’t tell who is giving what to lawmakers until long after debate ends, said Catherine Turcer, a policy analyst for Common Cause Ohio, a non-partisan advocacy group that promotes government accountability…

Read the rest of the article at Cleveland Plain Dealer