Which bills are lobbied? Predicting and interpreting lobbying activity in the US

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2005.06386v1
• Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 10:46:33 GMT
• Title: Which bills are lobbied? Predicting and interpreting lobbying activity in the US
• Authors: Ivan Slobozhan, Peter Ormosi, Rajesh Sharma
• Abstract summary: We use lobbying data from OpenSecrets.org to predict if a piece of legislation (US bill) has been subjected to lobbying activities or not. We also investigate the influence of the intensity of the lobbying activity on how discernible a lobbied bill is from one that was not subject to lobbying.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
• Abstract: Using lobbying data from OpenSecrets.org, we offer several experiments applying machine learning techniques to predict if a piece of legislation (US bill) has been subjected to lobbying activities or not. We also investigate the influence of the intensity of the lobbying activity on how discernible a lobbied bill is from one that was not subject to lobbying. We compare the performance of a number of different models (logistic regression, random forest, CNN and LSTM) and text embedding representations (BOW, TF-IDF, GloVe, Law2Vec). We report results of above 0.85% ROC AUC scores, and 78% accuracy. Model performance significantly improves (95% ROC AUC, and 88% accuracy) when bills with higher lobbying intensity are looked at. We also propose a method that could be used for unlabelled data. Through this we show that there is a considerably large number of previously unlabelled US bills where our predictions suggest that some lobbying activity took place. We believe our method could potentially contribute to the enforcement of the US Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) by indicating the bills that were likely to have been affected by lobbying but were not filed as such.

Related papers

• Verifying the Verifiers: Unveiling Pitfalls and Potentials in Fact Verifiers [59.168391398830515]
  We evaluate 12 pre-trained LLMs and one specialized fact-verifier, using a collection of examples from 14 fact-checking benchmarks.<n>We highlight the importance of addressing annotation errors and ambiguity in datasets.<n> frontier LLMs with few-shot in-context examples, often overlooked in previous works, achieve top-tier performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-16T10:32:10Z)
• Bayesian scaling laws for in-context learning [72.17734205418502]
  In-context learning (ICL) is a powerful technique for getting language models to perform complex tasks with no training updates. We show that ICL approximates a Bayesian learner and develop a family of novel Bayesian scaling laws for ICL.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-21T21:45:22Z)
• CLIP the Bias: How Useful is Balancing Data in Multimodal Learning? [72.19502317793133]
  We study the effectiveness of data-balancing for mitigating biases in contrastive language-image pretraining (CLIP) We present a novel algorithm, called Multi-Modal Moment Matching (M4), designed to reduce both representation and association biases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-07T14:43:17Z)
• Efficient Weighting Schemes for Auditing Instant-Runoff Voting Elections [57.67176250198289]
  AWAIRE involves adaptively weighted averages of test statistics, essentially "learning" an effective set of hypotheses to test. We explore schemes and settings more extensively, to identify and recommend efficient choices for practice. A limitation of the current AWAIRE implementation is its restriction to a small number of candidates.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-02-18T10:13:01Z)
• BAL: Balancing Diversity and Novelty for Active Learning [53.289700543331925]
  We introduce a novel framework, Balancing Active Learning (BAL), which constructs adaptive sub-pools to balance diverse and uncertain data. Our approach outperforms all established active learning methods on widely recognized benchmarks by 1.20%.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-12-26T08:14:46Z)
• Adaptively Weighted Audits of Instant-Runoff Voting Elections: AWAIRE [61.872917066847855]
  Methods for auditing instant-runoff voting (IRV) elections are either not risk-limiting or require cast vote records (CVRs), the voting system's electronic record of the votes on each ballot. We develop an RLA method that uses adaptively weighted averages of test supermartingales to efficiently audit IRV elections when CVRs are not available.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-07-20T15:55:34Z)
• Large Language Models as Corporate Lobbyists [0.0]
  Autoregressive large language model determines if proposed U.S. Congressional bills are relevant to specific public companies. For the bills the model deems as relevant, the model drafts a letter to the sponsor of the bill in an attempt to persuade the congressperson to make changes to the proposed legislation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-01-03T16:25:52Z)
• DeepParliament: A Legal domain Benchmark & Dataset for Parliament Bills Prediction [0.0]
  This paper introduces DeepParliament, a legal domain Benchmark dataset that gathers bill documents and metadata. We propose two new benchmarks: Binary and Multi-Class Bill Status classification. This work will be the first to present a Parliament bill prediction task.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-11-15T04:55:32Z)
• Disentangling Active and Passive Cosponsorship in the U.S. Congress [0.09236074230806579]
  In the U.S. Congress, legislators can use active and passive cosponsorship to support bills. We show that these two types of cosponsorship are driven by two different motivations: the backing of political colleagues and the backing of the bill's content. We develop anRGC+N based model that learns legislator representations from bill texts and speech transcripts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-19T16:33:46Z)
• Feature Engineering for US State Legislative Hearings: Stance, Affiliation, Engagement and Absentees [0.8122270502556374]
  We propose a system to automatically track the affiliation of organizations in public comments. A metric to compute legislator engagement and absenteeism is also proposed.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-18T06:50:35Z)
• Predicting and Analyzing Law-Making in Kenya [0.012691047660244334]
  We developed and trained machine learning models on a combination of features extracted from the bills to predict the outcome. We observed that the texts in a bill are not as relevant as the year and month the bill was introduced and the category the bill belongs to.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-09T20:21:50Z)
• Adversarial Attacks on Linear Contextual Bandits [87.08004581867537]
  Malicious agents may have incentives to attack the bandit algorithm to induce it to perform a desired behavior. We show that a malicious agent can force a linear contextual bandit algorithm to pull any desired arm $T - o(T)$ times over a horizon of $T$ steps. We also investigate the case when a malicious agent is interested in affecting the behavior of the bandit algorithm in a single context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-02-10T15:04:09Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.