During the Maryland General Assembly’s 90-day legislative session this year, energy companies like Baltimore Gas and Electric, Constellation, Washington Gas and PEPCO combined to spend more than $49,000 wining-and-dining the very lawmakers who were publicly promising to intervene with rising electricity bills in the state.
The often lavish meals, which are part of a long-standing practice known as committee dinners that dates back more than 30 years, took place at upscale Annapolis eateries like Ruth’s Chris Steak House and Lewnes’ Steakhouse, a fine dining restaurant where a steak costs between $57 and $160. The events provided energy industry lobbyists the chance to talk policy with legislators over a four-star dinner and wine.
Energy companies weren’t the only ones dropping tens of thousands on politicians as they deliberated over public policy, public records show. Climate advocacy groups; the Maryland Chamber of Commerce; hospitals; nonprofits; alcohol industry leaders; trade associations for nurses, restaurateurs and chicken farmers; and many other groups also took legislators out for dinner over the last lobbying year.
They collectively spent more than $589,000 on committee dinners between November 2024 and October 2025, according to publicly-filed lobbying registrations, with the vast majority of the tally occurring between January and April, when lawmakers were working in Annapolis.
The 259 committee dinners served during that period left at least one Maryland delegate with a sour aftertaste.
Del. Joe Vogel, a Democrat from Montgomery County who joined the General Assembly in 2023, is taking aim at the longtime legislative perk with a bill that would bar lobbyists, corporations and special interest groups from taking lawmakers out on the town, except in a few limited circumstances.
“Frankly, these committee dinners are a standard practice in the General Assembly during our legislative session and, like almost all of my colleagues, I’ve been to them,” Vogel, who at 28 is one of the state legislature’s youngest members, told The Washington Post. “And over the years I’ve grown increasingly frustrated with what these dinners represent.”
Vogel said when he goes back to Montgomery County to hear from his constituents, he talks to families struggling to afford groceries. He visits soup kitchens and food distribution centers with long lines. And then he goes to Annapolis, where he said legislators are being taken out to “fancy, three-course, all-you-can-eat, all-you-can drink-meals at some of the nicest restaurants in the city.”
“To me, that contrast is upsetting,” Vogel said. “I ran for the legislature for the purpose of helping those working families who are struggling right now, not to get fed really nice meals and steak dinners with all-you-can-drink flowing wine.”
The vast majority of his constituents cannot afford to take lawmakers out for dinner, Vogel said. The dinners, he said, underscore the financial advantage corporations and special interest groups have over the average Marylander when it comes to an ability to influence lawmakers.
Vogel said his bill is meant to start a conversation with his colleagues about reducing corruption and restoring the public’s faith in government.
“When I first ran I talked about the importance of restoring confidence in government and trust in democracy,” said Vogel, who vowed to never attend another committee dinner while part of the General Assembly. “I think there are a number of practices in the General Assembly that need to change if we want to root out some of the political corruption that people are frustrated by and to really restore confidence in the idea that elected officials are serving the best interests of the people of the state.”
Some veteran lawmakers dismissed the suggestion that the committee dinners pose a significant threat to fairness, arguing that a lawmaker’s vote cannot be bought with a meal. Others said they support Vogel’s bill, saying its high time to examine such attempts to buy influence with lawmakers who are meant to represent the interests of their constituents.
Lobbyists began spending more money on committee dinners in the 1990s, when the General Assembly passed ethics reforms that barred one-on-one meals with lawmakers. That spending, which includes large receptions, has continued to grow over the years.
In 1999, special interest groups spent $684,958 on receptions and committee dinners. Last year, spending on receptions and committee dinners totaled $2,303,980, according to public records. (Vogel’s bill would still allow special interest groups to pay for receptions and banquets where every member of the General Assembly is invited.)
With the exception of the committees that deal with rules and executive nominations in each chamber, every House and Senate committee was invited to at least a few dinners between November 2024 and October, records show.
The committees that deal with sprawling policy areas tied to powerful industries benefited from committee dinners more than those that contend with more narrow areas.
Members of the House Economics Matters Committee — which deals with business regulations and industries spanning alcohol, public utilities, and insurance — appeared to have eaten the most at lobbyists’ expense. Lobbyists reported spending more than $152,300 in outings with those lawmakers, the most of any committee.
The 25 dinners that Economics Matters attended cost between $3,838 and $13,416. If every member of the committee attended each dinner, the average spent on dinners for each member would be about $6,922, though lawmakers do not necessarily go to every committee dinner they are invited to.
The Senate committee on Education, Energy and the Environment and the Senate Finance Committee received invitations to the most costly dinners after Economic Matters. Those two committees received about $126,700 and $109,800 worth of food and drinks between November 2024 and October.
The Senate Judicial Proceedings and House Judiciary committees — which deal with policy that affect police, courts, and the justice system — got the fewest dinner invitations, receiving about $49,800 and $38,800 spent on dinners respectively.
Maryland’s major energy companies were among the state’s biggest spenders. Combined, Maryland’s major energy companies spent more than all but two lobbying firms that represent a wide swath of clients. Other groups that spent more than $10,000 total on committee dinners last year included Johns Hopkins, one of the state’s largest private employers; Anheuser-Busch Companies; casinos and the Sports Betting Alliance; and the Maryland Farm Bureau, which represents agricultural interests in the state.
Whether the committee dinner spending was effective may be a matter of perspective.
Several bills passed last year benefited the energy industry and the state’s power needs. One new law sped up the permitting process so new energy projects could launch faster. Another made solar power more accessible and reliable, and a third created an office to plan for the state’s future energy needs. But consumers also benefited. State leaders used $200 million from Maryland’s Strategic Energy Investment Fund to pay for $30 to $67 rebates for ratepayers this fall, depending on energy use.
Some advocates wanted lawmakers to go even further to prevent power companies from raising energy prices. But Del. C.T. Wilson, who chairs the Economic Matters Committee, said he thinks energy companies did not fare well in his committee last session despite spending tens of thousands on committee dinners.
“They didn’t get a lot of bang for their buck, I know that,” he said.
The Washington Post reached out to all of the lawmakers who chair a committee invited to a committee dinner last year. Several declined to comment because they had not yet seen the prefiled bill or for other reasons. Others did not respond to The Post’s inquiry.
Wilson said he wasn’t surprised lobbyists had spent the most money on dining with his committee. He said that businesses large and small, along with nonprofit organizations and other groups, meet with his committee each year. The dinners provide a convenient way for committee members to talk to a large number of people at one time, rather than scheduling individual meetings, he added.
Wilson said he is ambivalent about Vogel’s proposal to do away with committee dinners. He said he can understand the concerns Vogel is raising, but he also sees practical reasons to keep the practice.
The dinners can be valuable because they “gave people a chance to see my committee members in a different light,” Wilson said. If people only see lawmakers during committee hearings, Wilson said, they can come across as tough or even intractable.
For example, he said, Del. Christopher Adams, a Republican who represents part of the Eastern Shore, is always tough during hearings. Outside the hearing room, he is “one of the nicest people I’ve ever met,” Wilson said.
Del. Mark N. Fisher (R-Calvert) is known for throwing “firebombs” during debates, but he is a good guy, Wilson said. And Del. Lorig Charkoudian (D-Montgomery) “can come across as unyielding,” he said, but in person you realize she is a good person with strongly-held beliefs.
“I say this for my committee — everyone on my committee is very principled,” Wilson said. “Nobody is going to change their mind or change their vote [because of a dinner].”
In fact, he said he sometimes had to convince committee members to attend dinners with groups that the lawmakers already knew they did not agree with. He doesn’t view the dinners as an opportunity to sway his committee members. Instead, Wilson said, the meals are a chance to simultaneously connect with several key stakeholders during a short and hectic legislative session.
“I don’t see it as this villainous thing,” he said.
Still, Wilson said he understands why people would view the dinners as a problem for transparency and fair access. And he left space for the possibility that some lawmakers might be persuaded by the nice meals, though he argued that anyone whose vote could be bought with a nice dinner could also be swayed by campaign contributions if the dinners were outlawed.
“I can’t imagine that because somebody takes you out for steak you’ll change how you vote,” he said. “However, I may be naive.”
The post Lobbyists spend big on ‘committee dinners’ with Maryland lawmakers appeared first on Washington Post.
