"It was a great piece of legislation," Casey says, except for a few "unintended consequences."
On issues such as the environment or protection of animal rights, Casey explains, lawmakers tend to be ignorant of the needs of the scientific community. The role of Harvard lobbyists, he says, is primarily to make sure that legislators know what Harvard's existing policies are, and how a change would work.
"Legislators are overwhelmed with the issues that confront them," Casey says, "They can't be experts on everything."
Another area in which Harvard often attempts to wield its influence relates to its real estate holdings. Although most land-use laws are enacted at the municipal level, state actions can often create difficult legal snags for the University, Casey says.
One bill currently working its way through the legislature, for example, concerns Single Room Occupancy (SRO) hotels. The measure, which is sponsored by Barrett, would mandate an 18-month moratorium on their elimination.
SRO units, which are generally occupied by individuals who cannot afford permanent housing, are sometimes demolished or renovated by developers to make room for condominiums or apartments.
This displaces low- to moderate-income people who cannot afford to pay for the improvements to their dwelling, housing activists say. With the current shortage of affordable housing in Cambridge, these individuals either join the ranks of the homeless or are forced to leave the area.
As written, the bill would have applied to two hotels owned by Harvard: the Quality Motor Inn on Mass Ave.--earmarked for eventual use as Law School housing--and the Harvard Motor House on Mt. Auburn St., which is scheduled to be demolished to make way for an office building.
As a result, the bill would have placed a severe barrier to Harvard's immediate plans for the two sites. But neither structure can be adequately described as an SRO housing unit, Casey says.
"The intentions are excellent," Casey says, but because of a "drafting technicality, it would have frozen the development of new dorms even if it was new construction, even if it did not displace an SRO unit."
A series of changes to exclude Harvard, which the sponsor has agreed to, "make it a more crisply-drafted piece of legislation," Casey says.
Casey stresses that the type of lobbying in which Harvard engages tends toward this type of technical change to legislation, watching out for the University's interests without creating a big fuss.
Harvard's lobbying approach is "very proper and above-board," Barrett says. "They don't tend to be very grabby."
And if Harvard doesn't get its way on every issue, it apparently doesn't seek to retaliate. In part, this is because the University doesn't contribute to state political campaigns and doesn't endorse particular candidates.
"They don't mark you as an enemy if you fight them on any particular issue, and politicians appreciate that," Barrett says.