Michael H. McCarthy recalls that over the past few years, when he told friends and colleagues that he was taking part in a project on lobbying ethics, they usually laughed or looked at him quizzically.

To many of them, the very notion of lobbying ethics seemed "either an oxymoron or the description of a quixotic task," said McCarthy, a philosophy professor at Vassar College who was part of a research team at the Woodstock Theological Center at Georgetown University.

The Woodstock team, with Edward B. Arroyo, S.J., as coordinator, certainly didn't write off this fast-changing institution as beyond ethical reach. The Jesuit-sponsored center has issued a book titled "The Ethics of Lobbying: Organized Interests, Political Power, and the Common Good," newly published by Georgetown University Press after four years of study involving scores of prominent lobbyists together with ethicists, policy makers, and others.

Included in the 110-page book are the "Woodstock Principles for the Ethical Conduct of Lobbying," a first-of-its-kind set of guidelines for all those involved in the process.

The skepticism that McCarthy encountered was real enough, though the popular images of corrupt lobbyists are mostly outdated. Few lobbyists today use bribery and other illegal tactics of the trade, but they do have highly sophisticated ways of manipulating public policy on behalf of narrow interests, often out of public view. And that, according to the Woodstock report, is where the social-ethical problems lie.

Lobbyists themselves naturally stress the first point - that their profession is cleaner than it once was. For one thing, there are laws against bribery, extortion, and gratuities at the federal level and in most states, noted Thomas M Susman, a lawyer who chairs the American League of Lobbyists Ethics Committee.

"I think it's fairly clear that as lobbying has increased in importance, it has also become more ethical. We must be doing something right," said Susman, who participated in the Woodstock project but does not endorse all of the principles.

Susman joined with McCarthy and Joan B. Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, at an Oct. 24 forum sponsored by Woodstock. Claybrook, who is no friend of the lobbying establishment, acknowledged that important changes have taken place.

"When I first came to Washington in the '60s, I knew members of Congress who used to go out and have a drink with lobbyists, and they would give them a couple of hundred bucks. They'd put the money in their pocket, and then they would do the lobbyists a favor. And we would be horrified by that today," said Claybrook.

"But the cheating of the public is much more subtle today," she added.

For example, the pharmaceutical industry spends $180 million a year on lobbying, and Congress routinely sides with the industry on policy matters. Coincidence? Claybrook doesn't think so.

Neither does McCarthy, who makes the point about the sophisticated forms of lobbying today.

"The sophistication to which I refer involves carefully orchestrated campaigns to set the nation's political agenda, to influence the votes of public officials, and to slant the coverage given their clients or projects by the communications media," he said.

All that is fair game, of course, in a democracy. But what is increasingly skewing the political process is the dominant role of money in making policy and electing public officials, according to McCarthy.

"It is the money of organized interests that pays for political campaigns, pays for negative advertising, pays for lobbyists and public relations specialists, even pays for the orchestrated anti-government campaigns to which we have become accustomed," said McCarthy, whose most recent book is "The Crisis of Philosophy."

The Woodstock Principles do not squarely address the issue of money in politics, partly because that would be a project in itself. Nonetheless, some of the principles are rather pointed in discussing tactics that should be ethically off-limits.

For example, under the heading of candid disclosure, the principles state that lobbyists should have no part in "front organizations" that conceal the true identity of their clients.

To cite one possible case, many critics complain that the pharmaceutical industry finances so-called grassroots organizations with names like the "United Seniors Association." These groups have opposed initiatives to extend Medicare coverage to prescription drugs and otherwise control drug costs. People who see their television commercial usually have no idea the industry is behind the multi-million-dollar ad campaigns.

The Woodstock Principles also address larger social-ethical themes. The first principle states: "The pursuit of lobbying must take into account the common good, not merely a particular client's interests narrowly considered."

That may seem reasonable enough to those steeped in the Catholic or classical traditions, but the proposition set off fireworks at the Woodstock forum, moderated by Father Thomas J. Reese, S.J., of America magazine.

Susman, the lawyer-lobbyist, is among those in the policy arena who voice skepticism about whether people like him have a duty to discern the common good.

"Unfortunately, I am afraid that I have trouble with the concept that there is an immutable common good that provides a measurable guidepost for lobbying activity," he said.

"I think it is fair to propose that members of Congress remain faithful to the goal of promoting the common good, as well as the well-being of a constituency. But is it my job, as a lobbyist, to determine whether the common good is best served by cheap power provided by hydroelectric plants that can make electricity more readily available to the poor, or by maintaining pristine waterways?"

He added, "That's Congress's role, not mine."

Susman subscribes to most of the Woodstock Principles, but he draws the line at the common good -- which, in Catholic teaching, includes special attention to the needs of the poorest and most vulnerable members of society.

"The Ten Commandments - our most important and revered ethical code - say nothing about the disadvantaged and vulnerable. I question whether a lobbyists' code should."

Earlier in the forum, McCarthy anticipated the remarks by explaining:

"The common good is what we are properly seeking to discover through public deliberation and argument. In its general outlines, it's already known in advance, but in its needed concreteness, especially as it bears on policy making and law, it is still to be discovered through practical inquiry and informed debate."

Where does the Woodstock project go from here? Father Arroyo said the forum showed the need for greater elucidation of the common good, what it is and what it requires. "We'll be picking up on Susman's comments and his skepticism toward the whole notion," the Jesuit said.

Those discussions were set to begin December 12 with a Woodstock evening of conversation featuring Father David Hollenbach, S.J., author of the newly released, "The Common Good and Christian Ethics" (Cambridge University Press).

In addition to McCarthy and Father Arroyo, members of the Woodstock team included Philip A. Lacovara, lawyer-lobbyist; Robert W. Gardner, journalist and rapporteur; and Father James L. Connor, S.J., theologian and immediate past director of the Woodstock Theological Center. Father Gasper F. Lo Biondo, S.J., has succeeded Father Connor in the post.

William Bole is an associate fellow of the Woodstock Theological Center. (To order a copy of "The Ethics of Lobbying," call 202-687-3532 or send an email to woodstock@georgetown.edu.)