{"id":1120,"date":"2011-04-03T22:38:31","date_gmt":"2011-04-04T04:38:31","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/?p=1120"},"modified":"2011-04-03T22:38:31","modified_gmt":"2011-04-04T04:38:31","slug":"lobbyists-lobbyists-everywhere","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/?p=1120","title":{"rendered":"Lobbyists, Lobbyists Everywhere"},"content":{"rendered":"

The March 2, 2011 OpenSecrets blog contains a report co-authored by Dave Levinthal and Craig Gurian.\u00a0 The report is titled, \u201cNew Study: More Than 130 Top Congressional Staffers Are Former Lobbyists.\u201d\u00a0 <\/em><\/p>\n

Wow!\u00a0 So what do we do now?\u00a0 Get the kids in off the street?\u00a0 Take cover in a bathtub nearest the center of the house?\u00a0 Call out the National Guard?\u00a0 Run for the borders?\u00a0 Call 911?\u00a0<\/p>\n

Oddly enough, in what has to be the irony of all ironies, the report comes from an organization called the Center for Responsive Politics.\u00a0 <\/em>One would assume from the name of the organization that their primary purpose in life would be to promote\u2026 responsiveness<\/em> in politics.\u00a0 However, that raises the obvious question, responsive to whom?\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

The group\u2019s website tells us that \u201cThe Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) (Open Secrets) is a non-partisan, non-profit research group based in Washington, D.C. that tracks money in politics, and its effect on elections and public policy.\u00a0 Entering a corporation name on their website will tell how much money the company gave to Democrats versus Republicans.\u00a0 According to the group, \u2018The Center conducts computer-based research on campaign finance issues for the news media, academics, activists, and the public at large.\u00a0 The Center’s work is aimed at creating a more educated voter, an involved citizenry, and a more responsive government.\u2019 \u201d<\/p>\n

Oops!\u00a0 Time out!\u00a0 Someone has created a whopper of a non-sequitur.\u00a0 Exactly how does tracking the givers and receivers of money in politics lead to more, not less, government responsiveness?\u00a0 And how do they actually determine whether a $1,000 contribution to a member of Congress caused him\/her to vote a certain way on an issue, or if he\/she would have voted that way in any event, in spite of the $1,000 contribution?\u00a0 Exactly how do they get inside people\u2019s heads to that extent, or do they just begin with the assumption that every member of Congress is corrupt?\u00a0<\/p>\n

If the group is really interested in tracking money in politics and its effect on elections and public policy, then somebody needs to whisper in their collective ears because they\u2019re on the wrong track.\u00a0 They\u2019re swatting at flies in the kitchen while paying no attention at all to the elephant trashing the living room.\u00a0 Someone needs to tell them that whatever money is truly corrosive in the political process\u2026 the money that really buys legislation and is truly antithetical to the public interest\u2026 comes from the coffers of the AFL-CIO, the National Education Assn. (NEA), the American Federation of Teachers (AFT), the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), and the American Trial Lawyers Association (ATLA).<\/p>\n

So what is the Center for \u201cResponsive Politics\u201d trying to tell us?\u00a0 They report that, \u201cAt least 130 current congressional chiefs of staff and legislative directors are former lobbyists\u2026 And some of these powerful staffers \u2013 both Democrats and Republicans \u2013 have worked multiple lobbying jobs prior to working in their current congressional capacities.\u201d<\/p>\n

That experience, we are apparently meant to infer, is to be considered less noble than, say, the work of Washington lawyers or the work of staffers at the Center for Responsive Politics.\u00a0 A quick review of the resumes of the top staffers at the Center tells us that not a single one of them has an ounce of experience in the private sector.\u00a0 They are mostly over-educated idealists with little knowledge of how Washington, or the rest of the world, really works.\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

The report goes on to say, \u201cThe majority of chiefs of staff and legislative directors represented corporations, trade organizations, or worked for lobbying firms that represented corporations\u2026\u201d\u00a0 We can only assume that the hundreds of congressional staffers who previously lobbied for the AFL-CIO, the teachers unions, and the trial lawyers must have been hiding under their desks the day that the Center was running around Capitol Hill counting noses.<\/p>\n

The report quotes Sheila Krumholz, the Center\u2019s executive director, who tells us, \u201cThe bottom line is that many of the most powerful congressional staffers, who are now responsible for working on behalf of the public\u2019s<\/em> interest, used to make a living convincing the government to benefit a client\u2019s<\/em> special interest (emphasis added).\u00a0 Such relationships could present conflicts of interest and deserve continued scrutiny.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

One wonders whether or not Ms. Krumholz has ever stopped to consider what public interest is being served by a staffer who works for a Democratic member of Congress\u2026 who is bought and paid for by labor bosses and trial lawyers\u2026 as opposed to a Republican staffer who previously worked for a major corporation which is owned by several hundred thousand shareholders, all average American citizens who have a constitutional right to petition the Congress.\u00a0<\/p>\n

A number of years ago, after having pioneered the PAC movement in the American business community, I was invited to debate an officer of the citizens\u2019 group Common Cause.\u00a0 Our audience was the annual meeting of the National Association for Public Opinion Research, a trade association comprised mostly of pollsters and public opinion researchers.\u00a0 Our topic was, \u201cAre special interest PACs buying influence in the U.S. Congress?\u201d<\/p>\n

After taking the stage and flipping a coin, it was determined that Common Cause would speak first, after which I would be allowed to rebut.\u00a0 The one thing I knew from the outset was that my opponent could be expected to make all of the standard left wing charges about PAC money and its influence on the legislative process\u2026 and he did not disappoint me.\u00a0 When he had finished his harangue I was allowed to rebut, and as I approached the podium I selected a member of the audience, at random, a man seated in the front row, and asked him to stand.\u00a0 I then proceeded to ask about his marital status, his occupation, his hobbies and his interests, as well as his wife\u2019s occupation and her hobbies and interests.\u00a0<\/p>\n

In a matter of minutes I learned that he was a high school mathematics teacher who worked as an adjunct professor of mathematics, teaching evening classes in statistics at a local community college.\u00a0 I also learned that in his spare time he was an avid bird hunter and fisherman.\u00a0 His wife, he advised, sold real estate part time, was an officer in her local garden club, and was a dedicated environmental activist.\u00a0 Upon quizzing him about his and his wife\u2019s memberships, I learned that he was a member of the National Education Association, the National Rifle Association, and the National Wildlife Federation, while his wife held memberships in the National Association of Realtors, the Garden Clubs of America, and the Sierra Club.\u00a0 I then asked my subject if he ever felt as though he were a powerful man, politically.\u00a0 He chuckled, and said, \u201cNo, not at all.\u201d<\/p>\n

Then, addressing myself to the audience, I said, \u201cAlthough this gentleman does not see himself as being unusually powerful, the man you see standing before you is one of the most powerful men in America.\u00a0 The organizations that he and his wife support financially include four of the ten most powerful special interest lobbies in Washington\u2026 the NEA, the NRA, the NAR, and the Sierra Club\u2026 each of them employing large staffs of dedicated lobbyists and all maintaining political action committees with well-funded treasuries.\u00a0 (Three out of four dollars contributed by those four PACs go to Democrats)<\/p>\n

I said, \u201cThese are the \u2018special interests\u2019 that our friend from Common Cause would have us silence.\u00a0 But I would ask all of you\u2026 which of the \u2018special interests\u2019 represented in this man\u2019s household would you<\/em> like to silence?\u201d\u00a0 The silence was deafening.<\/p>\n

The point is, we are all special interests, and when Barack Obama and his friends on the left take indiscriminate pot shots at lobbyists, they\u2019re taking pot shots at the lobbyists who represent the people\u2019s interests.\u00a0 And while we may all differ on the merits of the arguments on one side of an issue or the other, there are at least two sides to every question and all deserve to be heard.<\/p>\n

Finally, the Center for Responsive Politics seems not to have noticed the large number of lawyers in the Congress.\u00a0 In the 111th<\/sup> Congress there were a total of 217 lawyers, 140 Democrats and 77 Republicans.\u00a0 Lawyers are, by definition, people who are trained to take any side of any issue in exchange for cash.\u00a0 Lobbyists, on the other hand, are people who take sides on a family of issues and rarely, if ever, change sides.\u00a0 From having spent an entire career as a lobbyist and a corporate PAC administrator for a major oil company, I can testify that I\u2019d much rather trust a lobbyist \u2013 whose word is his bond \u2013 than a lawyer whose allegiance can be purchased with cash. \u00a0<\/p>\n

As a lobbyist, I always operated under the self-imposed restriction, with my employer\u2019s consent, that I would never do anything that I would be ashamed to discuss with my wife, my children, or my mother\u2026 and I was unalterably committed to that pledge.\u00a0 How many lawyers can make that same statement?\u00a0 Barack Obama is a lawyer.\u00a0 I would sooner trust a poisonous snake than to trust Obama and he proves my point every day.\u00a0 His only loyalty is to himself and to whatever sounds good at the moment\u2026 whatever will convince the people that he is on their side.<\/p>\n

Yes, there is the occasional Duke Cunningham on the Republican side of the aisle, but one thing needs to be understood: money that comes from the private sector (corporations), except in rare instances, comes without strings.\u00a0 The same is not true of money that comes from big labor, the teachers unions, radical environmentalists, and trial lawyers.\u00a0 Nearly every one of those dollars comes with strings attached and almost all of it goes to Democrats.\u00a0 That\u2019s how things work in Washington and it\u2019s time the Center for Responsive Politics figured that out.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The March 2, 2011 OpenSecrets blog contains a report co-authored by Dave Levinthal and Craig Gurian.\u00a0 The report is titled, \u201cNew Study: More Than 130 Top Congressional Staffers Are Former Lobbyists.\u201d\u00a0 Wow!\u00a0 So what do we do now?\u00a0 Get the … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[4],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1120"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1120"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1120\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1121,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1120\/revisions\/1121"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1120"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1120"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.orderofephors.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1120"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}