Lobbyists

A guest post by JS:

On November 15, 2007, Barack Obama said: "I am running to tell the lobbyists in Washington that their days of setting the agenda are over. They have not funded my campaign. They won't work in my White House."

On February 2, 2008, Barack Obama said: "That's what happens when lobbyists set the agenda and that's why they won't drown out your voices anymore when I am president of the United States of America."

Now, of course, where the rubber hits the road, things aren't so black and white. The new criteria set by the Obama administration is that for a person to work in a particular position at the White House they cannot have lobbied within the past 12 month in an area relating to that particular position. Furthermore, that person's family and business associates cannot have influence in the field of the particular position. These rules are stricter than any that have existed in previous administrations. However, some are still complaining that this standard falls far short of the promise of zero lobbyists in Washington. The NY Times recently had an article to this effect and questioned whether Obama was even following his own guidelines.

The question, of course, is: is it even possible to run a government that is free from lobbyists and those who might be unfairly influenced by political, commercial, or other interests? After all, don't we want the people in the DoD to have knowledge and experience with defense contractors? Don't we want the people in the CIA or FBI to have worked in security and intelligence? Or for the people in the SEC to have worked with Wall Street? I think such harsh standards would deprive government of its most talented people.

The issue to me isn't whether a person worked as a lobbyist or has connections to industry but whether a person will be unfairly influenced by that past experience. That is a standard that needs to be constantly reviewed, not just when a person is hired, but throughout their term of employment.

---------
Buy DB's book. (please)