
Trump administration will ban lobbyists - tmptmp
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/11/16/trump-administration-will-ban-lobbyists-enact-five-year-lobbying-ban-after-leaving-government/
======
rdtsc
It would be interesting to see how media will respond. Last time I watched
them they were upset he went to dinner without inviting them or some such
thing.

One complaint I heard on a Washington, DC forum was that it would destroy DC
culture. I imagine "lobbyist struggling to make ends meet after being laid
off" might be an angle.

> The five-year ban will make it harder for Trump to recruit people to work in
> the administration.

I imagine anyone in Washington who knows how things run is a lobbyist of some
sort. Wonder how or who they'd have to hire who wasn't some insider of sorts.
If people don't know the system they'll probably make mistakes or take too
long to get started. If they know too much they are probably corrupt and
lobbying for someone else as well.

~~~
plugger
This won't clean up Washington much at all as it only involves the Trump
administration appointments. IF Trump was serious about clamping down on the
revolving door between Lobbyists and Congress he would have to enact this ban
for Congress as well as his administration. Congress is the "swamp", not the
Trump White House, correct?

Sadly I think this is nothing but smoke and mirrors, an attempt to appear to
"clean up" Washington whilst at the same time doing as little as possible to
actually sort out the problems at hand.

~~~
rdtsc
Ah good point!

Wasn't he talking about term limits. Let's see how well the Congress will like
the idea to enact term limits for the ... Congress.

Legislature is funny like that. They can change the rules which are used to
make the rules so to speak. But I want to see him pull that off.

------
dsr_
FTA: "On its face, the lobbyist ban appears stringent, but it could be easily
skirted if a lobbyist were to deregister to be eligible to join the
administration. One sign indicates that it may already be happening: A close
aide to Pence who is a Washington lobbyist, Josh Pitcock, filed paperwork with
the Senate on Monday to terminate his status as a federal lobbyist."

In other words, this is meaningless for people being hired into the
administration, and of course they can become lobbyists again after they leave
government service.

~~~
ptaipale
However, there is a registration involved when going through the revolving
doors, both ways?

Is that public information? Sounds like a good service to American society?

------
alexbeloi
Obama had a similar policy in place (2 year ban instead of 5 years), but ended
up making exceptions left and right to hire people he wanted.

~~~
giarc
A podcast talked about this recently (can't remember which one). Basically
said that government employees make so little that anyone worth their weight
has to eventually be allowed to make lobbyist salary, otherwise they won't go
work for the administration.

~~~
alexbeloi
NPR politics podcast (I think the most recent episode) ;) I listened to the
same one

------
adam12
Wasn't this one of Obama's promises?

------
wadetandy
Not likely to become a law either. Many congresspersons have an excellent
backup plan in becoming a well-connected lobbyist if they are ever voted out
of office. They are not likely to vote that away from themselves.

~~~
wadetandy
Sorry on mobile. Should have been in reply to Jotato

------
jotato
Unless a law is enacted, I wonder how legally binding the 5 year waiting
period is. That is one long non-compete agreement!

~~~
alexbeloi
You put it in their hiring contract, similar to non-compete clauses. No law
needed, just force people to tie their own hands in the future if they want
the job now.

~~~
phkahler
But if it's not a law, who are they making the agreement with? Suppose Trump
is voted out in 4 years, is he going to go after any of these guys for breach
of contract if they become a lobbyist? It seems strange to make it anything
but a law if you want it to have teeth.

~~~
alexbeloi
Maybe him making it 5 years is a statement that he plans to be in office for a
second term, but you're right someone needs to be there to enforce the
contract.

I think a law would be ideal, but I have little hopes of that being passed
(similar to Trumps plan to add term limits), the lobbyists don't like it and
they control the purses and the purses control the congressmen/women.

------
ksk
Previous HN discussion on the legality of lobbying.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11508551](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11508551)

~~~
lps41
Thanks for linking to that. I found kbaker's input interesting, that
transparency of Congressmen's votes leads to powerful lobbyists:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11509420](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11509420)

------
itsobvious
yeah.. but, theyll introduce a more exclusive, effective version for the elite
insiders

------
ianai
Title makes it sound like a lot more than it is.

------
falsestprophet
First they came for the lobbyists and I did not speak up because I was not a
lobbyist.

~~~
tootie
Then they came for deplorables.

