K Street! From 1st Street?: "You Can't Get There From Here"

The budget of the United States is, and has been for many decades, the largest in the world, currently distancing the second largest budget by over a trillion dollars.   At any given time, there are 536 people who collectively authorize the distribution of those funds.   Those people are assigned the duty, in theory, to act prudently and in the best interest of the country in the exercise of that power.  Unfortunately, there are no tests of competency or veracity to be among this group, and the electoral process has been a very poor means for producing officials of those qualities.

We have a process for filling those seats that discourages the most intellectually gifted and well intended from seeking them, and when such candidates do venture forth they rarely succeed in swaying the electorate.    Awaiting at the other end of these policy making roles in government are lucrative jobs in lobbying that same government on behalf of private interests; now a well worn path and not merely for members of Congress.  It is an incentive that compromises those in office and acts to attract candidates for office who see it as an end goal.

At any given point, hundreds of former Congressional staffers are employed as professional lobbyists with 'for hire' agencies or industry group associations who maintain full time offices near the Capitol.  A former staffer can often have more access than a former Congressperson, via relationships with other senior staffers across several Congressional offices and party lines.  This career path, of '1st Street to K Street', is a structural defect in our governing process, seriously adverse to the public interest.  The phrase, '1st to K' alludes to the Congressional office buildings, several of which lie on 1st Street, just east of Capitol Hill, and the federal lobbying industry which is largely housed in offices on K Street in Washington.   

Just as personal ties give advantage in business dealings it can affect the construction of government policy and regulations.  The influence can be enormous, affecting where billions of dollars are spent or are saved in tax assessments or outlays to meet regulatory requirements.  These changes can adversely alter policies initiated for the public good or safety, and shift the cost/benefit equation to the detriment of the public.  Of course fairness of tax and spending policy is often in the eye of the beholder, but the eyes which have the greatest influence on that policy, outside of congressional officials and staff, are moneyed interests often without corresponding influence representing opposing views.
 
It is a problem that arises out of the personal relationships which develop among colleagues, and by nature those relationships extend beyond the end of any formal association.  Thus, even after their public roles end, a member of Congress, or the Executive branch, and their aides have the power of access to, and influence on, many of their former colleagues still in public service.

In most other venues the influence of personal ties would have little consequence, but the size and breadth of the federal budget, and the unique economic role and characteristics of government, make it a target of and easily susceptible to those with ill aims.  The power of congressional 'ties' carried by former policy creators becomes a commodity for sale, and there are many willing to buy it.  Yet, in this post public sector role these 'players' are not acting in a capacity as an elected or appointed official with certain responsibilities and accountability to a political constituency, directly or indirectly; their allegiance is to their private sector employer.

It's easily stopped, if we have the will.  Conservatives, independents and liberals would agree that the power to affect government policy that is afforded those in official roles should not be extended to those same persons beyond the end of those roles to be used for private concerns.         

An AMENDMENT to the Constitution of this or similar wording is recommended:

No person having been a member, official or aide of Congress or the Executive branch shall be compensated, outside of the federal government, for any advisory activity, directly or indirectly given, intended to influence any executive or legislative policy of the federal government.

This is intended to do one thing, keep people from gaining extraordinary power by working inside the legislative or executive branches of the federal government and then using that power, for profit, to continue to impact policy while no longer empowered for that purpose by the electorate directly or indirectly.

The key here is to end the financial incentives which have created this backdoor influence by the very sectors who the Congress, and the Executive, are paid to moderate for the public good. What we've been doing, instead, is tantamount to paying for a very expensive college education for these members and staffers (their government service) so they can then go make big bucks in a real career. And thus, it's not those attending the 'University of Congress' who are doing the business of Congress, it's the alumni who are now working on K Street.

-RLee