Some of the best value I get out of the California Insider channel on youtube is the expertise by people in their respective fields, and shown in long-format interviews. I get some via The Epoch Times long-format interviews as well with American Thought Leaders. They've certainly opened my eyes to a number of issues facing state, national and global issues.
I'm sorry, John, but you are largely incorrect, based on my experience in and outside the system. Yes, they can have outsized influence, and I can tell stories to confirm that. But to suggest they are the primary influence just isn't true. I'll demonstrate that in future posts.
Kelly:I'll repeat what I already said. I appreciate your perspective as a person representing lobbyists, but my commentary is about my four decades of politically active experiences. There is zero doubt that lobbyists are by FAR the primary influence on legislators, federal and state.
You are correct to a degree BUT the root problem is much deeper than aids. They shouldn't be relying on aids for information. They are supposed to be representing the PEOPLE who are their boss! ALL decisions are supposed to be made within the bounds and limitations of the CONSTITUTION that most of them know nothing or very little about. We should require all elected and appointed public servants pass a proficiency exam in their knowledge and understanding of the founding documents which govern what they can and can't legislate!
When I was in office, I made it a point to BECOME EDUCATED on the policies and issues behind everything that came before me. Yes, it took a lot of time/effort, but it has LONG since served me well in becoming much more astute about a large number of policy issues today. I would have never made it very far up the political ladder, because I'm too honest, and kingmakers don't want honest people. They want corruptible people that they can influence/blackmail.
This would only work for a short time unless the education system were to go back to critical thinking and using the scientific method. As the current seniors die off, their will be no more like-minded people to replace them. I don't foresee this reversal ever happening since the global masters have control.
Perhaps another part of the solution to fixing Congress is term limits. Our founding fathers were mostly gentlemen farmers (I think, could be wrong) and likely did not see the need to constitutionally prevent the rise of career politicians.
I'm generally in favor of term limits, but I also know the importance of knowledge and not being befriended by lobbyists who DO know their respective industries fairly well. And some facing their last terms may just very well be sellouts to whoever promises them a fat career afterwards if they are successful in passing legislation that is wanted by lobbying firms.
Having worked in government and been an elected official, I see the worst in both sides. Staff often ran the show, knowing that my position was limited, and they would stall things out long enough to find someone else who would bend on a particular issue. And I see many people in government going along to get along and make it to their pensions. There are alliances made, favors asked/granted, etc. And people with integrity often were drummed out or hammered down when actually trying to serve the people and either point out issues, illegalities or try to improve the system whereby greater accountability and records are noted.
An informed populace is needed, however! Most don't even know their representatives names, until they see ads in their mail, on tv, or on the ballot. Not much research goes into who they select. It might just be whoever is the most good looking or has the best hair/smile/etc.
I hope the alternative media space will grow and more people wake up to holding their leaders accountable, and call out bad laws/leaders.
Just stumbled on this stack... I LIKE this topic. And I hope it grows legs.
Hi, John, former congressional staff (a decade) and federal (and state) lobbyist (two decades) here. While your idea, in theory, sounds delightful, your major assumption that lobbyists run Congress is mostly false. Yes, I know it seems that way. It's true that some lobbyists are more powerful than others and derive much of that influence from their ability to raise large sums of campaign cash. More often, their real influence derives from their expertise (e.g., tax law) or the relationships and inside knowledge gained from years on a committee or personal staff. As a food lobbyist, I was frequently consulted on scientific and technical issues involving labeling, nutrition, and food safety. You inspire me to write a post, perhaps a series based on the college-level lecture I give periodically, on the true nature of lobbying in Washington. Also, senior citizens (I am one) would never put up with the 60-hour weeks, poor pay, substandard conditions (cramped quarters), and frenetic schedule most offices experience, especially when Members of Congress are in town.
I remember 60+ hour work weeks too and I don't think I could do it any longer. Back when 100 hour efforts were required, I remember fondly the hour meetings some seasoned veterans spent with me weekly- taking me under their wings as the saying goes.
Having 2 to 3 mentors for every critical staffer might be a way to leverage the stamina, enthusiasm and potential of the aids with of wisdom of the mentors.
That's a nice idea, and I've done exactly that. Several nice nonprofit organizations provide such mentors to young Hill staffers. The problem is that the staff don't often hang around the Hill very long (tenures average about 2-3 years, especially on personal staff) or need more time for the mentors.
Kelly: I appreciate your perspective as a person on the other side of the fence, but my commentary is about my four decades of politically active experience. There is zero doubt that lobbyists are by FAR the primary influence on legislators, federal and state.
Further, I am not saying that lobbysis are bad people. I'm saying that: 1) by-and-large what they are advocating is not in the best interest of the American public, and 2) they have an undue influence on our representatives.
The very best result from your plan is the way it will actually help educate those young exuberant aides fresh out of college. Some mature, rational, experience mentoring would really help to cut a lot of the hype out of the lobbyist’s game. If the young and older experienced folks listen to the lobbyist and then discuss the pros and cons I think a lot of bad decisions will end.
As I watch our country continue to make absolutely bizarre decisions I find myself wondering how such ridiculous things can be sold to supposedly intelligent politicians. I think you have a rational answer.
For instance, one trip to a coal fired power plant will immediately show an observer the immense power needed to produce and deliver a kilowatt to a home. This vision will immediately show the weakness of both wind and solar. They are just not capable of delivering the energy density needed to get the job done. Only Nuclear can actually compete with coal, but look what has been sold to America with totally false promises. The truth is out here and easily explained, but the power companies are not interested in telling that story. They will produce energy anyway the government asks them to do the job. The lack of cost effectiveness just gets kicked to the customer. The power company gets to stay in business. They have no incentive to fight the government. That is not their job!
I had another thought on this. I would do this for no pay. I have made enough money and do not need more taxable income. I think any retirees would love to add support to young aides at no cost.
Each Congress person could have a long list of experienced folks to call on for support on various subjects. A Zoom connection or a trip to DC for a meeting would be sufficient and a report can be written when back at home. Reimbursement for travel and expenses would allow for a break even and a basically free, invaluable support. There is a wealth of knowledge and experience out here to be tapped. How do we sell this to DC is the question?
Jim: I agree that many seniors would take on such a job for little pay. These are patriotic people who would relish the opportunity to leverage their wisdom and experiences to make a legislative difference.
Carol: Thank you. I'm going to start by contactingt a few Congress people I know and see if they are willing to "break ranks" to get the ball rolling...
Interestingly I just finished lunch with a potential new hire aid. The person pretty much checked all the right boxes that John outlined. The only potential concern was the most critical: lobbyist groomers. This person is qualified & mature but could also have sights on.a more lucrative offer in a year or two as they are wooed & promised a pot of gold to play the game. Perhaps we should be looking at incentives to retain such talent instead of allowing them to go to the dark side.
Good points. Been working recently on Nullification legislation in TN. I'm finding it helpful to talk to the SAME aid. She's getting my message across.
And from what I've heard from a DHS group that helps protect elected leaders from sexual blackmail or prosecute sexual predators among the leaders, some want the young folks there... to um.... satisfy carnal lusts.
You make an excellent point, but I suggest that you consider another of Congress's problems that is at least equally as bad as acquiescing their power to their aides. It is a problem even more obvious imho. That is their loyalty to Party. It is applicable in both Parties, but particular rotten in the Democrat Party. (Sorry, I refuse to call them the Democratic Party, since it is such a bastardization of the word). The wants and needs of the Party almost always come before the wants and needs of the people who elected them. Far too often the best interests of the country take a back seat to the best interests of the Party. Lately, that "oftenness" has become "always", particularly as it applies to the members of Congress in the Party presently in control of the USA.
Or is it the other way around, John? Are all those eager young aids and financially well-endowed lobbyists just doing what they must, all in order to get or to keep their Party in power? At ANY cost to the well being of the country at large. Isn't it these Lobbyists who are themselves the driving force of their Party? Without a Party to 'drive' (more than just 'support'), how could they successfully employ their financial resources to have the people they want elected to office, or so easily have elected representatives collude together in support of what the lobbyists want?
Without a doubt though, the two problems are huge and they are clearly linked to one another. Does it matter if or which one is the cause of the other so long as Congress seriously upped its game in the absence of either of one of these problems?
Why would it be fought against? Any Congressional person is at liberty to hire whoever they like. They are simply following "tradition" to hire youngsters.
Some of the best value I get out of the California Insider channel on youtube is the expertise by people in their respective fields, and shown in long-format interviews. I get some via The Epoch Times long-format interviews as well with American Thought Leaders. They've certainly opened my eyes to a number of issues facing state, national and global issues.
I think, for the most part, you are correct John. Obviously the subject goes much deeper, but this is a huge part of the problem.
I'm sorry, John, but you are largely incorrect, based on my experience in and outside the system. Yes, they can have outsized influence, and I can tell stories to confirm that. But to suggest they are the primary influence just isn't true. I'll demonstrate that in future posts.
Kelly:I'll repeat what I already said. I appreciate your perspective as a person representing lobbyists, but my commentary is about my four decades of politically active experiences. There is zero doubt that lobbyists are by FAR the primary influence on legislators, federal and state.
You are correct to a degree BUT the root problem is much deeper than aids. They shouldn't be relying on aids for information. They are supposed to be representing the PEOPLE who are their boss! ALL decisions are supposed to be made within the bounds and limitations of the CONSTITUTION that most of them know nothing or very little about. We should require all elected and appointed public servants pass a proficiency exam in their knowledge and understanding of the founding documents which govern what they can and can't legislate!
When I was in office, I made it a point to BECOME EDUCATED on the policies and issues behind everything that came before me. Yes, it took a lot of time/effort, but it has LONG since served me well in becoming much more astute about a large number of policy issues today. I would have never made it very far up the political ladder, because I'm too honest, and kingmakers don't want honest people. They want corruptible people that they can influence/blackmail.
Carly: Indeed what you say are the ideal objectives. Please re-read the four Facts in the commentary, as to why aides play such a pivitol role.
This would only work for a short time unless the education system were to go back to critical thinking and using the scientific method. As the current seniors die off, their will be no more like-minded people to replace them. I don't foresee this reversal ever happening since the global masters have control.
Tom: Do you look at a half glass as being half full or half empty? If this was done for even only ten years, that could have extraordinary results.
Perhaps another part of the solution to fixing Congress is term limits. Our founding fathers were mostly gentlemen farmers (I think, could be wrong) and likely did not see the need to constitutionally prevent the rise of career politicians.
I'm generally in favor of term limits, but I also know the importance of knowledge and not being befriended by lobbyists who DO know their respective industries fairly well. And some facing their last terms may just very well be sellouts to whoever promises them a fat career afterwards if they are successful in passing legislation that is wanted by lobbying firms.
Having worked in government and been an elected official, I see the worst in both sides. Staff often ran the show, knowing that my position was limited, and they would stall things out long enough to find someone else who would bend on a particular issue. And I see many people in government going along to get along and make it to their pensions. There are alliances made, favors asked/granted, etc. And people with integrity often were drummed out or hammered down when actually trying to serve the people and either point out issues, illegalities or try to improve the system whereby greater accountability and records are noted.
An informed populace is needed, however! Most don't even know their representatives names, until they see ads in their mail, on tv, or on the ballot. Not much research goes into who they select. It might just be whoever is the most good looking or has the best hair/smile/etc.
I hope the alternative media space will grow and more people wake up to holding their leaders accountable, and call out bad laws/leaders.
Just stumbled on this stack... I LIKE this topic. And I hope it grows legs.
Ken: I believe that there is merit to that.
Hi, John, former congressional staff (a decade) and federal (and state) lobbyist (two decades) here. While your idea, in theory, sounds delightful, your major assumption that lobbyists run Congress is mostly false. Yes, I know it seems that way. It's true that some lobbyists are more powerful than others and derive much of that influence from their ability to raise large sums of campaign cash. More often, their real influence derives from their expertise (e.g., tax law) or the relationships and inside knowledge gained from years on a committee or personal staff. As a food lobbyist, I was frequently consulted on scientific and technical issues involving labeling, nutrition, and food safety. You inspire me to write a post, perhaps a series based on the college-level lecture I give periodically, on the true nature of lobbying in Washington. Also, senior citizens (I am one) would never put up with the 60-hour weeks, poor pay, substandard conditions (cramped quarters), and frenetic schedule most offices experience, especially when Members of Congress are in town.
I remember 60+ hour work weeks too and I don't think I could do it any longer. Back when 100 hour efforts were required, I remember fondly the hour meetings some seasoned veterans spent with me weekly- taking me under their wings as the saying goes.
Having 2 to 3 mentors for every critical staffer might be a way to leverage the stamina, enthusiasm and potential of the aids with of wisdom of the mentors.
That's a nice idea, and I've done exactly that. Several nice nonprofit organizations provide such mentors to young Hill staffers. The problem is that the staff don't often hang around the Hill very long (tenures average about 2-3 years, especially on personal staff) or need more time for the mentors.
A post I wrote a year ago about a friend and former fellow lobbyist who passed away is a good place to appreciate the world of lobbying and lobbyists. https://kellyjohnston.substack.com/p/saying-goodbye-to-fellow-swamp-creature
Kelly: I appreciate your perspective as a person on the other side of the fence, but my commentary is about my four decades of politically active experience. There is zero doubt that lobbyists are by FAR the primary influence on legislators, federal and state.
Further, I am not saying that lobbysis are bad people. I'm saying that: 1) by-and-large what they are advocating is not in the best interest of the American public, and 2) they have an undue influence on our representatives.
The very best result from your plan is the way it will actually help educate those young exuberant aides fresh out of college. Some mature, rational, experience mentoring would really help to cut a lot of the hype out of the lobbyist’s game. If the young and older experienced folks listen to the lobbyist and then discuss the pros and cons I think a lot of bad decisions will end.
As I watch our country continue to make absolutely bizarre decisions I find myself wondering how such ridiculous things can be sold to supposedly intelligent politicians. I think you have a rational answer.
For instance, one trip to a coal fired power plant will immediately show an observer the immense power needed to produce and deliver a kilowatt to a home. This vision will immediately show the weakness of both wind and solar. They are just not capable of delivering the energy density needed to get the job done. Only Nuclear can actually compete with coal, but look what has been sold to America with totally false promises. The truth is out here and easily explained, but the power companies are not interested in telling that story. They will produce energy anyway the government asks them to do the job. The lack of cost effectiveness just gets kicked to the customer. The power company gets to stay in business. They have no incentive to fight the government. That is not their job!
Jim Schout
Jim: Thank you. Sometimes the answers to our most complex problems, are amazingly simple!
I had another thought on this. I would do this for no pay. I have made enough money and do not need more taxable income. I think any retirees would love to add support to young aides at no cost.
Each Congress person could have a long list of experienced folks to call on for support on various subjects. A Zoom connection or a trip to DC for a meeting would be sufficient and a report can be written when back at home. Reimbursement for travel and expenses would allow for a break even and a basically free, invaluable support. There is a wealth of knowledge and experience out here to be tapped. How do we sell this to DC is the question?
Jim: I agree that many seniors would take on such a job for little pay. These are patriotic people who would relish the opportunity to leverage their wisdom and experiences to make a legislative difference.
This is brilliant!! How do we accomplish this?
Carol: Thank you. I'm going to start by contactingt a few Congress people I know and see if they are willing to "break ranks" to get the ball rolling...
I'd love to see how this goes! I'm betting it would seriously shake the halls of congress, as well as threaten legislators' lobbying funds.
Interestingly I just finished lunch with a potential new hire aid. The person pretty much checked all the right boxes that John outlined. The only potential concern was the most critical: lobbyist groomers. This person is qualified & mature but could also have sights on.a more lucrative offer in a year or two as they are wooed & promised a pot of gold to play the game. Perhaps we should be looking at incentives to retain such talent instead of allowing them to go to the dark side.
Exactly. Thank you.
Good points. Been working recently on Nullification legislation in TN. I'm finding it helpful to talk to the SAME aid. She's getting my message across.
Brilliant. As a senior citizen, I say that you are 100% correct.
A brilliant analysis and solution. The problem with approximately half of Congress is that they WANT the useful idiots on their staff.
And from what I've heard from a DHS group that helps protect elected leaders from sexual blackmail or prosecute sexual predators among the leaders, some want the young folks there... to um.... satisfy carnal lusts.
John…brilliant solution. Can the current aids and hire experienced people.
John,
You make an excellent point, but I suggest that you consider another of Congress's problems that is at least equally as bad as acquiescing their power to their aides. It is a problem even more obvious imho. That is their loyalty to Party. It is applicable in both Parties, but particular rotten in the Democrat Party. (Sorry, I refuse to call them the Democratic Party, since it is such a bastardization of the word). The wants and needs of the Party almost always come before the wants and needs of the people who elected them. Far too often the best interests of the country take a back seat to the best interests of the Party. Lately, that "oftenness" has become "always", particularly as it applies to the members of Congress in the Party presently in control of the USA.
Russ: What is behind your problem, is undue influence of lobbyists. What is behind that is influenced young aides.
Or is it the other way around, John? Are all those eager young aids and financially well-endowed lobbyists just doing what they must, all in order to get or to keep their Party in power? At ANY cost to the well being of the country at large. Isn't it these Lobbyists who are themselves the driving force of their Party? Without a Party to 'drive' (more than just 'support'), how could they successfully employ their financial resources to have the people they want elected to office, or so easily have elected representatives collude together in support of what the lobbyists want?
Without a doubt though, the two problems are huge and they are clearly linked to one another. Does it matter if or which one is the cause of the other so long as Congress seriously upped its game in the absence of either of one of these problems?
Thank God we have SOME semblance of checks and balances to at least slow down those who have vain ambitions.
Information I did not know (in addition to much more I am ignorant about).
Your solution is an excellent idea; however, implemenatation would be difficult and fought against.
BTW, love all your articles and the information that you bring to light.
Why would it be fought against? Any Congressional person is at liberty to hire whoever they like. They are simply following "tradition" to hire youngsters.
Less able to be manipulated was my thinking.