In his often-repeated calls to "drain the swamp" of Washington,
President-elect Donald Trump has targeted in particular the capital
city's so-called "revolving door."
If there is a poster child for what that door
represents, it might be former Rep. Billy Tauzin of Louisiana -- a
12-term Democrat turned Republican, who chaired the influential House
Commerce Committee from 2001 to 2004 and pushed the controversial
Medicare Bill of 2003 through Congress.
The bill was designed, in part, to make drugs cheaper
for senior citizens. But it ended up costing taxpayers a fortune --
$549 billion over nine years. It also made huge profits for drug
companies, partly because it prohibited Medicare and the federal
government, which represented millions of senior patients, from
negotiating for lower prices from pharmaceutical companies.
A few months later, Tauzin left Congress to become
chief lobbyist for and CEO of The Pharmaceutical Research and
Manufacturers of America where he made an estimated $2 million a year.
"It's a sad commentary on politics in Washington that
a member of Congress who pushed through a major piece of legislation
benefiting the drug industry, gets the job leading that industry," Joan
Claybrook, president of Public Citizen, said at the time.
Tauzin denied Fox News’ request for an interview, but
has often defended his move. He told the Washington Post that he was
diagnosed with intestinal cancer after leaving Congress and credited
cutting-edge pharmaceuticals for his survival. "I wanted to work in an
industry whose mission is no less than saving and enhancing lives," he
told the Post.
Tauzin's route from Capitol Hill to the lobbying
world is hardly unique. "Many of the top staffers who helped write the
Affordable Care Act then became health care lobbyists," said Tim
Carney, commentary editor at the Washington Examiner.
Yet, this common practice is not illegal. Some believe it’s not even unethical.
Paul Miller of the National Institute for Lobbying
and Ethics says the public benefits from the revolving door. "People
don't like to hear that, but government is run a different way. You have
to understand how it operates, and you need people like myself to be
here every day looking out for your interests, because if you're not,
somebody else will," he told Fox News.
Trump’s plan to drain the “swamp” includes three ambitious components:
- A five-year ban on White House and congressional officials lobbying after they leave government.
- A lifetime ban on White House officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government.
- A complete ban on foreign lobbyists raising money for American elections.
History has proven it may be easier said than done.
Of the thousands of influence peddlers in Washington, one is only
considered a "registered" lobbyist if 20 percent or more of one's time
is spent lobbying. Nobody measures that 20 percent. It’s an honor
system.
"That's where the gray line is," Miller said. "You
have people in the PR arena who will say, I do some lobbying but most
of it is in PR, so that’s not lobbying, so I don’t have to register. Its
people skirting the system in my opinion.”
This has allowed the Obama administration to hire
people who did lobbying work, after it vowed it would not. The same test
awaits the Trump administration.
Miller said previous attempts to shut the revolving
door have backfired. He cited the 2006 ban on lobbyists paying for a
congressman's meal. Forbidden from picking up the tab, lobbyists simply
found new ways to buy time and influence. "I can call your boss and say I
want to have a one on one for an hour over a meal and talk about my
issue, settle up with the check, and then push an envelope across the
table and say, ‘Oh, by the way, here’s your campaign check.You tell me
what looks more corrupt,’" said Miller.
The revolving door’s effect can be insidious, not
only enriching those who pass through, but raising the cost of
government. Take, for example, the Pentagon where former high-ranking
military officers are scarfed up by major defense contractors to not
just acquire their expertise, but to preserve the contractor’s
connections and their business.
"Fewer and fewer companies are involved in the
defense business because the Pentagon does play favorites," said Tom
Schatz of Citizens Against Government Waste." He added, "Smaller,
newer, more agile companies have trouble getting into the process
itself. When the Pentagon has 469 billion dollars in cost overruns in
its major defense acquisition portfolio, then something really needs to
be done."