Trump Administration Now Has 4 Corporate Lobbyists Serving as Cabinet Secretaries

[rocket88]

https://gritpost.com/trump-administration-cabinet-secretaries/

With the departure of Defense Secretary James Mattis, industry lobbyists now make up four of President Trump’s cabinet secretaries.

Good to see that draining the swamp is going so well!

 

[dcsports]

https://gritpost.com/trump-administration-cabinet-secretaries/

With the departure of Defense Secretary James Mattis, industry lobbyists now make up four of President Trump’s cabinet secretaries.

Good to see that draining the swamp is going so well!

Perhaps this article could give some insight. Every administration and candidate pays lip service to that promise, but there is value in having some people with policy experience in a given area.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-obama-administration/?utm_term=.6d05dde08e47

There are 65 former lobbyists currently working in the Obama administration

There are, according to Post analysis of data from the Center for Responsive Politics, 65 current members of the Obama administration who at one point lobbied the federal government. Combined, they worked for over 500 years for firms that lobby the government -- compared to the little over 320 years they have spent with the Obama administration.

The flow of employees from the private sector into government and back out is well-established and, often, hardly worth mentioning. Graphic designers from most media outlets with a location in the nation's capital have probably at some point been asked to Photoshop a revolving door onto the Capitol building.

But this is the Obama administration, which trumpeted its anti-lobbyist position in an ethics statement on its transition Web site. "Free the Executive Branch from Special Interest Influence," one header reads, right above "Close the Revolving Door on Former and Future Employers." It's an administration that quickly announced no lobbyists would be allowed to serve on advisory panels -- a policy that survived until this week, after a legal challenge.

The value of former administration and congressional officials to lobbying firms is two-fold. First, they have connections, which is why federal revolving door rules set windows during which ex-officials can't lobby their peers. The second is that these people know the subject matter very well, whether it's the intricacy of policy or the machinations of legislating. And it works the other way. The 65 people hired by Obama certainly gained knowledge while lobbying that aids them now; Cornell is a more informed FCC attorney than she would have been had she never worked for Inmarsat.

 

[tres borrachos]

Perhaps this article could give some insight. Every administration and candidate pays lip service to that promise, but there is value in having some people with policy experience in a given area.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-obama-administration/?utm_term=.6d05dde08e47

What does this have to do with Trump promising to drain the swamp and obviously filling it up instead?

 

[Excon]

https://gritpost.com/trump-administration-cabinet-secretaries/

With the departure of Defense Secretary James Mattis, industry lobbyists now make up four of President Trump’s cabinet secretaries.

Good to see that draining the swamp is going so well!

Those position being filled by qualified individuals and not politicians, is a good thing.

 

[dcsports]

What does this have to do with Trump promising to drain the swamp and obviously filling it up instead?

In this case, the 'draining the swamp' point isn't clearly defined, and it's hard to even have a discussion about that. But if the yardstick is the number of former lobbyists employed in the administration, clearly 4 is an improvement over 65.

 

[tres borrachos]

In this case, the 'draining the swamp' point isn't clearly defined, and it's hard to even have a discussion about that. But if the yardstick is the number of former lobbyists employed in the administration, clearly 4 is an improvement over 65.

This isn't a thread about Obama. It's about the man in the office today who swore to his fans that he would "drain the swamp".

Anyone with more than 5 working brain cells wouldn't consider lobbyists as not being "the swamp".

 

[rocket88]

Those position being filled by qualified individuals and not politicians, is a good thing.

Lobbyists are politicisns.

 

[rocket88]

Perhaps this article could give some insight. Every administration and candidate pays lip service to that promise, but there is value in having some people with policy experience in a given area.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-obama-administration/?utm_term=.6d05dde08e47

To be sure, Obama was far from perfect in that regard. I'd join in that criticism of him. Of course, the 65 number was in the administration as a whole, not cabinet secretaries.

Now are we done deflecting and ready to deal with the issue at hand?

 

[SenorXm/Sirius]

I guess Trump sees that his masters on Fox and his base really didn't care about his campaign promise to 'drain the swamp'.. So instead he's adding to the swamp, big time..

It'll make him and his rich buddies richer, that's all that matters to the millionaires and billionaires who he caters to. His base won't benefit, but as long as Trump keeps throwing red meat to them once in awhile, they'll be happy and keep goose stepping behind Trump.

 

[Excon]

Lobbyists are politicisns.

How cute, but no. They are separate and distinct from the politicians they lobby.

If you want to get that general with your definitions then any citizen who lobbies their elected politician for a change is a lobbyist.

Regardless, appointing people who have been lobbyists is not a bad thing.

 

[lurchadams]

https://gritpost.com/trump-administration-cabinet-secretaries/

With the departure of Defense Secretary James Mattis, industry lobbyists now make up four of President Trump’s cabinet secretaries.

Good to see that draining the swamp is going so well!

You understand this particular part of the forum is called, "Breaking News". What you just posted is not.

 

[ElChupacabra]

Those position being filled by qualified individuals and not politicians, is a good thing.

That depends on whether their focus is putting that expertise to benefit the people of the US or their former industries.

 

[Excon]

That depends on whether their focus is putting that expertise to benefit the people of the US or their former industries.

The former would be their job they were hired to do, not the latter.
So why would one assume the later and not the former?

 

[ElChupacabra]

The former would be their job they were hired to do, not the latter.
So why would one assume the later and not the former?

For the same reason politicians tend to represent their donors more than their constituents.

 

[Excon]

For the same reason politicians tend to represent their donors more than their constituents.

No.
Simply no.

 

[dcsports]

This isn't a thread about Obama. It's about the man in the office today who swore to his fans that he would "drain the swamp".

Anyone with more than 5 working brain cells wouldn't consider lobbyists as not being "the swamp".

The comparison is a valid one - and the explanation of the 'why' is important.

 

[Grand Mal]

No.
Simply no.

Yes. Definitely yes.
I don't know what about a lobbyist tells you they're qualified to serve in government but if knowing which side of your bread is buttered makes you qualified, I guess they are.
It's a mystery to me though why anyone with a background of working to promote corporate interests in the government would be considered for a public service job. Anyone who can't see the potential for and perception of conflict of interest has just put the blinkers on himself.

 

[rocket88]

How cute, but no. They are separate and distinct from the politicians they lobby.

If you want to get that general with your definitions then any citizen who lobbies their elected politician for a change is a lobbyist.

Regardless, appointing people who have been lobbyists is not a bad thing.

Lobbyists make a living from politics. Therefore they are politicians.

But at least we know that you don't care about corruption. Just your worship duties.

 

[ElChupacabra]

No.
Simply no.

So what do you think makes them less likely to be beholden to their former industries?

 

[JasperL]

The former would be their job they were hired to do, not the latter.
So why would one assume the later and not the former?

Because they always leave government, often after just a year or two, and almost always return to their former jobs as lobbyists. A good way to maximize your value and worth before and after government is to reliably serve your paymasters during your government stint. They call it the revolving door for a reason...

 

[Tom Horn]

https://gritpost.com/trump-administration-cabinet-secretaries/

With the departure of Defense Secretary James Mattis, industry lobbyists now make up four of President Trump’s cabinet secretaries.

Good to see that draining the swamp is going so well!

they are labor leaders who know how to indenting talent. You’re wanting iced cream vendors and fry cooks there instead?

 

[americanwoman]

they are labor leaders who know how to indenting talent. You’re wanting iced cream vendors and fry cooks there instead?

Yes because there is nothing in between industry lobbyists and ice cream vendors. Nothing, you say! :lamo

 

[Tom Horn]

Yes because there is nothing in between industry lobbyists and ice cream vendors. Nothing, you say! :lamo

industry lobbyists. Notice how Mattis lost 25 billion dollars for Exxon yet was hired to help confront Putin.

 

[TheGoverness]

Yes because there is nothing in between industry lobbyists and ice cream vendors. Nothing, you say! :lamo

Nothing but the delicious taste of a vanilla swirl!

 

[americanwoman]

industry lobbyists. Notice how Mattis lost 25 billion dollars for Exxon yet was hired to help confront Putin.

Mattis has nothing to do with Exxon.