iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

On K Street, An Ex-Senate Staffer Is Worth $740,000 A Year

First Posted: 09/24/10 01:09 PM ET Updated: 05/25/11 06:50 PM ET

K Street

To K Street firms, hiring the former employee of a current senator typically brings in $740,000 per year.

The connection itself is cash for these lobbying firms -- especially when the lawmaker is still in office. A new study from the London School of Economics finds that when a U.S. senator leaves the Hill, the lobbyists who used to be his staffers make 24 percent less money for their firms. That amounts to $177,000 less per lobbyist per year.

"Jesus," said retiring Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.). "The next year? I better tell that to my staff," he joked. "Don't go to K Street."

His advice will come too late for the minimum of 20 Dodd staffers who've already spun through the revolving door, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. (Dodd has promised that he himself will not become a lobbyist.) Dodd was central in the 111th Congress to credit card reform, health care legislation and Wall Street reform; his former staffers were some of the most valuable assets in Washington. Next year, they'll be worth much less.

The study, by Jordi Blanes i Vidal, Mirko Draca and Christian Fons-Rosen, also finds that lobbyists who worked in the House make 10 percent less when their former bosses hang it up, and lobbyist ex-staffers are more likely to quit lobbying when their former boss quits.

"That is a pretty striking figure," said Rep. Brad Miller (D-N.C.). "It does almost sound like in the Senate the lobbyists are hired specifically to lobby their old boss. A little less so in the House, but still lobbyists are being hired to lobby people like their boss. So it makes sense the dip would be not quite as severe."

The study puts a hard number on a phenomenon long identified as elemental to the U.S. political system. "Consistent with the notion that lobbyists sell access to powerful elected officials, the drop in revenue increases with the seniority of and committee assignments power held by the Senator immediately prior to leaving office," the report says. "The finding that a large portion of what makes revolving door lobbyists particularly attractive is perishable has the implication that staffers may have relatively short careers. Once a connection to a powerful Senator has been established, a staffer may want to move into lobbying and cash in this unique asset while it is still valuable."

Ivan Adler, a headhunter with the McCormick Group, has frequently said that "Once your rabbi leaves, your value always goes down." Adler read the report and agreed with the basic premise. But he says there are "Three Ps" -- People, Process, and Policy -- that determine a potential lobbyists' value. A staffer from a "money committee," such as the Senate Banking Committee or the House Energy and Commerce Committee, can make up what he or she might lack in connections by being very knowledgeable about process and policy. "The people part of it is only a part of it," Adler said.

Energy and Commerce chairman Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), however, said that the report shows that the most valuable thing most lobbyists have to offer is a specific relationship. He said the report's premise rang true -- but he boasted that there aren't too many K Streeters who'd be sad to see him leave the Hill. "It reminds me of how grateful I am that so many of the staff that I've had over the years stayed in public interest work. I can't think of more than one or two that ever went into lobbying," Waxman said. "I know for a fact that some lobbyists are hired because of the relationship with a particular member."

Only one of Waxman's former staffers, according to the CRP, is now doing corporate lobbying. Waxman won his contested primary this year, so the lobbyist is safe for another term.

"What makes those who spin through the revolving door such valuable commodities is not their expertise -- revolving door lobbyists do not usually possess any greater knowledge than others in the field -- but it is their connections," said Craig Holman, a lobbyist for Public Citizen. "They are literally selling their Rolodexes. It makes perfect sense, as the study shows, that when a revolving door lobbyist loses his or her connections in Congress, their value to special interests drops."

As long as members of Congress rely for re-election on campaign contributions generated by interest groups with business before Congress, the revolving door will continue to swing, as the need for cash gives corporate lobbyists abundant opportunities to spend time with former bosses and colleagues. The only way to put a stopper in it is to take away the need for that campaign cash by publicly funding campaigns, said retiring Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.).

"People say, 'Oh, I don't want my public money spent on campaigns.' Well, guess what? It already is, in the form of special interest deals and this, that and the other and this revolving door everybody hates and earmarking and blah, blah, blah," said Kennedy. "So how do we change it? Take away the need for people to have to turn that stuff around and you're going to make a big difference."

Kennedy said that the study rang true to him. "You're going to pay for it one way or the other, either upfront or through the backdoor. And it's a lot cheaper to pay upfront and come up with a system that works," he said. "If you take away the demand for the private sector to play such a heavy role, you're taking away an ingredient to this mix that 's creating the ugly correlation that you're seeing in this study."

Public financing for campaigns is a long way from happening, but a bill to alleviate the need for constant fundraising did advance in the House on Thursday. Progressive groups, led by MoveOn.org, are working to persuade candidates and members of Congress to pledge to take three concrete actions to reduce the influence of money in politics.

Republicans staffers have struggled to stay relevant while Democrats have controlled Congress for four years and the White House for two, but are looking at a retainer renaissance; even if Republicans fail to take either chamber, the narrower majority will make the minority relevant.

Former Blue Dog Democratic staffers, on the other hand, will see their stocks drop, unless their ex-boss happens to be among the handful of those expected to hang on. "Blue Dog staffers are more in demand than ever," Rep. Jim Cooper, a Blue Dog Democrat from Tennessee told Roll Call over the summer. "This is a sign that most of the decisions on governing are going to be made in the middle, and who knows the middle more than Blue Dogs?"

Those firms are likely to have a rough case of buyer's remorse come November. Those staffers might "know the middle," but they won't know the specific people in the middle.

The academic finding about a staffer's half-life as a lobbyist suggests the financial wisdom of a common career move: Returning to the Hill after a stint downtown. HuffPost reported in December that the House Financial Services Committee, for instance, was a shelter to 16 staffers who'd previously worked as lobbyists -- a dozen of them Democrats. Lobbyists speak wistfully of returning to Congress, however, and usually don't talk about going back and forth to boost their careers. They only left, after all, so they could send their kids to private school.

"I have never heard anyone specifically tell me that they want to go back in order to 'boomerang,'" said Adler. "The staffers I have spoken to have always wanted to go back to the Hill because they have wanted to further a political agenda and not an individual agenda." But returning to the Hill allows a lobbyist to refresh relationships that have gone stale while the ex-staffer labored on K Street, away from the action. (The big secret on K Street is that many lobbyists are starved for information about what's going on on in what was once their playground, though must maintain the opposite in order to continue to pull in monthly client retainers.)

Peter Rubin left the Hill in 2000 to lobby for Big Pharma, for instance, and returned in 2008 to direct a subcommittee chaired by Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D-Md.), just as health care reform began to ramp up. Once passage was assured this year, he announced he'd be returning to the drug industry as a lobbyist for Sanofi-Aventis.

"The door doesn't just revolve once," said Miller in December. "They tend to go out and come back and go out again. It really does create a set of financial incentives, whether conscious or not."

Click HERE to download a PDF of "Revolving Door Lobbyists."

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,531
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (35 total)
photo
MarsAmbassador
Per angusta ad augusta
02:18 PM on 09/26/2010
Our system if broken. We are behest to corporate dollars, regardless of party. Our candidates and legislation no longer reflect public opinion but corporate influence. Their candidacy, regardless of party, depends on dancing to the tune of the same corporate masters for the money necessary to win an election. NOTHING will change without comprehensive campaign finance reform.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kenhamlett
11:49 PM on 09/25/2010
If you need to better understand why Americans are angry and fed up with politics, this article points you clearly in the direction of that answer. Turns out there are no losers in American politics. If you lose your election contest, you should not feel rejected at all. Your party will find you a million-dollar lobbying job. If that is not available, you can sit on any number of corporate boards and receive six figure incomes for attending a couple of boring meetings a year and casting rubber stamp votes in favor of the actions of the people ripping off our Treasury. Still haven't had any luck? Well, a current or former President can add you to their staffs or appoint you to a position in their administration or make a call to someone who will. The important thing to remember is that you are in the club and if you don't sleep with someone of the same sex or write a tell-all book exposing the club's rules, you can probably stay in it forever and accumulate just as much money as those who were lucky enough to get elected on the evening you lost! What a system!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rgilley
Question Authority!
08:24 AM on 09/25/2010
If lobbyist cannot be controlled then they should be taken out of the system.
photo
yoyodyne666
Just here to spool you up.
02:12 AM on 09/25/2010
Helping corporations run this country is hard work, the deserve that kind of pay.
photo
ranchero42
Cherished Memories? NRA'll Rifle Thru 'Em
01:17 AM on 09/26/2010
ROFLMAO!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
breakingpoint
War is a Racket - Smedley Butler
01:53 AM on 09/25/2010
disgusting!
11:48 PM on 09/24/2010
We the people are too blame..We never raise any quams about lobbyists..If Tea partiers are true to themselves this is where they need to focus their energies on..but then again they are being paid by koch..Do u really think tebaggers in washington will not be lobbied or take money fom lobbyists..Like Obama said there anger is misplaced..Its the lobbyists
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
rgilley
Question Authority!
08:26 AM on 09/25/2010
Teabaggers are Not some grass roots organization....they are a very well funded right wing extremeist group with money from Rove , Dick Armey and the Koch brothers....the billionaires club.
Teabaggers are the same republicans who created this mess in the first place now they want back in and have changed their names to do so.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
fdeltz
10:00 PM on 09/25/2010
do you have a chin strap on that tin foil hat?
11:22 PM on 09/24/2010
The answer to this mess is the Constitution, specifically the convention clause of Article V. People fear a federal convention, thinking it can rewrite the Constitution, but it can't. It can only deliberate and propose amendments. Any idea would then need 3/4 of the states to agree to it before anything changes. The reason the Framers set ratification at 75% is so that whatever the idea--right to left--it will need all of one side signed on, plus at least half the other. Does anyone here think corporate interests want to go through the constituitonal process of convoking and convening a convention? There will have to be elections for delegates, this aspect alone will in effect be a peaceable reformation of the status quo. It's convention or bust folks. Check out ConventionUSA.org, or FOAVC.org. There are other Americans beginning to talk about it. You should too.
10:58 PM on 09/24/2010
What's unsettling is the public's blithe acceptance of lobbyists a "natural" part of how politics works. The word "lobbying" is used now as a synonym for the word "persuade". But in the political sense alone. If a man "lobbied" for his girlfriends hand in marriage, that could mean he was trying to buy her love. Its obvious lobbyists are the ruin of a true representative government. They buy that part of the Constitution (the First Amendment) that says citizens have the right to petition government. We can't be heard over the money of lobbyists. In addition, I'm sure any political figure who benefits from lobbyists would say lobbyists are citizens too.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BoshSpong
My micro-bio does not meet HP's guidelines
09:50 PM on 09/24/2010
The problem will not be solved with "term limits", lobbyists will simply buy new stooges to fill the departing ones' roles. The issue here is the total degradation of the system made worse by the SCOTUS decision on giving some citizens more "voice" than others.

Of all the immoral and dastardly "legal" decisions, equating money with free speech will stand as a monument to injustice and malfeasance. Sure we all have free speech but the moneyed powerful will always have more "free speech" than the poor or the middle class. The mere idea is patently absurd.

The Bible that the right wing twists and uses to induce the "Christian right" into their sordid pockets, says it clearly: "For the LOVE of money is the root of all evil.” Timothy, 6:10. By equating money and wealth as "free speech" the nation was launched into the mire.

Only when we finally get the money factor out of the political system we will be able to have unfettered representatives of the people.

The fact that politicians and staffers are able to profit from their posts by selling themselves to the highest bidder, is an embarrassment. History will not look upon this sordid chapter of our nation's history with praise, rather it will be looked upon as something akin to slavery and injustice.

It does not take a genius to understand the corruptive power of money upon the leadership of a society, the current system is of course unsustainable.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mixpiklix
06:52 PM on 09/24/2010
this stuff has to stop. i think it goes like this ,if i can get an aids job and convince the congressman to take some campaign money and a private little golf outing get him laid then i can get a job for a million or more a year ,he,he, i win screw the people.
photo
alterego55
Flash your citations or leave!
07:31 PM on 09/24/2010
If your a female, then I'm people, otherwise not.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ACLU Card Carrier
06:16 PM on 09/24/2010
All staffers on Capitol Hill should be banned for lobbying for at least two years BEFORE and AFTER their time in Government.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
fdeltz
10:23 PM on 09/24/2010
Now here is one of the few times that I have agreed with you. Except you are going too easy. It should be five or more years. In this era of lifetime congressmen, two years is a blink of the eye. Undue influence had not had sufficient time to die in two years. 
photo
azlegalcitizen
INDEPENDENT
03:51 AM on 09/25/2010
HEY do you recall I said the dream act would NOT PASS? In case you haven't heard the news I will let you know now. It didn't pass. Told you so!!!!!
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ACLU Card Carrier
06:15 PM on 09/24/2010
By the way, in case anyone feels the urge to try and paint the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION with the same brush...

President Obama's White House forbids such actions.

Before accepting a Cabinet position.. or any staff position within his Administration, nominees must sign this pledge.
"2. Revolving Door Ban All Appointees Entering Government. I will not for a period of 2 years from the date of my appointment participate in any particular matter involving specific parties that is directly and substantially related to my former employer or former clients, including regulations and contracts.
"3. Revolving Door Ban Lobbyists Entering Government. If I was a registered lobbyist within the 2 years before the date of my appointment, in addition to abiding by the limitations of paragraph 2, I will not for a period of 2 years after the date of my appointment:
(a) participate in any particular matter on which I lobbied within the 2 years before the date of my appointment;
(b) participate in the specific issue area in which that particular matter falls; or
(c) seek or accept employment with any executive agency that I lobbied within the 2 years before the date of my appointment.

Sorry, 'baggers.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
fdeltz
10:21 PM on 09/24/2010
Can you please now list the exceptions to it's own rule the Obama administration made to bring in it's collection of incompetent (and in some cases tax cheats) cabinet officials and appointees? His pledge has not been worth the paper it is written on and you know it.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ACLU Card Carrier
03:10 AM on 09/25/2010
Tell ya what, pookie.. why don't YOU do it?
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
fdeltz
06:47 PM on 09/25/2010
Let me quote you, "By the way, in case anyone feels the urge to try and paint the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION with the same brush...President Obama's White House forbids such actions."



Now, since in your other posts you threw yourself on my mercy and told me you couldn't do your research to back up your statements, let me help show you why you are wrong.
Let us examine the following:


Two Days After Instituting Ethics Rules, President Obama Waives them for Deputy Pentagon Secretary Nominee (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/01/two-days-after.html)


Would you believe, Obama had to issue 17 waivers on his own rule in less than two weeks for allowing lobbyist enter his Administration and control Governance of America! (http://hotair.com/archives/2009/02/02/the-world-has-noticed-the-obama-hypocrisy-on-lobbyists/)


The strongly worded statement by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) followed a call by a government watchdog group for President Barack Obama to stand by his tough new lobbying rules and withdraw Lynn’s nomination to avoid compromising the “effectiveness of the Department of Defense.” (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/17803.html)


So far, though, at least a dozen former lobbyists have found top jobs in his administration, according to an analysis done by Republican sources and corroborated by Politico.
(http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0109/18128.html)


William Corr, tapped as deputy secretary at the Department of Health and Human Services, lobbied that same agency through most of last year as an anti-tobacco advocate, according to public records.
(http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D95SCUQ00&show_article=1)
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/23/william-lynn-obamas-first_n_160512.html)


Now I have beaten you before and I'll beat you again, despite the cursing that you hurl in my direction. So go ahead commence your insults and curses.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ACLU Card Carrier
06:07 PM on 09/24/2010
For those who think that we need "term limits"…. we already have them. They are called ‘elections’. Would you have had preferred a Kennedy (bless him), Kucinich, Feingold, Franken, Grayson, Sanders, Murkowsky and many others be unable to be reelected?
 
I prefer that my choices not be limited by such an arbitrary rule.
 
For those who seek ‘Campaign Finance Reform” and want to end the influence of corporate lobbyists, a bit of a history lesson.
 
It started in 1886.
 
SCOTUS recognized corporations as persons for purposes of the 14th Amendment with "Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad".  This ostensibly allowed them to enjoy the same "rights" as individuals without any of the responsibilities, an intentional misinterpretation inserted into the record by reporter J.C. Bancroft Davis, previous President of Newburgh and New York Railway Co.
 
It's true purpose was to legitimize slavery.  And in a way, it still does, as it renders many to indentured servitude to these corporations.
 
It was exacerbated by language inserted into a decision by Antonin Scalia that equated "money" with "free speech", further cementing the power of the rich and the corporations and their lobby’s.
 
Then, of course, the “Citizens United” debacle.
 
Nothing will change the tenor of our elected government until this is overturned.  No attempts at public election financing will get off the ground, nor will any true reform to clean up our electoral process.
 
If you are truly interested in helping.. here is an organization that can use your participation.
 
http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/personhood/

...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BoshSpong
My micro-bio does not meet HP's guidelines
09:54 PM on 09/24/2010
Can't fan you again, faved, your comments clearly stand on their own.
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
fdeltz
10:17 PM on 09/24/2010
Yes, I would have loved to have had new blood in the game rather than those old turds you mention. Historically, people went to serve in Washington and then returned to private life. Unfortunately those days ended before our fathers were born.



But as usual you misrepresent the historic record. SP Railroad was looking for relief from abusive governments (in California) it's rail passed through that denied SP the right to deduct the amount of their debts (for example mortgages) from the taxable value of their property, a right which was given to individuals. Southern Pacific Railroad Company refused to pay taxes under these new changes. The CA court upheld the taxes (surprise). And then SP appealed to the SC using the Jurisdiction and Removal Act of 1875, a law created so black litigants could bypass hostile southern state courts if they were denied justice! This was a protective law for blacks, not the other way around that you state.
And the decision of quote “people rights” was not part of the decision but rather a precurser called the header agreed to by all the justices. It was not a “ intentional misinterpretation inserted into the record by reporter J.C. Bancroft Davis,” as he confirmed it with the Chief Justice. BTW, he was not just a random reporter as you try to slip in. He was the Supreme Court Reporter, working for the court, not a journalist. The only fact in your post that was not distorted was that he had been a President of another Rail during his career.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ACLU Card Carrier
06:03 PM on 09/24/2010
Now, now people....

Let's NOT paint ALL lobbyists with the same brush..
 
The FIRST AMENDMENT of our BILL of RIGHTS.
 
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
 
PETITION THE GOVERNMENT FOR A REDRESS OF GRIEVANCES
 
That means LOBBY, my friends.....
 
There are lobbyists that have petitioned on behalf of SUFFRAGE for women, CIVIL RIGHTS for African Americans, GAYS & LESBIANS, our ENVIRONMENT, WORKPLACE SAFETY, HEALTHCARE REFORM, CONSUMER PROTECTION, UNIONS.....
 
 
"People for the American Way"..
 
"MoveOn"..
 
"Americans United for the Separation of Church & State"..
 
"The Children's Defense Fund"..
 
"J Street" (anti A.I.P.A.C.)..
 
.... & MYRIAD other causes that had to be FOUGHT for before it became the law.
 
CORPORATE lobby's are NOT the entire picture..
 
Thank GOODNESS!!!!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Eric Sarnoski
09:44 PM on 09/24/2010
some incorrect facts. Workplace safety was created after the great textile fire in NY city where women who were locked in had to jump out of windows to their death to escape the flames in front of a crowd of on lookers....congress was so ashamed of what is happened they passed legislation with 2 weeks ....techincally the newspapers did the lobbying by denouncing the factory owners.
Same thing with child labor laws ......took a few good newspaper pictures of 10 year old kids working in the coal mines and textile mills to shock the nation and demand congress pass laws prohibiting such exploitation.
Unions were recongnized only after factory owners thought they had the right to hire thier own Militia and shoot and kill striking workers. JP Morgan and Dale Carnege owned congress and nobody was lobbying for the unions....they lobbied by dying at the picket lines not wandering the halls of congress.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BoshSpong
My micro-bio does not meet HP's guidelines
10:22 PM on 09/24/2010
Golly gee, Eric, you are nitpicking: its just that some lobbyists are better than others - once the unions brought in the mob to fight back they were able to survive, see they learned their lesson and got "effective lobbyists".
Fanned & Faved
05:50 PM on 09/24/2010
Well now I know what to do with my public policy degree ; )