Bill Overview
Title: CLEAR Doors Act
Description: This act requires a lobbyist who engages in special lobbying activities to file a report on those activities within 48 hours with the Secretary of the Senate and the Clerk of the House of Representatives. Special lobbying occurs when a lobbyist who was employed by an executive branch agency in the past four years engages in lobbying activity with an executive official of that agency.
Sponsors: Rep. O'Halleran, Tom [D-AZ-1]
Target Audience
Population: Lobbyists worldwide
Estimated Size: 5000
- The act targets lobbyists who have previously worked in executive branch agencies and are now engaging in lobbying with current executive officials from the same agencies they were associated with.
- There are approximately 12,000 registered lobbyists in the U.S., many of whom have past government experience, but only a fraction will meet the criteria of having been employed by an executive agency within the last four years and now lobbying that same agency.
- The act impacts these lobbyists by requiring more reporting and transparency around their lobbying activities.
- The bill might indirectly affect government agencies by potentially reducing influence or streamlining the tracking of potential conflicts of interest.
Reasoning
- The key impact of the CLEAR Doors Act is primarily on lobbyists who have transitioned from governmental agency employment to lobbying that same agency. This group forms a small subset of total lobbyists.
- A secondary impact is on the transparency and accountability of lobbying activities, which could indirectly influence other stakeholders such as governmental agencies and legislators by showing more clearly where and how lobbying efforts are focused.
- The budget constraints mean that while the policy can be implemented and monitored, its direct and strong impact is limited to those lobbyists who fall squarely into the subset affected.
- For those directly affected, the potential for reduced influence over policy due to increased transparency might have mixed effects on their well-being, depending on their perspective towards their profession.
- Some policies might indirectly lead to broader changes in lobbying industry structures, but such effects would be less visible in the short term.
Simulated Interviews
Lobbyist (Washington, D.C.)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The CLEAR Doors Act adds some extra paperwork, but isn't too burdensome.
- It aligns with my personal belief in greater transparency in government.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
Tech Company Executive (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 37 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Anything that reduces undue influence of lobbyists is a positive change.
- I hope this leads to more ethical lobbying practices over time.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Public Interest Lawyer (New York, NY)
Age: 50 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a step in the right direction, but more is needed.
- Lobbyists still have too much sway over policies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Former Government Official (Houston, TX)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 9
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I understand the need for transparency but this doesn't impact my current consulting work.
- It's good seeing accountability measures put in place.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 9 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 9 |
Healthcare Lobbyist (Chicago, IL)
Age: 42 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The policy creates a mild increase in workload but it's manageable.
- Could change how some of my colleagues strategize their lobbying efforts.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 7 |
Policy Analyst (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 29 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Interested in seeing data on lobbying transparency.
- The act might set a precedent for future regulations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 5 |
Retired Government Ethics Professor (Boston, MA)
Age: 55 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 3/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Happy to see legislation moving towards more regulation of lobbyists.
- There is still a long way to go in terms of ethics in lobbying.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 8 |
Financial Analyst (Silicon Valley, CA)
Age: 31 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- More data is always better for analysts like me.
- I'm hopeful this will lead to better decision-making processes in companies.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Lobbyist (Tallahassee, FL)
Age: 47 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 2/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This policy means I need to be more cautious about how I document my interactions.
- It's a reminder to keep everything above board.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 6 |
Environmental Policy Researcher (Denver, CO)
Age: 39 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I hope increased lobbyist reporting can lead to better environmental policies.
- This act is a small but positive step towards transparency.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 2: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 3: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 5: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 10: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Year 100: $2000000 (Low: $1500000, High: $2500000)
Key Considerations
- The act is aimed primarily at enhancing transparency and addressing potential conflicts of interest in lobbying processes.
- The administrative and technological adaptations needed to process and verify increased report submissions promptly.
- Potential challenges in defining 'special lobbying' activities accurately and ensuring compliance across varied lobbying scenarios.