GOVERNMENT REFORM
Lobbying Restrictions & Former Presidents
A Survey of American Voters
December 2017
Methodology
Online Probability-Based Panel provided by
Nielsen Scarborough
Fielded: September 7 - October 3, 2017
Total Sample: 2,482 registered voters
Margin of Error: 2.0%
Lobbying Restrictions
LOBBYINGCONGRESS
BecauseformerMembersofCongressandExecutiveBranchofficials(suchas
thoseintheDepartmentofDefenseortheUSTreasury)areveryfamiliarwith
howgovernmentworksandhavestrongpersonalconnectionsthroughout
government,theycanoftenworkaslobbyistsaftertheyleaveoffice.Currently,
therearesomelimitsonhowsoonaformergovernmentofficialcanlobbythe
governmentafterleavingoffice.
AsetofproposedbillsinCongressextendstheperiodformerMembersof
CongressandExecutiveBranchofficialsmustwaitaftertheyleaveoffice
beforetheycanworkaslobbyists.
Undercurrentlaw,beforetheycanlobbyCongress:
• formerHousemembersmustwaitoneyear
• formerSenatorsmustwaittwoyears
• seniorCongressionalstaffersinbothhousesmustwaitoneyear
Inaddition,seniorExecutiveBranchofficialsareprohibitedfromlobbyingthe
agencytheywerepartoffor1‐2years,dependingonhowseniortheywere.
MembersofCongressandseniorstaffwhohaverecently
lefthaveuniquepersonalrelationships,accessand
insiderknowledge,sothespecialintereststhathirethem
getanunfairadvantageinworkingthesystem.Itisfine
forspecialintereststocommunicatetheirviewsto
Congressandtheadministration,justlikeregular
citizens,buttheyshouldnotbeabletobuygreater
influencebyhiringwhatareessentiallysuper‐lobbyists.
ArgumentinFavor:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
51
57
52
59
59
58
28
31
31
28
28
28
80
88
83
86
87
86
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
VeryConvincing SomewhatConvincing
Congressional Districts
ArgumentinFavor:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
Tellingformerofficialstheycannotlobbyinfavorofa
causetheybelieveinviolatestheirFirstAmendment
rightstofreedomofspeech.Theyshouldhavetheright
tospeakwithcurrentgovernmentofficialsandshare
theirviewsorexpertisethatshedslightonvarious
policyoptionsThisrulealsolimitsthefreedomof
expressionforpeoplewhowanttohireaformerofficial
tohelpgettheirvoiceheardingovernment.Weshould
enhancethepeople’sabilitytopetitiontheir
government,notputgreaterlimitsonit.
ArgumentAgainst:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
13
9
8
11
8
9
23
28
26
22
25
24
36
37
34
33
33
33
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
VeryConvincing
SomewhatConvincing
Congressional Districts
ArgumentAgainst:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
Workingforthegovernmentshouldbesomethingthat
peopledoaspublicservice,notasasteppingstonefor
gettingahigh‐payingjob.Itisalsonotrightthatpeople
whohavejustcomeoutofgovernmentgetanunfair
advantageoverothers.Furthermore,whenpeoplein
governmentareenticedbyhigh‐payinglobbyingjobsit
createsconstantturnoverandanongoingbraindrain.
ArgumentinFavor:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
51
48
49
53
52
52
32
37
30
31
33
32
83
85
79
84
86
84
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
VeryConvincing
SomewhatConvincing
Congressional Districts
ArgumentinFavor:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
Whatifaformergovernmentofficialwantstolobbyin
supportoflegislationtohelppoorchildrenortoseeka
cureforcancer?Theymaybeuniquelyknowledgeable
orpassionateaboutaparticularissue.Shouldtheybe
prohibitedfromhelpingfurthergoodcauses?
Knowingtheywouldbeprohibitedfromthiskindof
advocacy,perhapsindefinitely,couldalsohaveachilling
effectontalentedpeopleservingingovernmentinthe
firstplace.
ArgumentAgainst:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
17
12
12
12
11
11
27
27
28
33
27
30
44
39
40
45
38
41
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
VeryConvincing
SomewhatConvincing
Congressional Districts
ArgumentAgainst:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
Whenpeoplewhoworkingovernmentarethinking
aboutleavinggovernmentorareconcernedtheymight
bevotedoutofoffice,theysometimesstartthinking
aboutthepossibilityofbecomingalobbyistbecauseit
canpayverywell.
Thiscanleadthemtousetheirremainingtimeinoffice
todothingsbeneficialtotheintereststhatmighthire
theminthefuture.Byremovingtheallureofhigh‐
payinglobbyingjobsshortlyafter,governmentofficials
willnotbetemptedtodofavorsforfutureemployers.
ArgumentinFavor:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
50
55
53
51
57
54
34
32
29
34
33
33
83
87
82
85
90
86
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
VeryConvincing
SomewhatConvincing
Congressional Districts
ArgumentinFavor:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
Workingforthegovernmentisrisky.Anelectedofficial
maybevotedoutofoffice,or,inthecaseofastaffer,
theelectedofficialtheyworkformaybevotedout.
Thereisnothingwrongwithformergovernmentofficials
havinglobbyingasafallbackcareeroption.Ifwecutoff
thisoption,itwilldiscouragepeoplefromgoinginto
governmentforfeartheymayendupwithhighlylimited
careeroptions.
ArgumentAgainst:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
10
6
6
9
7
8
16
21
20
19
18
19
26
26
26
28
25
26
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Very
Convincing
Somewhat
Convincing
Congressional Districts
ArgumentAgainst:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
18
18
17
16
12
14
13
11
10
15
11
13
69
71
72
69
77
73
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Unacce
p
table
Tolerable
Acceptable
Congressional Districts
Howacceptableitwouldbetoyoutoextendtheperiodformermembersof
congressmustwaitbeforeworkingasalobbyistfrom1‐3yearstofiveyears?
Assessment:ExtendingWaitingPeriodfor
MembersofCongressto5Years
42
35
33
37
34
35
18
18
17
18
15
16
40
47
50
45
52
49
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Unacceptable Tolerable Acceptable
Congressional Districts
Howacceptableitwouldbeforyoutogofurtherandprohibitformer
MembersofCongressfromworkingasalobbyistfortherestoftheirlife?
Assessment:LifetimeBanonLobbyingCongress
46
49
46
49
47
48
26
28
33
24
33
29
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
5‐YearWait
Life
Congressional Districts
79
Whichwouldyourecommendthemostwhenitcomestoformer
MembersofCongressworkingasalobbyist:
FinalRecommendation:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodBeforeLobbyingCongress
5years+
77
80
73
77
72
19
18
20
16
14
16
17
12
13
16
13
14
64
70
66
68
73
70
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Unacceptable Tolerable Acceptable
Congressional Districts
ExtendingtheperiodaseniorCongressionalstafferwouldhavetowait
beforeworkingasalobbyistfromthecurrentoneyeartotwoyears.
Assessment:ExtendingWaitingPeriod
forSeniorCongressionalStaffers
72
75
78
74
79
77
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Congressional Districts
Extendingthewaitingperiodbeforelobbyingfromonetotwoyears
Favor
FinalRecommendation:
ExtendingWaitingPeriodforSeniorCongressionalStaffers
17
17
19
13
13
14
12
11
7
15
9
11
72
72
74
72
78
75
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Unacce
p
table
Tolerable Acceptable
Congressional Districts
Howacceptableitwouldbetoyoutoextendtheperiodasenior
ExecutiveBranchofficialwouldhavetowaitbeforelobbyingthe
agencytheyworkedforfrom1‐2yearstofiveyears?
Assessment:ExtendingWaitingPeriod
forExecutiveBranchOfficials
Whichwouldyourecommendthemostwhenitcomestosenior
ExecutiveBranchofficialslobbyingtheagencytheyworkedfor?
Adoptingtheproposaltoextendthewaitingperiodbeforelobbyingto
fiveyears forallseniorExecutiveBranchofficials
Recommendation:ExtendingWaitingPeriod
forExecutiveBranchOfficials
73
74
77
71
77
75
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Congressional Districts
Favor
LOBBYINGFOREIGNGOVERNMENTS
AnotherdebateisaboutformerseniorExecutiveBranchofficials
lobbyingonbehalfofaforeigngovernment.
Hereisthecurrentsituation:
• Americanscanactaslobbyistsforforeigngovernments,provided
theyregisterandreporttheiractivitiestotheUSgovernment.
• FormerseniorExecutiveBranchofficialsareprohibitedfrom
lobbyingtheirformeragencyfor1‐2yearsaftertheyleaveoffice,
whetherforaforeignordomesticclient,butfacenorestrictions
afterthattimeperiod.
• TheTrumpadministrationhasrequiredthattobepartofthe
currentadministrationExecutiveBranchofficialsmustpledge
nevertolobbyforaforeigngovernmentaftertheyleaveoffice,
butnolawprohibitsthemfromdoingsoandthiswouldnot
necessarilyapplytofutureadministrations.
ThereisaproposedbillinCongressthatwouldprohibitformersenior
ExecutiveBranchofficialsfromanylobbyingonbehalfofaforeign
governmentfortherestoftheirlife.
Foreigngovernmentsshouldnotbeallowedtohire
formerseniorExecutiveBranchofficialswhohave
uniqueknowledge,connectionsandinfluenceto
advancetheinterestsoftheforeignpower.Those
foreignentitiesmayhaveintereststhatareatoddswith
theinterestsoftheUSgovernmentandtheyshouldnot
haveinsideaccess.
ArgumentinFavor:
FormerExecutiveBranchOfficials
LobbyingForeignGovernments
55
61
62
59
68
63
28
27
23
28
21
25
82
88
84
87
91
88
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
VeryConvincing SomewhatConvincing
Congressional Districts
ArgumentinFavor:FormerExecutiveBranchOfficials
LobbyingForeignGovernments
Singlingoutandpermanentlyprohibitingformersenior
ExecutiveBranchofficialsfromlobbyingforforeign
governmentsisdiscriminatoryandviolatesthe
principlesoffreespeech.Itwon’tprotectagainsta
foreigngovernment’sbadintentionsbecauseitcan
alwayshireanotherlobbyist.Anditisalsonot
necessary:orgovernmentisnotgoingtodosomething
thatiscontrarytoourinterestsbecauseaformer
ExecutiveBranchofficialmakesacase.
ArgumentAgainst:
FormerExecutiveBranchOfficials
LobbyingForeignGovernments
10
8
8
10
5
8
24
25
23
27
20
24
34
33
31
3
…
25
31
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Very
Convincing
Somewhat
Convincing
Congressional Districts
ArgumentAgainst:FormerExecutiveBranchOfficials
LobbyingForeignGovernments
37
25
18
18
21
13
17
17
12
13
15
9
12
58
69
69
64
79
71
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Unacce
p
table
Tolerable
Acceptable
Congressional Districts
HowacceptablewoulditbetoyouifformerseniorExecutiveBranch
officialswereprohibitedfromanylobbyingonbehalfofaforeign
government,fortherestoftheirlife?
Assessment:FormerExecutiveBranchOfficials
LobbyingForeignGovernments
SowouldyourecommendyouMemberofCongressvoteinfavorof
oragainstaproposaltoprohibitformerseniorExecutiveBranch
officialsfromlobbyingonbehalfofaforeigngovernment,forthe
restoftheirlife?
67
73
73
70
81
75
31
26
25
29
18
24
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
Favor
Oppose
Congressional Districts
Recommendation:FormerExecutiveBranchOfficials
LobbyingForeignGovernments
Former Presidents
Methodology
Online Probability-Based Panel provided by
Nielsen Scarborough
Fielded: September 22 - October 17, 2017
Total Sample: 2,589 registered voters
Margin of Error: 1.9%
AnotherbillinCongressseekstoeliminatethefinancialsupport
thatUSPresidentsgetaftertheyleaveoffice.
Asyoumayknow,undercurrentlawgoingbacksomedecades,
whenUSpresidentsleaveoffice,theyaregivenfinancialsupport
tocovertheongoingcostsassociatedwiththeactivitiesofbeing
aformerpresident,suchaspublicspeakingandconsultingwith
currentgovernmentofficials.Thesecostsincludehavingan
office,havingastaff,andtravel.In2017,thegovernmentwill
spendatotalofabout$4millionforthispurposeinsupportof
thefourlivingformerpresidents.
Currently,thereisaproposedbillinCongressthatwould
eliminatethissupportforformerpresidents’officespace,staff
andtravel.ItwouldnotaffectsupportforSecretService
protectionorthepresident’spension.
ItnolongermakessensetospendUStaxpayerfundsonformer
presidents’officespace,staffandtravel.Whilefinancialsupport
forformerpresidentsmighthavebeenappropriateinthepast,in
themodernera,formerpresidentscanearnverylargefees—
millionsofdollars—frompublicspeakingandbookdeals.
Furthermore,someoftheactivitiesofformerpresidentsinvolve
politics,suchassupportingacandidate.Itmakessenseto
continuetoprovidethemSecretServiceprotectionaswellas
theirpensions—whichareover$200,000—butitnolongermakes
sensetospendUStaxpayerfundsonmorethanthat.
ArgumentinFavor:
FormerPresidents
ArgumentinFavor:FormerPresidents
51
62
100
58
47
68
57
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
27
26
Congressional Districts
82
90
78
77
78
88
VeryConvincing SomewhatConvincing
20
23
30
25
20
Therearesubstantialexpensesassociatedwithfulfillingtherole
thatAmericansexpectoftheirformerpresidents—advising
currentofficials,representingtheUSabroadinkeydiplomatic
events,andevennegotiatingwithforeigngovernments.Theyalso
receiveatremendousamountofmailthattheymustanswer.Itis
inthenation’sinterestforformerpresidentstocontinueto
performthesevitalfunctions,anditisunfairtomakethempay
fortheassociatedcostsoutoftheirpersonalfunds.Itisalso
inappropriatetoexpectthemtofinancetheseimportant
diplomaticandsymbolicfunctionsbysolicitingbookdealsor
speakingfees.Wemustmaintainthedignityofthepresidency.
ArgumentAgainst:
FormerPresidents
21
10
14
22
8
15
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
26
24
Congressional Districts
42
32
38
53
49
39
ArgumentAgainst:FormerPresidents
VeryConvincing SomewhatConvincing
20
2331
29
24
27
28
Assessment:FormerPresidents
So,again,theproposalistoeliminatesupportforformer
presidents’officespace,staffandtravel.Itwouldnotaffect
supportforSecretServiceprotectionorthepresidents’pension.
Pleaseselecthowacceptablethisproposalwouldbetoyou.
28
19
22
30
13
22
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
69
57
6
74
61
Unacceptable
Tolerable
5
Acceptable
82
13
67
11
11
10
Congressional Districts
FinalRecommendation:FormerPresidents
WouldyourecommendthatyourMemberofCongress
voteinfavororagainstthisproposal?
61
77
71
60
85
72
VeryBlue
VeryRed
Independents
Dems
GOP
National
26
22
Congressional Districts
15
27
Favor
Against
38
28
39