When Former Lobbyists Attack

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


You know, it would be nice if this sort of thing was shocking rather than routine:

A White House official who once led the oil industry’s fight against limits on greenhouse gases has repeatedly edited government climate reports in ways that play down links between such emissions and global warming, according to internal documents.

My oh my. Whoever could’ve done such a thing?

Mr. Cooney is chief of staff for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the office that helps devise and promote administration policies on environmental issues.

Before going to the White House in 2001, he was the “climate team leader” and a lobbyist at the American Petroleum Institute, the largest trade group representing the interests of the oil industry. A lawyer with a bachelor’s degree in economics, he has no scientific training.

Yep. Shocked, just shocked. Actually, though, this brings up an important point related to Elizabeth Drew’s latest piece on Congressional corruption. One major “revolving door” problem in Congress is that representatives and senators often leave their positions as elected officials and find lobbying spots or other lucrative positions around Washington. Sometimes this leads to rather blatant conflicts of interest, as when former Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-LA) left his spot as chairman of the House pharmaceutical oversight committee to go… become the president and CEO of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. How this might’ve affected the drafting of the 2003 Medicare bill that Tauzin co-sponsored—a bill replete with pharmaceutical giveaways—well, I’ll leave that to the imagination. But the revolving door revolves both ways; as with Mr. Cooney, industry lobbyists coming into government can pose just as great a problem. Surprisingly, the Office of Government Ethics’ rules and guidelines on conflicts of interest don’t cover this situation. Here’s the OGE’s summary of the relevant statute:

Specifically, this law says that you may not work on an assignment that you know will affect your own financial interests or the financial interests of your spouse or your minor child. The prohibition also applies if you know the assignment will affect the financial interests of your general partner, or of an organization that you serve as an officer, director, employee, general partner, or trustee. And it even applies when you know the matter will affect the financial interests of someone with whom you have an arrangement for employment, or with whom you are negotiating for employment.

In other words, former lobbyists can waltz into government and oversee the industries they used to represent. They just can’t have any direct financial stakes in the matter. Wink, wink, nudge, nudge. Looks like a loophole in need of a bit of attention, no?

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate