If there’s one thing that many Democrats and Republicans can agree on, it’s that they dislike lobbyists. During the Presidential campaign, much of President Trump’s early appeal was due to his derision of lobbyists and campaign donations from corporations. Bernie Sanders based much of his upstart campaign on fighting the influence of lobbyists in politics — he even pushed Clinton to emphasize the issue. Both Sanders and Trump pointed to campaign donations as one of the main reasons lobbyists have had such a significant influence on politics. While this is true, both of these candidates failed to address another reason lobbyists have such an outsize role in our politics: Congress cannot keep hold of experienced staffers.
Year after year congressional staffers stream from the government to K Street, a phenomenon known as “brain drain.” These are the experienced policy experts that help make critical decisions on federal policy, the ones vital to making the government work. This “brain drain” forces congressional offices to rely on lobbyists for policy expertise, lobbyists who have their own interests which may not align with the interests of a congressman’s constituents.
Experienced staffers move to K Street primarily for one reason: money. About 46 percent of staffers were willing to look for a new job within a year because of a “desire to earn more money.” There is no standard pay for staffers because every member of Congress is given a predetermined chunk of money to pay staffers, but some generalizations can be made. The mid-level position of a Legislative Assistant gets paid around $48,000 per year. A 2015 report claimed that you need to make more than $108,000 a year to live comfortably in Washington, DC.
Not only is the pay low, but it keeps going down. The median income for staffers at all levels went down between 2009 and 2013. There’s no reason to think this trend has changed in the last three years. Additionally, the money congressman are given to pay their staff has decreased in the last decade, without accounting for inflation.
Lobbyists have a median income of $106,223. Besides better pay, a lobbying job offers more regular hours, greater benefits and increased job security. For a more experienced congressional staffer that wants to start a family, moving to a lobbying position would be a sensible decision. The current system relies too heavily on people sacrificing a great deal in the name of public service. While we clearly want people who care about public service to work to represent us, people should not have to choose between public service and their livelihood.
Besides the issue of lobbyists, the lack of pay for staffers also creates a socioeconomic issue that should be noted. With entry level positions starting at $30,000 a year there is very little possibility for people without some economic security to take these positions. What’s more, nearly all of these positions require experience as an unpaid intern in Congress. Consequently, Congress is staffed with mostly people who come from the upper-middle class and above. While all these people are very qualified, the lack of diversity helps make Washington less responsive to the views of many Americans.
The idea of paying congressional staffers more is not one many people intuitively support. With “drain the swamp” being the slogan of the day, it’s hard to see many people advocating for more money to be given to those who work in Congress. However, it is impossible to drain the swamp without significantly increasing staffers’ salaries. Congressional staffs are the firewall between lobbyists and a congressman — the less they have to rely on lobbyists, the less congressmen will be influenced by them.
The good news for this problem is it has bipartisan support. House Judiciary Chairman Robert W. Goodlatte, a Republican from Virginia, expressed strong support for giving congressional staffers competitive compensation. Alcee Hastings, a Florida Democrat, also spoke of increasing the pay of staffers last year while other Democrats agreed with his remarks. The political will among established politicians exists, but we are holding them back. People need to educate themselves and voice their support for this sensible change. While we may not get campaign finance reform for a while, there are ways we can limit the influence of lobbyists now.
Bobby Doyle is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at b.doyle@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
WILLIAMS: Big donors are dominating the Board of Visitors
By Ryan Williams | YesterdaySuch appointments being dictated by connections and donations creates a Board composed of big donors instead of members passionate about University goals.
EDITORIAL: Collectives are a misinterpretation of the mission of NIL
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoA large driver of this inequality comes in the form of collectives, the structures many schools use to organize their NIL payments.
CARTER: Data science without sustainability is insufficient
By Nathaniel Carter | 6 days agoThe University appears committed to a future defined by data, but lacks the dedication to meeting this future’s energy needs in a sustainable way.
