A conversation with lobbyists, part 1 of 2

A couple of years ago, I attended a meeting between a company (Company A, now defunct) with a potential new product and lobbyists. President Obama had been in office a few months and Republican opposition was coalescing and hardening. The lobbyists were Democrats, Republicans and included a former member of congress who was fairly powerful in the House. The lobbyists were well-connected and knew how government works. They were also familiar with the federal program behind the development of the types of products that Company A had developed to near completion.

Company A's product had civilian and military applications. The technical problems were identified and solved. The product was effective at what it did and had no real competition. Congress had budgeted money for purchase of a several products for this problem. But other than this product, none were in advanced development.

During development of the product, the government told Company A their product would be purchased as it was the only thing that worked for its use. The need for the product was urgent. However, instead of buying the product, the government changed its mind and rejected the product as a failure. The reasons the government gave for changing its mind didn't make any sense to Company A. The science behind the product contradicted the reasons given for the failure.

The millions of dollars Company A spent to develop its product were wasted. Final development of the product was stopped. Company A later went bankrupt.

What happened?

Being cautious people, the lobbyists would only intimate about what happened. I suspected that they knew exactly what happened. They may even have been involved in view of their detailed knowledge. What happened was that there was another company (Company B) who was pursuing another but not directly competing product in the same federal program. Company B had been awarded a purchase contract for hundreds of millions of dollars provided they could finish the technical development of their product and deploy it.

Then, Company B got a great idea. They hired lobbyists and backed them with campaign contributions. Company B decided to use their lobbyists to try to prevent any of the money that congress had appropriated from going to any other company or product in the program. They succeeded. Company A with the product that worked was rejected. Company B ultimately could not solve its technical problems. Its product failed. The government had to cancel Company B's contract.

It depends on context

What happened made sense in the context of how the federal government works. In the context of service in the public interest, it made no sense. Lobbyists working quietly behind the scenes can and do kill good ideas in favor of second best or even fatally flawed ideas. They do that in service of whoever employs them, not in service of the public interest. The lobbyists don't care if what they advocate for is good, bad or indifferent to the public interest. Its just business. Business is amoral.

Whose side do you think federal agencies, people in congress and lobbyists are on? Yours or theirs?

Part 2 - How to coerce congress (legally)