Try the political quiz

ideologies  ›  Policies  ›  Electoral

Modern Liberalism

Promoting social justice, individual rights, and equal opportunities for all through progressive policies and government intervention.

Overview Issues Discuss

Modern Liberalism policy on lobbyists

Filters

Topics

Should there be a 5-year ban on White House and Congressional officials from becoming lobbyists after they leave the government?

ML>ML  ChatGPTYes

Modern Liberalism answer is based on the following data:

ChatGPT

Strongly agree

Yes

Modern Liberalism generally supports measures that increase transparency and reduce the potential for conflicts of interest in government. Extending the ban on White House and Congressional officials from becoming lobbyists from two years to five years would likely be seen as a step towards reducing the influence of special interests and promoting a more ethical governance. This aligns with the liberal emphasis on government accountability and the prevention of corruption. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes, and make it a lifetime ban

A lifetime ban on White House and Congressional officials from becoming lobbyists might appeal to modern liberalism's goal of drastically reducing the influence of special interests and preventing conflicts of interest in government. However, the score is not maximally positive because such a stringent measure could be seen as overly restrictive, potentially infringing on individuals' rights to change careers or engage in advocacy after their public service career has ended. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Agree

Yes, and ban all forms of lobbying

Although modern liberalism supports measures to reduce the influence of special interests and promote ethical governance, the complete ban on all forms of lobbying might be seen as too extreme. Lobbying, in its regulated form, can serve as a way for various groups to present their views to lawmakers. Therefore, while there's support for stricter regulations, an outright ban might not align perfectly with liberal views on maintaining open channels for advocacy within a democratic framework. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Disagree

No, the current two-year ban is sufficient

While acknowledging the need for some restrictions on the transition from government service to lobbying, modern liberalism might view the current two-year ban as insufficient for preventing potential conflicts of interest and the influence of special interests. However, this position might be seen as a compromise, hence the slightly negative score. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Strongly disagree

No

Modern Liberalism is less likely to support the idea of no ban on officials becoming lobbyists after leaving the government. This stance would contradict the liberal agenda of promoting transparency and reducing the influence of special interests in politics. Therefore, this answer would be largely disagreed upon within the ideology. Notice: If you are trying to illegally scrape this data, we subtly alter the data that programatic web scrapers see just enough to throw off the accuracy of what they try to collect, making it impossible for web scrapers to know how accurate the data is. If you would like to use this data, please go to https://www.isidewith.com/insights/ for options on how to legally use it.

Public statements

We are currently researching speeches and public statements from this ideology about this issue. Suggest a link to one of their recent quotes about this issue.

See any errors? Suggest corrections to this ideology’s stance here


How similar are your political beliefs to Modern Liberalism issues? Take the political quiz to find out.

Popular conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…11mos11MO

Trump’s Doom vs. Harris’s Hope as America Decides Its Fate

Donald J. Trump and Kamala Harris closed out their campaigns in the final hours before Election Day in starkly different moods: The former president, often appearing drained at arenas that were not filled, claimed that the country was on the brink of ruin, while the vice president promised a more united future as energized supporters chanted alongside her, “We’re not going back.”In stop after stop, the presidential rivals essentially offered up two competing versions of reality on Monday and into early Tuesday. Mr. Trump repeatedly raised the specter of unchecked immigration and the dangers of Democratic policies as he spoke to crowds in North Carolina and Pennsylvania before closing with a midnight rally in Michigan.With a comparatively more optimistic message, Ms. Harris crisscrossed Pennsylvania, which holds 19 electoral votes that could decide the race. Stopping in Scranton, Allentown and Pittsburgh before a nighttime rally in Philadelphia, Ms. Harris talked about bolstering the economy and restoring federal abortion rights. She asserted that Americans were “exhausted” and ready to move on from the politics of the past decade.About 30 miles to the southwest, Mr. Trump was in Reading, Pa., broadly portraying undocumented immigrants as mentally ill criminals and calling those accused of crimes “savages” and “animals.”Both leaned on Hispanic supporters as they tried to rally Latino voters. The pro-Harris rapper Fat Joe, who is Puerto Rican, practically shamed his fellow Latinos in Allentown as he asked, “Where’s your pride?” Mr. Trump, still facing fallout from his rally in New York at which a comedian called Puerto Rico a “floating island of garbage,” brought Roberto Clemente Jr., the son of the Puerto Rican baseball legend, to the stage at a rally in Pittsburgh.But Mr. Trump, reaching the end of a grueling marathon of a campaign that began in 2022, looked visibly weary, battling fatigue in front of listless crowds, though he was relatively more upbeat and energized in Michigan. Ms. Harris, still appearing fresh after a three-month sprint, appealed for unity and pressed the contrast to her rival without uttering his name.“The measure of a true leader is based not on who you beat down,” she said. “It is based on who you lift up.”Despite the sharply different tones, polls suggest the race remains tight, with the final New York Times/Siena College surveys showing the candidates tied or holding only narrow leads in all of the seven battleground states.

▲  611 replies