What This Bill Does
This bill would amend federal criminal law to bar former Members of Congress and elected congressional officers from lobbying Congress after they leave office. It targets people who have served in Congress or as elected officers of Congress and would impose a permanent restriction on lobbying activity directed at lawmakers. The measure is aimed at reducing the revolving door between public office and paid influence work. It has been introduced in the House and sent to the Judiciary Committee for consideration.
- Bars former Members of Congress from lobbying Congress after leaving office.
- Applies to elected officers of Congress as well as former Members.
- Amends title 18 of the U.S. Code, making the restriction part of federal criminal law.
- Would create a permanent post-service lobbying ban rather than a temporary cooling-off period.
Who This Bill Affects
For the general public, this bill would mainly affect how former members of Congress and elected congressional officers can earn a living after leaving office. It would not create a direct benefit payment or tax change for most people, but it could reduce the influence of ex-lawmakers in shaping federal policy through paid lobbying. If you are not a former Member or elected congressional officer, the bill would not change your day-to-day rights or obligations directly.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisWho Supports & Opposes This
- Government ethics advocates They argue that a lifetime ban would reduce conflicts of interest and the perception that lawmakers can trade on public office for private gain. They see it as a strong deterrent against influence peddling and a way to restore public confidence in Congress.
- Taxpayers and anti-corruption voters They want stricter rules that separate public service from later lobbying work. Supporters in this group believe former lawmakers should not be able to use insider access to shape legislation for paying clients.
- Public-interest organizations These groups often favor tougher revolving-door restrictions because they believe policy should be driven by constituents and evidence, not by former insiders with privileged access. They argue the bill could make congressional decision-making more transparent and less susceptible to hidden pressure.
- Former lawmakers and congressional staffers entering the private sector They may argue that a lifetime ban is overly punitive and limits legitimate post-government employment. From this perspective, former officials should be able to use their expertise to advocate for clients, so long as they follow disclosure and ethics rules.
- Lobbying firms and government-relations professionals They may contend that the bill would remove experienced advocates who understand how Congress works and can help organizations navigate complex legislation. They could also argue that existing ethics and disclosure laws already address the biggest abuse risks.
- Trade associations, nonprofits, and state or local interests that hire former lawmakers These groups may worry that losing access to former Members would make it harder to communicate technical policy concerns to Congress. They may prefer narrower cooling-off periods rather than a permanent ban that could reduce effective advocacy.
Key Implications
-
““prohibit former Members and elected officers of Congress from lobbying Congress at any time after leaving office””
This is the central restriction: once a covered person leaves office, they would be permanently barred from lobbying Congress. In practice, that would cut off a common post-service career path for former lawmakers and congressional leaders.
-
““amend title 18, United States Code””
Placing the rule in federal criminal law gives it stronger legal force than a simple ethics guideline. That means violations could carry legal consequences, not just congressional discipline or reputational harm.
-
““after leaving office””
The ban would apply only once the person is no longer serving, so it does not stop sitting Members or officers from doing their jobs. The real effect is on future employment and advocacy opportunities after public service ends.
-
““lobbying Congress””
The restriction is aimed at direct influence on the legislative branch. That could affect meetings, calls, and other advocacy directed at lawmakers or congressional offices, while leaving other kinds of work less clearly affected depending on how the law is enforced.
Latest Status
June 3, 2026
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.