Airline pilots do have to go through security every time they enter the airport (note the weasel-comment from the lobbyist was "every time they de-plane").

so, yeah. Lobbyists should have to have their tighty whiteys searched every time.

Why not let John McCain decide whether or not to grant a special access provision to lobbyists?

A lobbyist is nothing more than a citizen seeking legislative action. Perhaps it's on a broader basis than the average individual who seeks legislative action, but it's no more or less important. Therefore, they should be treated in the same way as any other citizens and be required to follow the exact same security processes as anyone else.

No one is *forcing* lobbyists to do business, or to to it on the premises and in person. They could just fax, phone, or email in their deathless prose and essential knowledge (heh heh). Mr. Bryer evidently has confused himself with those we elect and the ones they appoint or hire as somehow exempt from the trials and tribulations of ordinary citizens. I'm shocked, shocked, Rick.

Friskem, Danno...

Chuck, pilots and crew may have to go through security before they board a plane, but (at least at the airports I've seen) they don't have to stand in line with the passengers. I suspect that's exactly what the lobbyists want.

That said, I agree that the comparison between lobbyists and pilots is inapt, and that lobbyists enjoy enough special access without adopting a measure that makes it seem as if they actually run the place.

Bryers' analogy is flawed. Lobbyists are not 'pilot and crew', they are 'frequent flyers'. They are private citizens who just happen to go to the Capitol alot.

People go to work in a particular building every day, and they still have to go through security--even though security gets to know them after a while. Why should it be any different for lobbyists that go through Capitol Hill?

I've waited in security lines with pilots and other flight crew a number of times since September (and possibly before, but like everybody else, I wasn't paying that much attention back then). The aircrews are seeing the same security checks as everybody else--in fact, it's often worse for them, since the airlines have ordered them not to complain when they're harassed by the burger-flippers in "security".

By Mr. Bryer's logic, then, he should have to wait in line with the rest of us plebes. Deal with it.

Why should lobbyists get quicker review than federal judges?

Hell, I think the *Legislators* should go through the same security as everyone else. There should be no special access at all to anyone.

Here's one ammendment I would love to see in the Constitution: "No legislative body can enact legislation, nor any goverment agency create rules, which exempt themselves from laws and rules intended for the general public."

Have to disagree with Mr. Cooper a bit. It depends on what airport, what airline, and what time of day, but at most of the smaller airports I fly to/from the flight crews stand in the same lines with the passengers. A couple of weeks ago in Escanaba Michigan the pilot and I were both "selected" to strip down to our underwear (well, not quite, but close) and he and his belongings were searched exactly the same as mine.

I think the real issues is as Mr. Reynolds describes - lobbyists really have come to believe that having purchased Congress it truely belongs to them. The rabble of citizenry and 8th graders on their "DC trip" can be dammed.

sPh

Nice zing, Glenn. Lobbyists, the real pilots of the ship of state. Look what happens when you get too many hands on the tiller.

I think they're going to have to wait in line. Wouldn't do for Congress to have the appearance of pandering to special interests, in this day of corporate/government shenanigans, would it?

"Lobbyist"? Isn't the preferred term "Legislative Consultant"?

Jack Bell's idea is certainly worthy. But there's essentially no political will in Washington for doing unto the "servants of the people" as they do unto "the people." Indeed, one might surmise that the reason politicians seek power is so that they can be on the giving end of the relationship.

I'd add my two cents, but it looks like everything that could have been said, has been said.

Oh, wait, I know: "Ditto!"

;-)

Meryl: Spare me, please.

Hell -- since security screeners aren't allowed to profile for real terrorists, just tell the screeners that they need to profile for guys in $1,000 suits carrying $500 briefcases and corporate credit cards.

Government might work better for the people if lobbyists were excluded from the building entirely.

Not only should lobbyists have to go tthrough security so should congressional staffers and even the members of congress themselves. There is no reason they should be treated differently than anyone else. Having once worked on Capitol Hill, I've seen how everyone kowtows to the Congressmen and it is not healthy.

Come to think of it (apropos Barry), government might serve the people better if members of Congress were excluded from the building altogether.

Goes right along with my preferred constitutional amendment: "Congress shall make no law."

I agree with the following -
=============
Here's one ammendment I would love to see in the Constitution: "No legislative body can enact legislation, nor any goverment agency create rules, which exempt themselves from laws and rules intended for the general public."

Posted by Jack William Bell at August 6, 2002
==============
Yeah, like various employment and OSHA and EPA stuff they deliberately exempted themselves from. Did you know that the natural radiation from all that granite and marble is higher than allowed for nuclear plants?

I'd like to add that all laws except those about treason and murder have a sunset clause, requiring re-enactment every ten years. A Massachusetts law allowing Rhode Islanders to be shot on sight has been superceded, but never repealed. And it would keep our Congresscritters too busy to get into as much mischief as they do.

Here's a good description of what pilots go through in relation to security from the AVWeb site (a great aviation site in any event): http://www.avweb.com/articles/ceo/ceo0009.html

Lobbyists as pilots. Wonder how long it would take them to figure out that the laws of physics can't be changed by a backroom, "bad bill/good bill" sneak attack. One flight, or 1/2?

sPh