There is a good article on the Atlantic website about how it has become acceptable for connected people to become directors because they have access to power due to their names or former positions. The article gives an example of Hunter Biden becoming director of a Ukranian company despite no relevant experience. This article is not partisan, but focuses on how it has become acceptable to give advice and sell access to dubious regimes. This is nothing new, of course. I took a recent course on Corporate Governance which talked a little about these issues. The article implied these actions had become much more popular and ethically acceptable than in the past. But it probably is not new that Coke might theoretically be interested in hiring an executive from Pepsi since they have relevant experience. “Trade secrets” are protected by law, and possibly to some degree in practice.
Got me thinking.
-
Is it true that an ex-official monetizing their connections is relatively new, or was once looked down upon?
-
Should there be a time limit on when officials can work for others or other limits on using connections?
-
What are the rules for retired judges? This was something recently criticized in Canada since several retired Supreme Court judges were (very peripherally) involved in the SNC-Lavalin affair. What standards might apply to a retired ranking soldier or retired police officer?
-
Can the lobby system be meaningfully reformed? Is this needed? In my course, it claimed that in the US lobbyists were rare before Reagan. But although the number of registered lobbyists may have increased, having friends in high places has probably always been important?