I think the reason it was allowed in the first place was so that experts in their fields could argue pros and cons of bills associated with their field(s) of expertise. Then businesses started paying wolves in sheeps' clothing to go to Congress to present pros/cons for their best interests. Anyway you go about it, this is something that will be needed in some way or form and will always be sought out to corrupt, since elected officials can't be experts in everything.

Not entirely sure what a good resolution for this problem is, other than make a law to make it illegal to misrepresent science/data/logic for the sole purpose of benefitting somebody paying/gifting/bribing you, and then actually enforce that law. Hate being a defeatist about it, but I don't think that'll ever happen in my lifetime since that's what politicians do in a regular basis. They aren't supposed to take bribes, but they do, and there are never penalties for them doing so.

[–] TheBeege@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago

Makes sense, and I agree on it being difficult to prevent corruption.

Maybe we do something similar to the court system? But that means that lobbyists would need to discuss things as part of a specific event rather than ad hoc, but I think that's a good thing. Make lying the crime of perjury. Require individuals to prove their expertise on the matter. Might make things even slower, though... hrm...