Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
The Close the Revolving Door Act of 2025 tightens post‑employment restrictions and transparency for Members, staff, and lobbyists. Key changes include a lifetime ban on former Members lobbying Congress, extended cooling periods for staff and lobbyists, a centralized public lobbyist database (lobbyists.gov), new annual reporting for substantial lobbying firms, and higher civil penalties under the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
Lifetime ban: left approves, center cautious, right opposes strongly
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is drafted with clear statutory amendments for many core elements but contains notable implementation and resourcing gaps.
The Close the Revolving Door Act of 2025 tightens post‑employment restrictions and transparency for Members, staff, and lobbyists.
Key changes include a lifetime ban on former Members lobbying Congress, extended cooling periods for staff and lobbyists, a centralized public lobbyist database (lobbyists.gov), new annual reporting for substantial lobbying firms, and higher civil penalties under the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
Technocratic transparency elements are plausible, but sweeping post-employment bans and career-impacting rules make enactment unlikely without strong bipartisan momentum.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is drafted with clear statutory amendments for many core elements but contains notable implementation and resourcing gaps.
Lifetime ban: left approves, center cautious, right opposes strongly
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Lifetime ban: left approves, center cautious, right opposes strongly
Overall supportive.
Sees this as a substantial step to reduce special‑interest influence, improve transparency, and limit foreign agent access.
May press for strong enforcement and robust funding for the database and oversight.
Cautiously favorable but pragmatic.
Appreciates stricter restrictions and transparency, but worries about overbroad lifetime ban, implementation costs, and potential legal vulnerability.
Prefers measured adjustments, clear definitions, and periodic review.
Generally opposed.
Views lifetime bans and long cooling periods as government overreach that burden free speech and employment mobility.
May accept targeted transparency but seeks narrower limits and stronger protections for petitioning rights.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic transparency elements are plausible, but sweeping post-employment bans and career-impacting rules make enactment unlikely without strong bipartisan momentum.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Lifetime ban: left approves, center cautious, right opposes strongly
Technocratic transparency elements are plausible, but sweeping post-employment bans and career-impacting rules make enactment unlikely with…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive policy change that is drafted with clear statutory amendments for many core elements but contains notable implementation and resourcing gaps.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.