> You can't blame the lobbyists' lawyers for trying to enforce a provision that their clients successfully negotiated.
I'm not so sure. By the same logic, one could argue that the lobbyists deserve no blame either, because they were just doing what their clients paid them to do; nor could one blame the business executives who hired the lobbying firm in the first place, because the fiduciary obligation of those executives is to maximize their companies' profits; and so on.
At some point, by reductio ad absurdum, this chain of "we did exactly what we were hired to do" excuses must break down, no? Doesn't the buck stop somewhere?
Or is this a systemic cultural problem where blame is so diffuse that no one can be held reponsible -- i.e., everyone is to blame, therefore no one can be blamed?
I'm not so sure. By the same logic, one could argue that the lobbyists deserve no blame either, because they were just doing what their clients paid them to do; nor could one blame the business executives who hired the lobbying firm in the first place, because the fiduciary obligation of those executives is to maximize their companies' profits; and so on.
At some point, by reductio ad absurdum, this chain of "we did exactly what we were hired to do" excuses must break down, no? Doesn't the buck stop somewhere?
Or is this a systemic cultural problem where blame is so diffuse that no one can be held reponsible -- i.e., everyone is to blame, therefore no one can be blamed?