Valid. Good point on the consumer choice vs. forced tax. That person does still know how shit works in government, and their experience is something they worked for and is a valuable skill. Why deny that valuable skill from being used by some American people? Seems a bit harsh, especially when the people who know how the system works are no longer able to help Americans get the most from their own government.
Everyone complains about "lobbyists" and "special interests." What are we all but our own special interest? Some of us want free gun laws. So, we all gather together, and start a National Rifle Association, and say, hey, here's a pool of our money - can you help us, as a group, get more out of our Congress than we think we can as an individual? Oh, and by the way, make sure you only hire people who have no idea how shit works there.
Or if a group of people says, "We want electric cars! No more gasoline. It makes me cough!" and get together and start a "Gasoline Stoppers" group, and everyone sends in $100/year to hire someone who can talk to lawmakers for them about the cool shit electric cars can do, and how they can make legislation work to increase electric car usage - (tax breaks for electric car purchasing, subsidizing refueling stations, grants for battery research, even higher taxes on gasoline.) If I want to be effective in getting my idea of a better America with all electric cars, shouldn't I be able to hire a person who knows the system, knows the people, and can make the phone calls and get office appointments that I, as a regular Joe with a regular job, an average white surburbanite slob, cannot do with my $100/year donation? You think I have a better shot at my electric car future by sending my Congressman $100 campaign donation a year, or joining with 10,000 other people who pool our $100/year to get better access?
(I'm not arguing the GOOD of our system - I'm arguing that limiting the American people's choices on who they can hire is unAmerican. That we have to hire a person to listen to us, because our Congressman won't is a whole other story and another argument that I'd prefer not to get into. Let's just assume that the system is static, and focus on this point. I'd be happy to get into the "our system sucks" discussion if you wish, but let's finish this one first!)
I agree with you in cases of private businesses doing the same, but this is the federal government we're talking about.
The job they retire or are fired from involves the collection end expenditure of tax dollars. The creation of legislation that impacts American lives. It's not the same as getting fired as CEO of a huge company then going off and forming a tech startup.