In her essay “The Pull Peddlers” which is part of “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal,” Ayn Rand discusses the phenomena of lobbying.  This is a very interesting essay and as applicable today as when it was written more than 50 years ago.

The first quote I want to share is her definition of lobbying:

“Lobbying” is the activity of attempting to influence legislation by privately influencing the legislators.  It is the result and creation of a mixed economy–of government by pressure groups.  Its methods range from mere social courtesies and cocktail-party or luncheon “friendships” to favors, threats, bribes, blackmail.

A bit later in the essay she gives a description of what she means by “pressure group,” which is where the idea of “public interest” comes in.  More specifically why this idea gives such terrible results.

So long as a concept such as “the public interest” (or the “social” or “national” or “international” interest) is regarded as a valid principle to guide legislation–lobbies and pressure groups will necessarily continue to exist.  Since there is no such entity as “the public,” since the public is merely a number of individuals, the idea that “the public interest” supersedes private interests and rights can have but one meaning: that the interests and rights of some individuals take precedence over the interests and rights of others.

If so, then all men and all private groups have to fight to the death for the privilege of being regarded as “the public.”  The government’s policy has to swing like an erratic pendulum from group to group, hitting some and favoring others, at the whim of any given moment–and so grotesque a profession as lobbying (selling “influence”) becomes a full-time job.  If parasitism, favoritism, corruption, and greed for the unearned did not exist, a mixed economy would bring them into existence.

By mixed economy she means an economy where the government interferes in the economy by methods other than restraining the use of force or fraud.  This would include all types of regulations such as minimum wage, permitting, licensing, labeling requirements, as well as taxes, tax credits, tax breaks and etc.

Is it any wonder that when the government gives itself the power to interfere in the lives of individuals to this extent businesses, and individuals, will find a way so that the interference favors them rather than hinders them.

The solution to this is not further regulations, but rather the removal of governmental interference while at the same time strengthening the legal system so that those who are legitimately injured by the actions of others have a reasonable chance of recourse.