CLEAR Path Act Bans Top Officials from Lobbying for 'Countries of Concern'—But Only for Five Years

If you’ve ever watched a former high-level government official immediately take a lucrative job lobbying for a foreign government, you’ve probably wondered, “Wait, is that even legal?” The CLEAR Path Act (Conflict-free Leaving Employment and Activity Restrictions Path Act) is the latest attempt to tighten the revolving door, specifically targeting those who held Senate-confirmed positions—think Cabinet Secretaries, agency heads, and their deputies.

The New Rules of the Revolving Door

This bill introduces a significant, though temporary, restriction on what these former top officials can do after they leave office. If you were appointed to a Senate-confirmed job after this bill becomes law, you are permanently barred from knowingly trying to influence U.S. government employees (in the executive or legislative branch) on behalf of a “foreign governmental entity” from a “country of concern.” This restriction is meant to stop former officials from cashing in on their connections and inside knowledge to benefit countries deemed problematic by the U.S. government. The catch? These specific restrictions expire five years after the bill’s enactment date—meaning Congress will need to renew them if they want them to stick around.

Who Gets Targeted and Who Gets a Pass?

For the average person, this means there’s a new layer of protection against foreign influence peddling. The idea is that the people who shape U.S. policy shouldn't be immediately hired by foreign rivals to undo that policy. The bill mandates that the agency or department must inform officials of these restrictions both when they are appointed and when they leave, making sure no one can claim ignorance (Section 3).

However, there’s a crucial exception that could raise an eyebrow. The bill explicitly states that the restriction on “representing” a foreign entity does not include lawyers giving actual legal advice or representation in a legal capacity (Section 3). While protecting the right to legal counsel is important, this carve-out could become a major loophole. Imagine a former Secretary of State joining a law firm and then providing “legal advice” to a foreign state-owned entity that just happens to involve navigating complex U.S. regulatory issues. The line between “legal advice” and “lobbying” can get very blurry, very fast, especially when millions of dollars are involved.

How the 'Naughty List' Gets Updated

Another key part of the CLEAR Path Act is how it handles the list of “countries of concern.” Currently, this list relies on existing definitions in the State Department Basic Authorities Act. But the world changes fast, and so should the list. The bill sets up a new mechanism where the Secretary of State, after consulting with the Attorney General, can propose adding or removing countries from this list (Section 4).

This isn't a unilateral decision, though. The proposed changes must be sent to key Congressional committees, and for the change to actually take effect, Congress must pass a specific joint resolution of approval (Section 4). This means that updating the list—which directly determines who former officials can and cannot work for—requires a public, legislative vote. This adds transparency and forces Congress to take ownership of the list, which is a good check on executive power, even if it adds bureaucracy to the process.