Anytime I see my fellow Republicans supporting legislation that does not align with boilerplate conservative values, like free-market capitalism, I always do two things: First, I brace myself for further disappointment. Then, I follow the money.
I have written two pieces on the impending drone ban, which targets drones manufactured by one company, DJI Technology, the world’s most successful commercial drone manufacturer. The “Countering CCP Drones” bill, which was incorporated into last year’s National Defense Authorization Act, was sponsored under the premise that drones made by a company that has a presence in China (and worldwide including the United States) poses national security risks. This assertion has been proven wholly untrue.
In 2023, I covered how elected officials often spin an issue to create a policy “boogie man” where no true threat exists so that they can look like the hero and thusly reap the political points.
As Machiavelli wrote in The Prince, “Men are so simple and so much inclined to obey immediate needs that a deceiver will never want for victims…Therefore it is unnecessary for a prince to have all the good qualities I have enumerated, but it is very necessary to appear to have them.” This Machiavellian trick is one of the oldest in the book.
In 2024, I highlighted the hardship this ban would have on our first responders. At its core, the real problem with bowing to special interests is that it distracts lawmakers from the people they swore an oath to serve: their constituents. Grounding Chinese-manufactured drones takes important emergency response tools out of the hands of our law enforcement, while wasting hard-earned tax dollars.
Since writing those two editorials, I became a legislator myself. The experience of being an elected official has crystallized the imperative of distancing oneself from special interest influence.
To be fair to my colleagues in the advocacy space, the term ‘lobbyist” gets a bad rap. Government affairs consultants are not inherently bad. Everything of value has or could have an advocate at any level of government. These people are usually issue experts and can and do provide valuable insights to legislators and their staff.
What is critical is that we cannot allow campaign donations to give one interest over another special consideration in policy making. We must ensure our ultimate policy decisions pass the values check. Is this policy solving a real problem? Does this policy align with conservative values? Is it constitutional? Does it benefit my constituents? I argue the anti-DJI drone policy is not checking a lot of those boxes.
In the case of drone legislation, Rep. Stefanik, appears to have been unduly persuaded by special interests’ campaign contributions, and for this reason alone, it would be wise for the federal government to allow another year for the national security agencies to complete a fair review of DJI.
Rep. Stefanik has received $10,000 in campaign donations from U.S. drone manufacturer General Atomics PAC. No doubt this company would love to cut their biggest competitor out of the game. During the 2023-2024 campaign cycle, Rep. Stefanik received $2,500. In 2019 – 2020, she received her largest donation, $6,500. And in 2015 – 2016, she received $1,000.
What is also of great interest to me is how lopsided the donations are by political parties. Nearly 70% of the political donations by General Atomics PAC were to Republican legislators. Across the three election cycles, the donations to Republicans were well over 50%, highlighting the fact that this policy does not align with conservative economic principles and needed heavy investment to convince lawmakers to sidestep free market principes. It appears a few sold out.
The good news is that free-market principles can still prevail. Congress still has time to stop this ban. I encourage every reader to call their representatives today and urge them to demand a thorough, unbiased national -security review of DJI before infringing on freemarket principles – or better yet, to drop this protectionist bill entirely. Special interest money has already clouded the judgment of too many otherwise free-market legislators; it’s time for constituents to remind them who they truly serve.
Former senior congressional staffer in the U.S. Senate, and currently serves as a city councilmember and political strategist specializing in grassroots mobilization, government affairs, and strategic communications.
