My half-baked point is that the harm of voters NOT having access to this information is less than the harm of lobbyists and major donors having access to it.
On the other hand, it gives pols plausible deniability that they aren’t getting bought out.
Maybe I'm naive, though. I really do think nearly everyone in congress does want to make the world a better place, they're just lost/confused about how to go about that, often getting caught up in the game of staying in congress rather than using their time there for good.
The vast majority of people don't actually go and look up their senator's/congressperson's voting records, where as lobbyists do. So I think the voter disclosure argument is overblown; I don't think that voters actually need to know the exact voting records of their congressperson. I think voting should be selecting people based on character and rhetoric and then letting those people act as representatives.
It would be less democratic, but more functional (and more akin to what the founders imagined anyway).