This won't make me popular (not that I am now), but I'm gonna defend lobbyists...

[SaveElmer]

Ok not all lobbyists...but

I know many lobbyists, and I have a close relative that is a lobbyist. My experience is that they are as hard working, dedicated, and honest as those in any profession. This close relative is about the most honest person I know. His integrity is very important to him, and I knew no one more upset with the Abramoff crap than he was, because it tarnished the reputation of anyone engaged in lobbying.... He has turned down many jobs where he felt he was being asked to do something unethical, or would even have the appearance of being unethical.

Now, I understand about monied interests having undue influence because of their ability to gain access to the corridors of power, and I understand how harmful the revolving door between government and business can be...and I certainly agree with all that...

But I think to demonize a person simply because they were a lobbyist, or saying a person working for one campaign or another are tainted simply because they used to be a lobbyist is without evidence that person in any way behaved unethically...is unfair.

And remember too that the Sierra Club has lobbyists, and the AFL-CIO has lobbyists, and Greenpeace has lobbyists, and NARAL, NOW, and the NAACP all have lobbyists as well...

Like any profession there are those who behave in an unethical manner (Abramaoff), and those who take their ethics seriously (my relative)...

That's all

edit: For sucky typing!

[onenote]

1. from the bottom of my registered lobbyist heart, thanks!!

[acmavm]

2. You're correct. And if you didn't have politicians who sell themselves to

the highest bidder and have no qualms about shitting on their constituents, all lobbyists wouldn't have a bad name. It's just not the lobbyists fault.

It's lobbyists like those from the oil companies, tobacco companies, religious organizations, etc. that give those that are trying to make the case for good causes a bad name.

[Solon]

3. Legalized bribery is still bribery, and I frankly don't care for any lobbyists...

Regardless of their political affiliations.

[Hippo_Tron]

4. I have no problem with lobbyists, just with lobbyists giving money to politicians

[Blue_In_AK]

5. I agree.

Lobbying is fine; buying votes isn't.

[acmavm]

7. Which is illegal, isn't it?

[SaveElmer]

8. Lobbyists can't give any more money than enyone else...

Now the companies that employ lobbyists can give money to candidates...but lobbyists themselves are not generally a source of large donations...

[Hippo_Tron]

12. It's basically the same thing

The lobbyist can walk into a congressman's office with the checkbook of the PAC that they represent and the congressman can't accept it there, but they can give them where to send it.

[SaveElmer]

13. Ethical lobbyists won't do that...

And in fact will refuse to discuss money in any way with a congressman or Senator...

[Hippo_Tron]

14. Do we know which lobbyists are ethical and which ones aren't?

When the Sierra Club, the AFL-CIO, and NARAL send lobbyists to congress, it is pretty well understood by Congressmen and Senators that if you want them to give you money, you have to support their bills. They may not negotiate exact amounts, but it's still bribery.

[EffieBlack]

18. Most lobbyists - or their organizations - do not give money to members of Congress

So money doesn't come into the equation at all for most of them.

For example, civil rights organizations like the NAACP, Urban League, NAACP Legal Defense Fund, Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, etc. all lobby Congress, but they do not make political contributions. Their lobbying efforts are extremely important and make a tremendous difference - without them, we wouldn't have had the Voting Rights Act, the Civil Rights Act, Title VII, the Fair Housing Act - the Voting Rights Act would not have been renewed last year and Miguel Estrada, Charles Pickering, Terrence Boyle and Leslie Southwick would be federal Court of Appeals judges. We desperately need the work that most lobbyists do - and their work does not involve any money or other financial remuneration to Members of Congress.

Please don't assume all lobbyists are bad.

[Hippo_Tron]

20. I'm not assuming that they're all bad

But many of them, even representing liberal causes, contribute money to members of congress.

[EffieBlack]

21. Many of them do. Many of them don't. It is their right to do so, just as it is yours.

The fact that someone donates money to a member of Congress (especially as an individual) does not mean that they are unduly influecing the member or corrupting the system.

[Hippo_Tron]

22. Yes it does mean that they have undue influence

I'm not talking about lobbyists making an individual contribution I'm talking about them walking into a congressman's office and telling the congressman "The PAC that I represent will make a contribution to your campaign if I you vote a certain way on this bill." That is legalized bribery especially since the maximum PAC contribution is $5000, which is far greater than the maximum individual contribution. Also, more than one PAC representing the same interest, meaning that multiple lobbyists can walk into a congressman's office and each offer him $5000 for the same vote.

[MonkeyFunk]

23. I don't think so

I thought corporate contributions were banned. Only individuals can give to candidates.

[Hippo_Tron]

35. Corporations just have to form a PAC, each PAC can give $5000 to a candidate

And multiple PACs representing the same interest can each give $5000. You can see how that adds up pretty quickly.

[WCGreen]

6. I really think that Lobbyist have gotten the short schrif....

I know that most are hard working and truly believe what they advocate is worth their effort...

My problem is that there seems to be no accountability anywhere in the system until someone does something spectacularly stupid and ends up on the front page of the NYT...

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

9. I think you can tell something about a candidate by the lobbyists they hire

and who those lobbyists represented. If they represented Big Phrama, for example, I'd be looking long and hard at the candidate's health care plan to see if it appeared to benefit drug companies rather than citizens. You may not think that is right, but people are often judged by the company they keep.

[Tellurian]

10. There are some lobbyists that ARE ethical..

a close relative of mine is also a lobbyist for an Int Corp, (a Mr. Mitchell type, from Dennis the Menace.) He would never involve himself in anything unethical because he values his name and integrity as something money can't buy.

[SaveElmer]

11. I would go further and say most are ethical...

BUt when there is a bad apple...there is no hiding it!

[Tellurian]

16. And bad apples serve a purpose as well...

to anyone on the brink of the bad apple syndrome.. a fine example, of what can happen if your standing at a crossroads and pick the wrong path. A safer route was picked by another relative working for the UN.

[JerseygirlCT]

15. I'm not going to flame, and your point is well-taken

Everyone has a right to speak to their gov't reps -- and that often includes non-profits working hard for noble causes.

Decrying "lobbyists" is way too broad. What did they lobby for? What are their goals? How do they work -- ethically or not?

As in most everything, it's far more complex than a simple good/bad.

[CK_John]

17. Why do we keep wanting to shred the constitution. Right to petition is very important part

of the constitution. Learn how to function with the government as it is and quit whining.

[EffieBlack]

19. The bad guys LOVE it when people think that all lobbyists are bad

It serves their interests to get people all riled up so that they force draconian, anti-lobbying measures that will tie the hands of - and in some cases, completely eviscerate - the non-profits and other smaller entities who lobby for good but would hardly touch the big, powerful ones who will always be able to navigate through the system.

Case in point - one measure recommended is that instead of filing semi-annual lobbying disclosures, organizations that engage in lobbying file weekly or bi-weekly disclosures. This would do little more than ensure that smaller organizations could not engage in any lobbying since they do not have the resources or capacity to spend the time and money necessary to file so frequently - they'd drown in paperwork. On the other hand, the larger lobbyists would have no problem complying. And more frequent filings would do nothing to cut down on improper contacts between lobbyists and Congress.

You're absolutely right - people need to understand the system and learn how to make it work rather than getting carried away and causing more problems for the people who represent our interests.

[illinoisprogressive]

24. does your defense have anything to do with Hillary's ties to so many????

[mitchum]

27. I certainly imagine so...carrying water for a water carrier (n/t)

[Alexander]

25. My mom was a lobbyist. So what?

Donations from PACs should be $2000, the limit for individual contributions.

[mitchum]

26. But...but...but...they're just following orders!

Fuck those dirtbags

[MadHound]

28. Sorry, I don't care how noble your close relative is, but lobbyists are a large part of the problem

With our current government. Since the lobbyists have the money and the access, they get the preferential treatment, and their issues are still heard. On the other hand, ordinary citizens can't be heard, even in their millions, since they don't have the connections nor the money. This isn't the way our government was set up, and the lobbying sector is destroying our government. Your close relative may be personally honorable, but he is participating in an unethical industry, and thus he is tainted.

It is past time that we got rid of the lobbyists of the world. They are simply out for the interests of the highest bidder, and this is doing great harm to our government and our society.

[blondie58]

29. thanks for presenting the other side

I must admit, I have very negative connotations toward the word lobbyist. It is very close to the bad feeling that one gets when thinking of a used car salesman.

I am a member of NALC Branch #47, who supports the AFL/CIO and I give some money to COLCP (A political action committee to protect Postal Workers Jobs and Interest)

Funny, I had never thought of it as lobbying before.

I strongly believe that we need to have publicly funded elections and very strict laws on the powers that lobbyists have. The Big Pharma, tobacco and other lobbyists have left a very bad mark on the trade.

Unfortunately, money talks. Or as Bush stated it, money trumps peace. That is so wrong.

[Ethelk2044]

30. I agree with you 150%

It means congress are working for the lobbyist instead of the people. We need to make it harder for lobbyist to gain access to congress. Congress allows them to sway their votes, gain perks. Instead congress should be working for the people in their districts.

[Independent Democrat]

38. LOBBYING= Political representation based on purchasing power.

The most common excuse those who are in favor of lobbying make is that it's merely a form of excercising democracy based on the right to petition government. Except that's not really what lobbying is. Lobbying is limiting access to government to those who have the financial resources to promote their agenda.

Now how the f*ck is any of this democratic?

[treestar]

31. Here, here, there is so much complicated legislation out there

That it is a good thing that people who have experience with a subject and who will know the consequences of some of the proposed legislation get input - the People and their representatives never seem to think these things through. Then years later, they or someone they know are living with the unintended consequences.

[IndyOp]

32. Lobbying fine. Money for campaigns, gifts, services of ANY kind - NO!

For the price of a six pack of beer per each American, we could fund Federal elections and outlaw any all campaign donations, gifts, etcetera from anyone to candidates & elected officials.

It is fine for groups to send spokespeople to D.C. -- it is unacceptable for them to have unequal access because some can toss around more money than others.

Lobbyists with $$$ are the death of our nation -- whether they individually have integrity or not does not matter -- SiCKO shows the effects of health care & pharma lobbies on our nation.

:thumbsdown:

[Adelante]

33. I used to work for labor lobbyists

If it weren't for them, just as an example, labor law would be written by corporations, probably, because legislators and legislative staff do not have the time or the expertise to fully comprehend every single bit of law and legal history. So lobbyists play more of a role than on the money front and it's an important one. I have no problem with individual lobbyists donating to candidates if they self-identify as lobbyists. But I would like to see bundlers of all sectors, including consulting companies, but every industry or service sector, OUT FRONT with who is gathering and who is donating individually. Of course, a grocery clerk can make an individual donation, but if a large supplier's executive is collecting and compiling and presenting, this is in order to buy influence and everybody knows it. The whole money chain needs to be public information. We need to know who is paying our elected officials. A candidate who makes the claim of not accepting PAC or lobbyist money is making a show if he or she is taking bundles and won't reveal them. The law hasn't caught up with this, but our candidates can be ahead of the law.


That said, I've always liked you, Elmer :pals:

[Greyhound]

34. What you didn't mention is what your "honest", "hard-working", "dedicated" relative has done to

fix his so-called profession. The unethical jobs he turned down, did he report the firms, the actions they take, and offer to testify against them?

Of course he didn't. That would jeopardize his own standing as a "good guy" in a thoroughly reprehensible field that views bribery of elected officials as their business. It might even make it impossible for him to make his 6 or 7 figure income as an advocate for people that wish to steal from our treasury.

Is the absence of criminality now enough to make one a good person?

[Independent Democrat]

36. You support lobbyists because you support Clinton......

and clamping down on lobbying would be inimical to your candidate's interests.

[sandnsea]

37. Who get earmarks for important projects

I agree with you. It isn't as simple as banning earmarks and lobbyists. I prefer to know every time one of them meets with a lobbyist, what they asked for, and whether they got it.