Lobbyist tax

Hey the want to tax cigarettes out of existence, lets introduce a tax on lobbying.

We all know the lobbyist control the govt so that is a HUGE potential tax base.

Lets say a lobbying firm gets 100 million for any project, tax or fee the lobby firm 50%.

You lobby for 50 mill for your guys, great, pay 25 mill...

what is worse, me smoking or lobbyist? Im taxed for smoking a lot...lets tax the lobbyist

There is our money

reply to post by tinner07


good idea and give them free cigarettes

reply to post by chrismarco


I know it isnt as simple it sounds. nothing is. but why not?

reply to post by tinner07


because they are lobbyist...the ones who give all these corrupt officials all these sweet packages...

reply to post by chrismarco


right, so tax them at 50%... get a 100 million dollar deal, cost your firm 50 mill in tax

tinner07
reply to post by chrismarco

 

right, so tax them at 50%... get a 100 million dollar deal, cost your firm 50 mill in tax

Let's make this very simple: NO!

There isn't any part of "NO" that you don't understand, right? Although this is yet another screwball insane idea from ATS that won't ever leave its shores, if you decide to tax a particular business outrageously differently than other businesses, then you run the risk of having your own business taxed the same way once someone decides they don't like it. There are a whole lot of people with a whole lot of beefs against one kind of business or another and a whole lot of inequities as a result. Lobbyists have the right to express themselves and their ideas. It's all about the First Amendment. If you want to tax lobbyists for exercising their free speech rights, what's to prevent us from taxing you the same way?

Nothing, really. So you're next.

Yeah, let's further legitimize state thievery.

ok so it is not a good idea. I see your point

reply to post by schuyler

It's all about the First Amendment. If you want to tax lobbyists for exercising their free speech rights

Than there's the rub , The lobbyist took away the free part and only the highest bidders can be heard. So what you have is Paid Speech rights.

I'm not saying , that lobbying needs to be abolished or taxed but it needs to be restructured.

At one time the existing lobbying structure made sense since we did not have the technology in place to get our elected officials to hear our points. However, that is no longer true. We have the technology that will allow people to be heard equally and not just the highest bidder.

tinner07
ok so it is not a good idea. I see your point

I think you had a good idea and your comparison to cigarettes was a good one. You also could have chosen any number of other products and services which have been taxed significantly different from others, or even made illegal. My personal preference isn't for the tax that you suggested; I'd settle for no one who has ever drawn a paycheck from the government being allowed to work as a lobbyist.

I think it's a little too late to worry about a slippery slope when we've already slipped and are 3/4 of the way down the hill. The First Amendment deals with being able to speak your peace, it doesn't guarantee a lobbyist access to my representative, a man I'm not even entitled to speak with directly btw.

reply to post by tinner07


What exactly will you tax? When you redress your Government (Congressman/woman, Senator, etc) you are lobbying them; do you want to be taxed to express your grievances?

interupt42
reply to post by schuyler

 

Than there's the rub , The lobbyist took away the free part and only the highest bidders can be heard. So what you have is Paid Speech rights.

Lobbyist didn't take anything away; piss poor character in seats of power did that. It is the willingness to accept campaign monies and other benefits via the lobbyist does it make it "paid" speech in my opinion

To Add:

It is also a piss-poor character of the People who vote for such politicians in this day in age, given all the information that is available. This is truly a three-pronged problem with failings on each. The solution however is not to limit the People the ability to redress their representatives.