AboveTopSecret.com Video and Media Portal.Books, posters, and more.T-shirts, mouse pads, cups, and bags.Member podcasts.Conspiracy theory wiki.Alternative news headlinesBelowTopSecret.com - off topic and general chit chat.AboveTopSecret.com - conspiracy theories and


 

 

This topic is in the Above Politics discussion forum.  (rss)


Obama: Closing Lobbyist Loopholes




Topic started on 27-7-2009 @ 02:54 PM by Sestias


Closing Lobbyist Loopholes

This information is admittedly from a partisan source -- a White House blog.

Still, it outlines the steps being taken to make more transparent the contacts of lobbyists--both official and unofficial (like CEOs who make "casual" phone contacts with the funding agencies)--with the agencies responsible for funding the Recovery Act.

There is supposed to be quick reporting of these contacts on the internet, though I don't see a web address where one could find this information.

It is reassuring to know the Obama administration is taking seriously its commitment to greater transparency in government.

Some here on ATS would like to have the White House visitors' log published, but IMO not that many lobbyists have direct access to the President, though he does occasionally have meetings with groups of concerned individuals or organizations.



   copyright & usage 
Click here for more Above Politics topics
Hot Topics   |   Top Topics   |   This Week   |   Subscribe   |   Home


reply posted on 27-7-2009 @ 03:07 PM by jam321


Some here on ATS would like to have the White House visitors' log published, but IMO not that many lobbyists have direct access to the President, though he does occasionally have meetings with groups of concerned individuals or organizations.


The only way to test your opinion is for him to release the logs. This will tell us if they are lobbyists or not. As far as loopholes, have you ever noticed that when politicians close one loophole, they always seem to open up a new one?

Do you have a clear definition of who Obama considers a lobbyist or how he defines the word lobbyist? Politicians are renowned for defining words according to their own terms.

Bill Clinton's definition of SEX comes to mind.



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 29-7-2009 @ 05:57 PM by Sestias


Originally posted by jam321

Do you have a clear definition of who Obama considers a lobbyist or how he defines the word lobbyist? Politicians are renowned for defining words according to their own terms.




I think his definition of lobbyist is partially provided in the link.

True, politicians have their ways of defining terms.

But I don't think Obama's contacts with lobbyists are the only contacts that should be of concern. It's also the secret deals different government officials, congressmen, and federal agencies make that also influence legislation. For example, the agencies responsible for disbursing the Recovery Act funds.

All presidents have some contact with lobbyists.

What the White House is trying to do is make these more transparent.

Again, I acknowledge that the White House is not exactly an unbiased source.

[edit on 29-7-2009 by Sestias]



   copyright & usage 


reply posted on 30-7-2009 @ 05:32 PM by whatukno


I don't buy it. Lobbyists are to a politician like air is to mammals. There is no way that lobbyists are going to get kicked out of the white house.

This is complete and utter Bull Dunk!

Anyone that believes that this administration is really going to be transparent and not be influenced by lobbyists needs their heads examined.



   copyright & usage 
AboveTopSecret.com is advertising supported.
















































ATS Server: www3.theabovenetwork.com
Powered by AboveTop:Board v2.3
Header data processed in 0.002 seconds
Page processed in 0.025 seconds
6 total database queries (1)

(:)








The Above Top Secret Conspiracy Community Web site is a wholly owned social content community of The Above Network, LLC.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors.
The opinions of our members are not those of site ownershipwho maintains
strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.






It looks like you're using some kind of software designed to block advertising while surfing our site.

We work very hard to provide an efficient Internet presence that services over 200,000 daily visits from people and automated web spiders. A large web site like this, that can handle that amount of traffic, is increasingly expensive to operate. Our only viable source of revenue (for now) are the ads displayed on each page.

If you enjoy our content, please enable our domain in your ad-blocking package.

more information       contact us

[hide this message]