It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Do away with lobbyism to squash corruption: Let's save ourselves!

page: 1
6

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 09:05 PM
link   
Face it, the POTUS actual power is limited, but what about Congress? For one, they have the benefit of being 535 people strong - while the POTUS is on the highest hot seat of them all.

When a congressman introduces a damaging bill or votes for the best interests of his/her friends over the people's, how often does it go unnoticed? How many people actually monitor their congressman's voting record?

Our country allows legal corruption in the form of lobbyism. I contend that absolutely no government official should recieve any 'gifts' or money, in any form, from private citizens or organizations.

Want to form a special interest group? Fine, but your only means of supporting your candidate will be mailing out flyers, holding rallies and making calls. No campaign contributions or any type of monetary support should be allowed.

All campaign funds for federal level government officials should be provided by the government (Yes, we may have to spend some money to squash corruption). Allow 5 slots to be available for 5 candidates that have met the quota on signatures on a first come, first serve basis.

Hold three debates, a slew of town-hall meetings, a few commercials and vote!

Now Congress as well as the white house will have to actually spend their time working for the people instead of against the 'other side' or for their 'friends'.

I welcome any ammendments to my OP and suggest we get a bill drafted to get things done. Hope this doesn't turn into a Dem vs Repub, divide and conquer thread. Our problems are bigger than two groups of liars.

It's more important to make progress than to be right. With the mandatory five party system of any able party, we have a chance to develop a party that actually DOES care about the best interest of the country. One that could unite us where the current two have divided us so masterfully.


So what do you say? Can we put aside our Left vs Right nonsense and truly change things?
edit on 28-10-2012 by intelligenthoodlum33 because: spelling




posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by intelligenthoodlum33
No campaign contributions or any type of monetary support should be allowed.



I agree on the principle, but the devil is in the details.
As per your plan the only people who could ever run for election ever again would be the super multi millionaires.

Yes, I know thats generally the way it is now most of the time, but you've just legalised it.


Originally posted by intelligenthoodlum33
Allow 5 slots to be available for 5 candidates that have met the quota on signatures on a first come, first serve basis.


And to get those signatures you have to run an election type campaign to get your supporters to sign. TV and radio ads, newspaper ads, billboards etc... out of your own pocket.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 09:33 PM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 


I disagree. No more super PACS or contributions. Any legal ad would be government sponsored. Each party chooses their candidate, then we hold nationally televised platform delivery conventions. These conventions are for the parties that were able to accumulate the requisite signatures to be heard.

Once the conventions are done, we hold a vote for the top 5 parties and go from there.

Do you have a better idea? I welcome it and any idea that could help make this possible.

Please people, if you find a hole, fill it and let's talk about it. I'm aware of all the devil advocates, but I am also aware of the vast depth of knowledgeable people we have here too.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:04 PM
link   
I agree. I think all lobbyists should have to contribute to a pool. Make it mandatory and base it on an average of pass contributions. Use that money to hold townhall meetings and have public service announcements to educate and acknowledge the concerns of the citizens. Also have a law whereas no politician can recieve a government salary that is more than the average salary of his constituents. Watch how many of our caring politicains find another gig.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by FreebirdGirl
 


I like the way you think.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:09 PM
link   
Lobbyists are experts. Our legislators need to listen to more experts before making critical legislative decisions not fewer.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
Lobbyists are experts. Our legislators need to listen to more experts before making critical legislative decisions not fewer.


How are your 'experts' working out for you? I thought the reason we elect representatives are because 'they' are supposed to be the experts.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Am I missing something here? Where is it written that a politician even needs to give a lobbyist the time of day?

Ultimately the politician is responsible for their own actions and if they would be swayed by a lobbyist rather than right and wrong then it is evident that you voted for the wrong guy.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by intelligenthoodlum33
 


Do you realize how ridiculous that assertion is?

No one can possibly be an expert on everything.

Do you realize the amount of variety of legislation our leaders deal with?

OF COURSE they need the opinion of others who actually read the proposed legislation and testify how specifically that legislation would affect their particular constituency. Any educated individual would appreciate the need to turn to those with the most knowledge and experience on a specific subject to gain knowledge before casting a vote.

Any other assertion would be to promote ignorance.

Is our system perfect? No, but it is better than the rest.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by 11235813213455
Am I missing something here? Where is it written that a politician even needs to give a lobbyist the time of day?

Ultimately the politician is responsible for their own actions and if they would be swayed by a lobbyist rather than right and wrong then it is evident that you voted for the wrong guy.


I hear ya, but favors, money and power corrupts. It's a fact of life...especially so in politics.

Heck, politicians are forever imposing regulations on the public...for our own good. It's time we do the same....for their own good.



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:31 PM
link   
You have a very limited and skewed view about what a lobbyist does. Clearly you don't realize the amount of good they do in protecting us from really horrendous legislation being passed. You see the legislators write a lot of this tripe and the lobbyists come in and explain to them why their proposed legislation is dangerous, expensive, not enforceable, or simply unnecessary.

Get rid of the lobbyists and guess who will make all the decisions about what gets passed and what doesn't get passed.

Does that still sounds like a good idea to you?



posted on Oct, 28 2012 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by intelligenthoodlum33
I disagree. No more super PACS or contributions. Any legal ad would be government sponsored. Each party chooses their candidate



Each party?
What if I wanted to run as an independent, does that count too?

If so, thats open to abuse.

eg. I dislike red haired people. My ranting doesnt get any publicity.
So I run as an independent, and the government then pay to put my anti-redhead rants on TV.

eg. I'm a contrail believer. My ranting doesnt get any publicity.
So I run as an independent, and the government then pay to put my conspiracy rants on TV.

eg. I run a small income generating website, but nobody knows about it or visits.
So I run as an independent, and the government then pay to put my ads on TV.

eg. I'm paranoid, and think my neighbour is reading my mail, then resealising it and putting it back in jy mailbox. My ranting doesnt get any publicity.
So I run as an independent, and the government then pay to put my paranoid rants on TV.

eg. I'm the drummer in a band, but we need publicity to make it big..
So I run as an independent, and the government then pay to put my ads on TV.

eg. I'm the head of BHP Billiton mining corporation.
I run as an independent and the government then pay to put my pro-BHP policies to the world.



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by MsAphrodite
 


I understand everyone will not be on board with change of this size. Clearly your not and I wish you luck.



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 12:48 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 



If you see a hole, fill it. We can go back and forth all day, but what can you offer in the form of solutions?



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 12:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by MsAphrodite
reply to post by intelligenthoodlum33
 


Is our system perfect? No, but it is better than the rest.


I think that ill-informed statement deserves a thread of it's own.



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 12:51 AM
link   
The only thing they are "expert" at is buying a/k/a bribing congress critters and buying votes.




Originally posted by MsAphrodite
Lobbyists are experts. Our legislators need to listen to more experts before making critical legislative decisions not fewer.



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Lobbying in the United States describes paid activity in which special interests hire well-connected professional advocates, often lawyers, to argue for specific legislation in decision-making bodies such as the United States Congress. It is a highly controversial phenomenon, often seen in a negative light by journalists and the American public, and frequently misunderstood.[21] While lobbying is subject to extensive and often complex rules which, if not followed, can lead to penalties including jail, the activity of lobbying has been interpreted by court rulings as free speech and protected by the US Constitution. Since the 1970s, lobbying activity has grown immensely in terms of the numbers of lobbyists and the size of lobbying budgets, and has become the focus of much criticism of American governance. Since lobbying rules require extensive disclosure, there is a wealth of data in the public sphere about which entities lobby, how, at whom, and for how much. The current pattern suggests much lobbying is done by corporations although a wide variety of coalitions representing diverse groups is possible. Lobbying happens at every level of government, including federal, state, county, municipal, and even local governments. In Washington, DC, lobbying usually targets congresspersons, although there have been efforts to influence executive agency officials as well as US Supreme Court appointments. It has been the subject of academic inquiry in various fields, including law, public policy, and economics. While the number of lobbyists in Washington is over 12,000 people, those with real clout number in the dozens, and a small group of firms handles much of lobbying in terms of expenditures. As an activity, lobbying takes time to learn, and requires skill and sensitivity, and depends on deft persuasion, and has much in common with generally non-political activities such as management consulting and public relations.


en.wikipedia.org...

Here a couple of the guys who "help" Congress understand laws:


Josh Ackil and Matt Tanielian, Franklin Square Group. With clients including Apple, Google and Intel, the two Democrats are among the elite lobbyists for Silicon Valley in Washington.

Nick Allard, Thomas Hale Boggs Jr., Micah Green, Jonathan Yarowsky and Edward Newberry, Patton Boggs. The firm continues to reign on K Street thanks to its roster of seasoned power brokers.

Andy Barbour, Smith-Free Group. Smith lobbies for several financial and insurance companies but is best known for his work as the lead Democratic lobbyist for the Financial Services Roundtable.

Doyle Bartlett, Eris Group. Bartlett has years of Capitol Hill experience and a busy lobbying practice that is on the front lines for clients including MetLife, Genentech and eBay.

Rodger Currie, Foley Hoag LLP. A former lobbyist for PhRMA, Currie now works for several clients at Foley Hoag in the healthcare, medical and biotechnology fields.

Mitch Feuer and Robert Griner, Rich Feuer Group. The two lobbyists work for first-tier clients from the financial services world, including Visa and Goldman Sachs


thehill.com...



posted on Oct, 29 2012 @ 02:21 AM
link   
you can't get rid of it. I have thought about it.

Take ATS for example. They have "rules". Then they have site owners, admins, friends of those two groups, and then mods....the rules will never be the same for them, and the application of the rules will never be the same by them to one of the other groups, or people the other groups don't like.

The same is true for government. You have the "rules". Then the Legislative branches, their support, home and at work, friends and associates, and then the lobbyists. they will never enforce the rules on themselves in the same way as others, and will not enforce the rules fairly on any one that opposes them even if within the rules his rights, and logically by his self determination to defend himself /town, city/, ethnic group, whatever from the lobbyist for whatever for profit cause.

You can't change it. It is corrupt through and through, and we people have become just like them. There is now little difference between a perceived "them" and "us". We are all worthy and deserving of what will come.



edit on 29-10-2012 by manykapao because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
6

log in

join