Is Lobbying OK?
 

I notice all the negative verbiage used to describe lobbying, and therefore i assume the general opinion is negative (i would hope). But this question has been on my mind for awhile, why is it that the general public isn't outraged by the lobbying that goes on in DC? While we are at it, why do ear marks not bother anyone either? To me they sound like bribery and extortion. I mean it seems that if you want to kill the snake, cut off the head right? We have a lot of problems in this country, but instead of concentrating on the issues that are a product of this phenomenon why not go straight to the source?

It is negative. The name of the game is to use your connections after you get out of office to lobby for businesses - who put you on their payroll. That is where the money is made as a politician..


rjp

politics without lobbying is sure death.

Why would anyone operating a multi-million/billion business not want representation in Washington?

They all want representation in WA. Problem is, when the big biz is foreign then it's a problem- unfair foreign competition is usually the end result. The huge sums they pay the people can equate to a bias. Big biz vs. what is actually good for the country..

Politicians rely heavily on lobbyist to get things hashed out. I didn't and still don't have much interest in DC politics, but at the state level, nothing would ever get accomplished if lobbyist weren't pushing legislation through. You will always have goods and bads that go with policies that get passed.

Those who bad mouth lobbyist are most likely people that do not fully understand the dynamics of the legislative process, and have never expirienced a legislative session first hand. The most common misconception is how a lobbyist accomplishes his goals. Most of those in the public sector have the understanding that a lobbyist will wine and dine his/her former collegues as a means to rectify a problem or create an advantage for his/her client. Those types of lobbyist often have a short lived career. It takes much more to be a successful lobbyist.

Most of the former members of legislative bodies are hired on as consultants by private corporations for their connections, but do very little actual lobbying.
Sure they register as lobbyists, but that's just a mere formality, a fail safe if they were to be asked by the corporation to attempt to sway the vote of a member of a legislative body.

While I was a lobbyist, I spent more time dealing with the staff in a members' office working with the oppostion to try to reach an agreement. In these situations it becames paramount that you be honest and upfront about your intentions, and what benefits/implications may arise as a result of that members' vote on passing/killing a certain piece of legislation. That might sound like the lobbyist is trying to muscle the member, lol, but there are no wrong votes if the member votes his district, and a lobbyist isn't going to call the dogs if they vote the way they should. However, if a lobbyist is dishonest about their intentions, they (staff and member) will find out, and your ship is sunk.

Feel free to ask any questions.

What's really wrong with Washington is that there is a need for lobbying. The federal gov't. is nothing more than a big extortion racket and if they come after your industry, you'd better ante up with a lobbyist (protection money) to keep them off your back. Just ask Bill Gates. Even as big as MS was before 2000, they had no lobbyists at all in DC before the feds came after them. Obviously, Netscape played the game a lot better. Now MS has an army of lobbyists and I'm sure it's worth every penny. Lobbying has a huge ROI. A good friend's father runs a hospital in western PA. The father deals a lot with John Murtha for federal funding request. Father told me one year he paid his lobbyist $200k in fees but got $20 million in fed. funds. That's what I call a good ROI. That kind of lobbying bothers me, but it only exists because of earmarks. Petitioning the gov't. for a redress of grievances is every bit as protected by the First Amend. as is the right to call Bush a bozo.

I can understand the circumstances in which lobbying might "get something done" based one what you said. However to me i still see the glaring problem of special interests (corporate interests) with the deepest pockets getting their way. This obviously would be irrespective of right or wrong. BTW, who or what did you lobby for?

I have a few friends who are lobbyist, they make a good living at it.

Remember, it's only a special interest if you disagree with their cause. If you agree with them, they're called a watchdog. Case in point - the NRA. They rank up there with AARP as the most powerful lobbying orgs. The fact that they even need to lobby is what bothers me. They started out as a marksmanship training org (still do a lot of that too). If lawmakers actually paid attention to the Const., the NRA wouldn't need to lobby.

If you were a widget manufacturer and Congress decided to pass a special 10% tax on just the kind of thing you made, you'd hire a lobbyist pronto. Sure, you can write your Congressman too. Which do you think is gonna be more effective? Pay dues to the Nat. Assoc. of Widget Makers, hire your own lobbyist or write your Congressman?

like the concept, HATE the application of it.

Imho, lobbyists are floaters in the cesspool of politics. They are a scourge in the NY legislature and make sure special interests don't pay their fair share, or get special laws passed to their direct benefit. They also, through the party in power, exert pressure on agencies to again directly benefit special interests. Most of them are lawyers that could otherwise be gainfully employed.

It's a joke to hear anyone who is naive enough to think that lobbying as it has evolved is somehow akin to Americans having representation of their interests. Isn't that what those axxholes in Washington have been elected to do...represent us? Actually it's not a joke...it's absurd.

The average American has basically NO representation compared to the paid lobbyists. An example would be th drug industry. They have more paid lobbyists in Washington than there are members of Congress. What a great deal for the average American.

And it's not party specific. They are equally guilty. It just seems that the GOP is worse here lately since they have been in power and whoever is in power ends up dirty. Watch the Dems catch up now that they are now in control!

If the drug industry had no lobbyists, Congress would have run them out of business long ago. Tell me that would be good for the avg. American. Face it, Congress is an extortion racket. Take away their power to hand out special tax loopholes and earmarks, elect people who actually respect the Const. as the law of the land as opposed to something to find ways to get around, and the need for lobbyists would dry up overnight.

Wow, a real live lobbyist. This is great. I have never heard of an average American who had ever even met a lobbyist!

Questions:
1. Who did you lobby for?
2. Did you feel the need to take a shower after "lobbying" the high moral creatures who seem populate our government?;)
3. How did you influence the politicians? You say it was all clean and ahonest and I'm wondering how you compete with the lobbyists who toss cash, gifts, perks, or freebies at the politicians?
4. Do you also think that it's a great deal for our nation when the politicians line up their lobbying jobs while they are still in office?
5. Did Jack Abramoff get a bad deal?

Gee Rick, if the drug lobbyists are so good for us why don't we increase the number of drug company lobbyists? It's ludicrous to think that more drug lobbyists than members of Congress somehow is a good deal for American citizens.

BTW, those obbyists that you think have been protecting our interests must have been asleep the past 20 years since we pay more for drugs than any nation on the planet. The same drugs!

Yes, Congress is "an extortion racket" as you say, but guess who's paying them that extortion money? It sure as hell is not Joe Sixpack or any of his buddies!

I never said they were good OR that they were protecting our interests. They protect the interests of those who hire them, just as lawyers, realtors and financial advisers do. They are, for the most part, amoral, not to be confused with immoral. If Congress didn't try to punish businesses with taxes and regulations, there'd be no lobbyists. Address the root cause of the problem, not the symptoms.

So you are saying that "taxes and regulations" are the problem?

Not sure about taxes, but it appears that we need more regulations rather than fewer!

I don't understand this statement can you elaborate? If an industry is making obscene profits, that tells me no one is competing, but then i'm no economist.

Consider yourself lucky that you are not an economist...most of those dip*****s can't even figure out what really is the main cause of inflation!

BTW, you are correct about the drug industry. That's why we pay more for the very same drugs than any other nation on the planet.