lawrocket 3 #1 May 6, 2009 I often hear the word "lobbyist" being used as a pejorative. I also note that it is always the other side that has lobbyists. Nobody mentions their lobbyists, PACs, etc. It is as if they don't want to mention that they have lobbyists of their own, Or, incidentally, that they are lobbies themselves. Think of an organization with a national prominence. Or a local prominence. Yep, they are lobbies. Do you think corporations aee the only lobbyists out there? Moveon.org is a lobby. Now to why lobbies are important. Lobbyists write our laws. Yes, you heard me right. Lobbyists write our laws. Do you think legislator X drafts the laws? Nope. His staffers? Not really. Here's what happens. A legislator's attention is called to a problem. The legilator says, "we've got a problem with online child predation. There ought to be a law." The legislator then runs through the contact list to find whatever group seeks to punish online predarion. The organization's job, of course, is to get a law passed. Guess who has a draft of that legislation. Yep. They give it to the legislator, who sponsors it. Note: more often, the lobbyist approaches the legislators with the draft of the law seeking sponsors. Organizations pay these lobbyists to do that. Now, once the bill is sponsored it moves through committees, where other lobbyists offer their input. The police lobby looks for funding for enforcement. The ISPs look for language immunizing them from liability. Civil libertarians put changes in on mens rea requirements. The lobbyists educate the legislature on all sides of the issue. The lobbyists make suggestions on how to improve the law. And they put a face on the practical ramifications of the impact of these laws. It is then up to the politicians to decide their vote. Lobbyists try to sweeten the deal but the decision is on the legislators. Now, our recent administration sought to avoid lobbyists because a lobbyist is perceived as bad. That creates a problem: the lobbyists know how to write laws and analyze the implications. Anybody who knows what he or she is talking about is either in government already or a lobbyist. In places like California that has term limits, legislators don't know how to write laws. Trust me - it is a difficult thing. Lobbyists are the only ones with the experience and knowledge to draft effective laws. Don't be mistaken. In my libertarian thinking, laws are generally disagreeable. A part time legislature would be swell with me. Nevertheless, it is the lobbyist who proposes and drafts legislation. It is the lobbyist who educates the legislature about the bill, offers different perspectives and suggests changes to the bills. The lobbyist rallies support or opposition to the bills. And the lobbyist continues with the executive. And if the law is problematic, the lobbyist will support a court challenge. While it is fairly easy to rail on lobbies, it deflects from the true nature of what they do. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
peek 21 #2 May 6, 2009 Hey, national skydiving organizations are lobbyists, right? Lobbying to protect the sport from excess government regulation is the most important thing they do. Generally we don't mind when they do that well. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #3 May 6, 2009 QuoteWhile it is fairly easy to rail on lobbies, it deflects from the true nature of what they do. It is the true nature of what they do that makes it fairly easy to rail on them. They are agenda pushers using the government (and money) to push their agendas ..."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BikerBabe 0 #4 May 6, 2009 I find in general, the majority of people (this site included) really don't have a firm grasp of how our government ACTUALLY works. By this i mean on a day-to-day, operating basis, not what you learned in HS civics class. Articles and posts about government spending (especially procurement, be it defense or otherwise) always make me chuckle, for example. Unfortunately, there is absolutely NO concise way to explain the processes by which government money is actually allocated and spent, you just have to live it for a while. Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #5 May 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteWhile it is fairly easy to rail on lobbies, it deflects from the true nature of what they do. It is the true nature of what they do that makes it fairly easy to rail on them. They are agenda pushers using the government (and money) to push their agendas ... Is that not what government is? A law is an agenda. A law pushes that agenda. You've got pros and antis. It goes up for a vote. I may think, "Hey. This is messed up." What can I do about it? I can post online that it is messed up, which lets me vent but doesn't get anywhere. I can sign an online petition (truly useless). There are many things I can do. But - the most effective is to build a coalition of like-minded people. Or, join a coalition of like-minded people and contribute to that effort to block it or forward your own. Yes - they are agendas. That is what politics are all about. Agendas. Positions. Platforms. Policies. Do you want to stand alone in opposing something? Do you know to whom to talk? Can you take time out of your schedule to go to Sacramento and meet with legislators and staff? Or can you and 5,000 other people contribute $100 to hire a couple of people who can do it for you? And - if you and those people would like to see a new regulation or law, there are people who can help. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #6 May 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhile it is fairly easy to rail on lobbies, it deflects from the true nature of what they do. It is the true nature of what they do that makes it fairly easy to rail on them. They are agenda pushers using the government (and money) to push their agendas ... Is that not what government is? No. The government is (or should I say was) not meant to be used to push capitalist (or personal) agendas ..."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #7 May 6, 2009 Quote I find in general, the majority of people (this site included) really don't have a firm grasp of how our government ACTUALLY works. By this i mean on a day-to-day, operating basis, not what you learned in HS civics class. I know exactly how it works, thankyouverymuch. "There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dreamdancer 0 #8 May 6, 2009 what about this lobby? QuoteAipac wields considerable influence in the US Congress. Its critics say that what amounts to bullying pressure tactics has narrowed the room for debate about Israel, and claim the group has played a leading role in unseating some members of Congress who were critical of the Jewish state's policies. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/06/us-israel-palestinians-middle-eaststay away from moving propellers - they bite blue skies from thai sky adventures good solid response-provoking keyboarding Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gmanpilot 0 #9 May 6, 2009 QuoteIs that not what government is? A law is an agenda. A law pushes that agenda. No, that is called politics; confusing and/or integrating the two is, IMO, the #2 thing wrong with our government/political process(two-party stranglehold is #1). Unless lobbyists have no more access to or influence over anyone in government than the man on the street does, I have a huge problem with them. They wield immense power because their clients provide the PAC money that gets politicians elected....that is the problem. If it were simply a matter of calling up a subject matter expert to gain a better understanding of a particular subject, that would be fine.That is not the case with lobbyists. They are simply hired guns who write legislation, get laws passed, get contracts awarded, and generally stink the place up. Money + party influence = political corruption, always has._________________________________________ -There's always free cheese in a mouse trap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #10 May 6, 2009 QuoteThe government is (or should I say was) not meant to be used to push capitalist (or personal) agendas It seems to me that agendas are the reasons why we elect people. Obama said he would do some things. McCain said other things. How on earth is a government not meant to push agendas? That's ALL they do, and pass laws to reflect these agendas. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #11 May 6, 2009 I think it's a lobby. I think there are pro-palestinian lobbies out there, too. Do you have a problem with Jewish lobbies? Pro-Israel lobbies? Do you balme the U.S. for Israel's excesses? AIPAC is strong. It's campaigned and helped to unseat folsk like J. William Fulbright and Charles Percy - both of whom were chairs of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. I don't think AIPAC is the most powerful lobby - I'd say the AARP is far and away the most powerful. 33 million members can do that. But AIPAC gets its power the same way trial lawyers get their power - generous campaign donations. AIPAC has (because it supports Israel) has been painted as pretty damned sinister. Kinda the way many paint the AFL-CIO. AIPAC is one of the most visible lobbies because of the huge amount of attention placed on it. Tell me this - why do you think an American president should push Israel to negotiate for a Palestinian state? Isn't pushing someone to negotiate somewhat of a misnomer? But to the point - there is a lobby for every bit of human endeavor or interest in the US. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #12 May 6, 2009 QuoteUnless lobbyists have no more access to or influence over anyone in government than the man on the street does, I have a huge problem with them. I can understand that. Trust me - it's not the best thing. It has so much to do with money and campaigning. But if every person had equal access, nobody would have any. It would be impossible. QuoteThey wield immense power because their clients provide the PAC money that gets politicians elected....that is the problem. Yes. And the solution. It actually provides a check and balance. It's like the AFL-CIO bitching about corporate lobbyists. And corporate lobbyists bitching about the AFL-CIO. They are directly opposed to each other much of the time. Which one will have the most sway? They are both lobbies! QuoteIf it were simply a matter of calling up a subject matter expert to gain a better understanding of a particular subject, that would be fine You can't do that with qualitative things. "What is the best tax structure for all Americans?" "What is the fairest tax?" It cannot be answered. There is no such thing. It's why the lobbyists are there to advocate and say, "Hey. AIPAC is pretty good at this. But let me give you the Palestinian side of the story." QuoteThey are simply hired guns who write legislation, get laws passed, get contracts awarded, and generally stink the place up. Yes. At least they are hired to try to do this. Quotegenerally stink the place up. In some senses, yes. QuoteMoney + party influence = political corruption, always has. Yep. And always will. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #13 May 6, 2009 Yes, they present an agenda. That is a good idea. Example: If there are 30,000 dues paying members of USPA, then I would not expect : - all 30,000 of them to show up at a legislative session. - the legislator's staff to read 30,000 well-worded and lengthy letters that address an issue. Both of those items would be an inefficient method of accomplishing the goal. Lobbyists are only a problem if they are not promoting My agenda. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #14 May 6, 2009 QuoteLobbyists are only a problem if they are not promoting My agenda. Lobbyists are a problem if they promote an agenda that benefits the few, at the expense of the majority. For instance, my next-door neighbor is the president of the Colorado Auto Dealer's Association - he is, in fact a lobbyist. His goal is to try to create tax and other incentives for colorado auto dealers that benefit them, but may negatively impact colorado citizens. Or he may do something that's beneficial to both, but what are the chances of that? Right now, he's trying to promote clean, energy-efficient cars. That sounds like a good thing at first, but studies show that in the majority of cases, it's better for the environment to keep your old car and tune it, than to buy a new one (manufacturing, delivery, etc). He will continue to promote the sale of new cars, even if it isn't good for the environment. That's his job.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #15 May 6, 2009 QuoteQuoteWhile it is fairly easy to rail on lobbies, it deflects from the true nature of what they do. It is the true nature of what they do that makes it fairly easy to rail on them. They are agenda pushers using the government (and money) to push their agendas ... Every citizen of a free and open democratic nation does that. It's the core essence of what that form of government is all about. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #16 May 7, 2009 Quote Lobbyists are a problem if they promote an agenda that benefits the few, at the expense of the majority. Let the minority bear the burdens of the majority's benefit. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
gmanpilot 0 #17 May 7, 2009 QuoteIt's like the AFL-CIO bitching about corporate lobbyists. And corporate lobbyists bitching about the AFL-CIO. They are directly opposed to each other much of the time. Which one will have the most sway? Neither should have any sway, seriously. They are messing up how a representative democracy is supposed to work. Mr Smith Goes to Washington is not fiction._________________________________________ -There's always free cheese in a mouse trap. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #18 May 7, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteWhile it is fairly easy to rail on lobbies, it deflects from the true nature of what they do. It is the true nature of what they do that makes it fairly easy to rail on them. They are agenda pushers using the government (and money) to push their agendas ... Every citizen of a free and open democratic nation does that. It's the core essence of what that form of government is all about. There is a difference between an individual pushing their capitalistic (or personal) agenda and the government creating a law pushing an individual's capitalistic (or personal) agenda. PS: We're a federal constitutional republic that protects the rights of the individual against the majority (and other individuals)."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
riddler 0 #19 May 7, 2009 QuoteLet the minority bear the burdens of the majority's benefit. I don't believe it's an either-or situation. Just because wealthy corporations right now benefit from lobbying, and the minority suffer their benefaction; that doesn't mean that if we took that away, that the wealthy corporations and special interest would suffer. Unless you mean that the wealthy corporations would suffer because their CEOs could no longer afford gold-plated Ferraris. If that's the case, then, yes, they would suffer.Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #20 May 8, 2009 QuoteThere is a difference between an individual pushing their capitalistic (or personal) agenda and the government creating a law pushing an individual's capitalistic (or personal) agenda. Don't kid yourself. QuoteWe're a federal constitutional republic that protects the rights of the individual against the majority (and other individuals). True enough, in concept; but remember the moral in the book Animal Farm: in the barnyard, all the animals are equal - except the pigs, which are a little bit more equal. A paradigm for real life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Butters 0 #21 May 8, 2009 QuoteQuoteThere is a difference between an individual pushing their capitalistic (or personal) agenda and the government creating a law pushing an individual's capitalistic (or personal) agenda. Don't kid yourself. Whose kidding themself? QuoteQuoteWe're a federal constitutional republic that protects the rights of the individual against the majority (and other individuals). True enough, in concept; but remember the moral in the book Animal Farm: in the barnyard, all the animals are equal - except the pigs, which are a little bit more equal. A paradigm for real life. I've read it. Is it a paradigm or a warning? Remember, we elect our representatives ..."That looks dangerous." Leopold Stotch Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #22 May 8, 2009 QuoteIs it a paradigm or a warning? 'Tis both. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
