Lobbying: The Scourge of Politics Back in the News
Posted in Public Affairs, wordpress, Politics, GOP, Democrats, conservative, liberal, News Media, lobbyist, obama, Opinion, Jeff Flake, Pelosi, Murtha, Congress, Legislation on March 12th, 2009 by Stanford Matthewscrossposted to:
Maggie’s Notebook
Conservative Thoughts
(from Wordnet; ’scourge’: lay waste to: cause extensive destruction or ruin)
Neither major political party has done anything one can notice about ending politics as usual in Washington and the ever present plague of lobbyists. Some argue that lobbying is simply engaging the process and the public’s right to make their preferences known to politicians. But everyone knows lobbying is simply buying influence.
GOP still dominates drug lobby
Obama has set his sights on healthcare among other things. With another of his campaign promises tossed in the trash any optimism that politics as usual would end, including lobbying, has been reduced to a laughable footnote as expected for 21st century governing.
A Republican Congressman who is an outspoken critic of earmarks, Jeff Flake, (R-AZ) has a resolution in Congress related to lobbying. Here is an excerpt.
Raising a question of the privileges of the House.
This resolution is to accomplish what exactly? Obama said no lobbyists will work in his White House. Really? How many lobbyists now work in the Obama Administration? Last tally taken through reports from various outlets suggested the number was at least a dozen.
GOP targets Dems for ethics complaints
Liberals can raise the issue as is mentioned in the report above of the Tom Delay saga and conservatives can beat the drum over Murtha and PMA Group. But this is just another partisan mud slinging contest which serves no useful purpose. You either put an end to lobbying or you do not. It is that simple.
To dismiss the case against lobbying as merely a part of doing business is tantamount to admitting the purchase of public officials has Congressional approval. Which draws the logical conclusion that therefore the principles documented in the founding of our nation only receive lip service from those elected or appointed to act on the citizen’s behalf in governing the United States of America.
The dishonesty of lobbying or paying to play or buying executive, judicial or legislative outcomes cannot be overstated. Until this practice is eliminated the tainted legacy of Washington politics will continue to overshadow those ideals for which many have fought and died during the short history of this republic. Again, to merely dismiss this practice as the cost of doing business is a slap in the face to those whose legacy includes the ultimate sacrifice.
For public officials to have no shame in this regard serves as an indictment of who they are and the lack of character of those elected to serve in the public interest. It also adds to the suspicion other citizens of the world may have regarding our sincerity to do the right thing. If the current Administration and both major political parties are truly intereested in improving this nation’s image around the world this would be an excellent place to start.
But most of you know the odds of that ever happpening.
Here’s a tidbit related to the recent lobbying fiasco in the news.
The announcement comes as news broke on Monday that the FBI raided PMA’s offices in November.
Like other vermin in nature when exposed these fine examples simply start another company and business continues as usual buying outcomes from elected officials.
Stanford Matthews
MoreWhat.com
Hmmm: Obama technology official’s office raided by FBI; employee charged in bribery sting (Michelle Malkin)
This is the second post on ethics reform in light of the vote on S.1, the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007 on July 31, 2007. The previous post suggested the current activity in Congress related to ethics reform is just another exercise in futility. There has been no evidence uncovered to suggest that the current ethics reform legislation is anything more than a cosmetic makeover of previous efforts to side step the issue.
It may sound outragious to the casual observer or typical apathetic or bleeding heart version of American, but the laws against treason should have a section that addresses politicians who sell this country by accepting money from every special interest and who do their bidding regardless of the negative impact on this nation.
This is not the time to rely on elected officials to protect this country or enforce the rule of law. Congress will again take up the issue of illegal immigration. Recent reports indicate failure of Congress to pass HR4437 in 2005 was the result of a plan to appear concerned about illegal immigration while knowing the House bill would never pass in the Senate. Again, the Senate is the focal point of deciding this nation’s course on illegal immigration. This chapter on illegal immigration comes complete with typical back room deals as shown in the following article.
Senator Kyl is among a small group of Senators who would have you believe he is in favor of strict immigration enforcement. If Kyl is ‘working’ with the White House and Edward Kennedy on immigration, what are the chances that again, the results from Congress will do nothing to stop the flow of illegal immigration? This may highlight the the reluctance of Congress to admit that sanctions against employers would deport illegals by attrition.
Another reminder of the practical side for all in favor of uncontrolled immigration is displayed in the following link. Most of what immigration is about is not the altruistic motive of freedom and democracy. The United States and the lax enforcement of law or liberal policies on immigration provide financial opportunity for all involved. While life long citizens continue to take things in stride and for granted, newer arrivals are actively supporting agendas that will affect this country’s future in alarming ways. As at risk as this country is from lack of national security, those alarming changes are already here.
Will the voices opposed to illegal immigration and lax security and enforcement be enough to protect this country? Most arguments in favor of open borders, increased visa quotas, guest worker programs are centered around the proponents’ economic ambitions. Money is central to this issue as it is in most others. Corporate interests increase their profits with cheaper labor. Illegal immigrants increase their options for generating income, legal and illegal. Businesses see profit in a new market of illegals. Politicians see votes and lobbyist money. Taxpayers see another drain on public money. The cost of illegal immigration is shouldered by the public while the profits of illegal immigration are distributed among its proponents.
So how did the United States Congress do in the first month of the 110th session? You be the judge. First, a little review of the fact that posts here have sometimes asked why we get so focused on what Congress does. After all, they legislate. That’s it. They legislate. The can pass laws. Whatever the House passes must be passed in the Senate also. So both Houses of Congress must pass the same version of a bill before it can become law. Then it goes to the President. He can sign it into law. He can veto it and send it back to Congress. He can pocket-veto at the end of the session. Or he can pretty much ignore it and it becomes law. All you expert legal types out there, feel free to refute this if you must.
So six bills and one joint resolution have the term “on passage” next to them in the voting record in the House. Being that it is joint and includes the Senate, that’s the only thing showing up on their completed list. Then there are the six bills. You’ll remember them from the daily reminder of the 100 hour agenda. Here’s a take on that.
One law was passed to rename a park. And the other bills have many hurdles to cross before they can become law. Even if they become law there is no guarantee they will have any positive effects. No one, with any regularity, will follow up on them. So the Congress has done nothing for one month. They have solved nothing. There is only one item as law and it is not critical. 21 Senators are worried about 2008 due to re-election. Other Senators are worried about running for President. And the rest have passed one joint resolution and participated in renaming a park.
