Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Should Lobbying and Corporate Campaign Contributions be Outlawed for the good of preserving Democracy?

Since both parties do it, this is a nonpartisan question.Should Lobbying and Corporate Campaign Contributions be Outlawed for the good of preserving Democracy?
No. Then all the corrupt deals would be done behind close doors and in dark alleys.Should Lobbying and Corporate Campaign Contributions be Outlawed for the good of preserving Democracy?
There's nothing wrong with lobbying, but it should be grassroots lobbying, not astroturf. The solution to the problem will be when a constitutional judiciary overturns the bigoted activist judiciary that made corporations ';people'; and turned the privileges that depend on the good graces of the community into inalienable ';rights.'; Bribery is NOT freedom of speech, nor was free speech for the banks and other corporations that Jefferson saw as a threat to our economic well-being part of the original Bill of Rights.





First of all, the FCC licensing process was intended to guarantee that broadcasters give back to the community in return for the privilege of using the limited bandwidth, so charging outrageous (or any) fees for candidates to get their messages out—or blatantly favoring one over the other through free advertising on ';news programming'; scams violates the terms of such a license.
Two things should be done away with in federal politics, lobbying and pork belly programs (earmarks).





They have both become either unfair persuasion or a license to steal.





The bridge to nowhere fiasco was just the tip of the iceberg, and it works equally in every state and across to both sides of the aisle, so let's not let Alaska stand out by itself, but it's example does brings it to the forefront.





Let's not let it slide back to the back burner before something is done about it !
Or... let them throw campaign money into a common pool of which all candidates get an equal share.
I am not convinced that they should be outlawed but,there should be better rules and regulations.


I also think there should be a cap on how much money ANY candidate should receive and, there should be LIE detectives out there to control the smears and out right lies.
It would probably take a national referendum to make this come to pass. The corporate lobby money would never allow the legislatures to let a reform like this pass without direct intervention by the American people.
Corporate Contributions, yes. They aren't people. Lobbying, unfortunately no. The group advocating the 9/11 commission was a lobbyist group. It's in the constitution that you have a right to redress grievances.
YES! But getting our lawmakers to do it is another thing entirely. Why would they, when they are the ones benefiting from it?
The laws of lobbying should probably be reformed, yet, you can not outlaw lobbying as that in itself would be a violation of freedom of speach and a search for representative government.





As crazy as it sounds, lobbying in and of itself was in its pure and unbastardized form was an attempt at fairness and making sure that congress was able to see the entire issue.






Yes, but before you do that you need to remove corporate person-hood. That is the ridiculous claim that companies should have all of the rights of a person because they are made up of people, but at the same time not be able to hold them accountable as a person because they are multiple people in the company.
YES. We should take money out of campaigning. First because you and I would never be able to run for an office because of the $$ it requires. Second, that would eliminate(you would think) special interests and preferential treatment. I am curious to what happens to the money left over in the ';war chests'; Is it possible to walk away with several million whether you win or lose?

No comments:

Post a Comment