Godwin's Thread

[D44kpunk]

Also it's only on amounts higher than 500k, you ever even seen that amount of money? Sounds like she really plans to take the big corporations out of Washington.

What a joke of a politician

[Zealot]

I can also speak only to my own experience but I've met a number of politicians at the federal level who straight up hate lobbyists and would love for them to go away.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

[D44kpunk]

I can also speak only to my own experience but I've met a number of politicians at the federal level who straight up hate lobbyists and would love for them to go away.

Sent from my SM-N960U using Tapatalk

500k is still a lot of money, can't see them going anywhere. please read her plan and we can continue this discussion.

hugs and kisses

[Zealot]

Did you literally read the first thing on her website - sorry, second, she just released her comprehensive labor reform plan today - and come back here claiming you're now the Warren policy expert?

[D44kpunk]

i literally said what i was linked to.

you aberrations talked like she was getting rid of lobbyists for good. this sure doesn't sound like it:

Spoiler: show

[Zealot]

You think $500k is going to get a law passed?

[Zealot]

No, her plan says this:

Spoiler: show

Ending Lobbying As We Know It

The fundamental promise of our democracy is that every voice matters. But when lobbyists and big corporations can buy influence from politicians, that promise is broken. The first thing to do to fix it is to end lobbying as we know it.

The Constitution guarantees the American people the right to petition their government with grievances. Lobbying isn’t new – it’s been around for centuries. What’s new is the weaponization of lobbying to coerce our government into doing whatever corporate interests want. While companies have an important role to play in our democratic conversation, the voices of corporations and powerful interests shouldn’t be the only voices in the room. But that’s exactly what’s happened.

Prior to the 1970s, there was little corporate spending on lobbying. Last year, over eleven thousand registered lobbyists roamed the halls of government, mostly representing their powerful clients – to the tune of over $3 billion. It’s no wonder everyone else has such a hard time breaking through the noise.

This boom in the influence-peddling game has happened around the same time that right-wing ideologues have slashed independent government resources and in-house expertise, which are essential for officials to maintain their independence from the “expertise” of self-interested corporate lobbyists. Meanwhile, most corporate lobbying work remains hopelessly opaque – nominally governed by a patchwork of weak definitions, few meaningful restrictions, and inadequate reporting and disclosure requirements. And the free rein granted to corporate lobbyists to also fundraise for political campaigns crosses the line from influence peddling to legalized bribery.

We can break the grip that lobbyists for giant corporations have on our government. Together, we can end lobbying as we know it. Here’s where to start:

Expand the definition of lobbyists to include everyone who is paid to influence lawmakers. Because of our weak laws, only individuals who meet directly with politicians or spend more than 20% of their time lobbying are required to register as lobbyists. That means law firms, consultancies, and even self-described lobbying firms that hire individuals for the express purpose of influencing government may be able to avoid these registration requirements – allowing powerful interests to influence policy without any public accountability. This practice, endemic on both sides of the aisle, must end.

My plan brings this activity out of the shadows by strengthening the definition of a lobbyist to include all individuals paid to influence government. It also creates a new designation for corporate lobbyists to identify individuals paid to influence government on behalf of for-profit entities and their front-groups – and subjects these corporate hired guns to additional restrictions.

Ban lobbying for foreign entities – period. President Trump’s campaign chair currently sits in prison, convicted in part of failing to properly register his shady foreign lobbying activity on behalf of Ukraine. But what is the justification for allowing foreign governments to use Americans as hired guns who sit in the shadows, quietly attempting to influence our domestic political system? That’s not how diplomacy should work. Other nations have ambassadors and diplomatic staff in the United States. If those governments want to interact with our political process they can do so through normal, above-board diplomatic channels. My plan categorically bans the practice of private lobbying for foreign governments, foreign individuals, and foreign companies. No more K Street influence-peddlers looking out for the interests of China, Russia, or Saudi Arabia.

Impose strict rules on all lobbyists, including preventing them from donating to or fundraising for political candidates. Paid lobbyists are hired for one objective: to advance the interests of their clients. Allowing individuals who are paid to influence government officials on policy to also give gifts or funnel money to the political campaigns of those same officials sounds like legalized bribery. My plan not only bans lobbyists from making political contributions, it also bans them from bundling donations or hosting fundraisers for political candidates. And it outlaws lobbying contingency fees, where lobbyists are only paid if they successfully influence politicians to achieve a policy outcome that serves their client’s narrow interests.

Dramatically expand the kinds of information lobbyists are required to disclose. Our current laws require only minimal disclosure from lobbyists of their activities. This prevents the American people from fully understanding who is trying to influence government – and why. My plan requires all lobbyists to report publicly all meetings with Congressional offices or public officials, the documents they provide to those individuals, and all government actions they attempt to influence. It also demands that all charitable non-profit organizations, social welfare organizations, and trade associations disclose any donors whose money was used to develop products to influence Congressional testimony, agency rulemaking, or for lobbying purposes.

Impose a tax on excessive lobbying – and use this revenue to give Congress and agencies the tools to fight back against the corporate influence machine. In 2018, lobbyists spent a whopping $3.4 billion trying to influence public policy on behalf of their clients, including $95 million from the pro-corporate Chamber of Commerce, $73 million from the National Association of Realtors, and $28 million from the Big Pharma lobbying group. The right to petition our government does not allow industries to exercise unlimited financial influence over policymakers. That’s why I will impose a tax on any entity that spends over $500,000 per year on lobbying. The tax will reduce the financial incentive for excessive lobbying, and its revenue will be used to counter the effects of excessive lobbying by providing additional financial resources for agencies to research and review regulatory actions that are the targets of excessive lobbying activity, as well as additional funding for the National Public Advocate, an office established to help the public engage with the rulemaking process, and for Congressional support agencies.

Strengthen Congressional independence from lobbyists. Congressional offices and agencies are severely underfunded, creating unnecessary pressure to rely on lobbyists for expertise. My plan transitions Congressional staff to competitive salaries and reinstates the nonpartisan Congressional Office of Technology Assessment to help members of Congress understand new areas of science and technology – because members of Congress should be able to access expertise and information without being dependent on lobbyists.

[Demosthenes]

Zealot stop! Nothing you say will help him understand anything.

[Melena]

Isn't great when someone has no fucking idea what they are talking about, so they argue everyone else is wrong until people get frustrated and start insulting them, and then they get upset and play the victim.

Why do you think I don't engage him. I honestly think Trump would admit to being wrong on something before he does.

[D44kpunk]

That’s why I will impose a tax on any entity that spends over $500,000 per year on lobbying.

what are you talking about? the rest other than that is just pandering.. i posted the meat of her stance.

have you ever looked at campaign donations? yes i think 500k would easily get a law passed lmao

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/tot...?id=D000067823

educate yourself my man

[Zealot]

Fine...

[Zealot]

>>posts 2 sentences
>>ignores 11 paragraphs

"I posted the meat, the rest is just pandering!"

k I'm done

[D44kpunk]

good god.. please point out what else should be noted in that statement other than there will be a tax on over 500k/yr donations.

"nu i wont i'm done arguing"

also i like how there is a consensus that i won't admit that i'm wrong when i'm just posting general opinions, such as warrens platform issues are shit. there's no right and wrong on opinions on such things. circle jerk crew an interesting bunch

[archibaldcrane]

good god.. please point out what else should be noted in that statement other than there will be a tax on over 500k/yr donations.

oh I realized your malfunction

you think "$ spent lobbying" means "donations to a candidate"

that's not what it means.

[Zealot]

I don't slang or bang
I just smoke motherfuckers like it ain't no thang

[Tokitoki]

Also, she just plans to tax lobbying more, from the site you linked me to. Sounds like a real effective way to stop it. Give more money to the government while trying to stop giving money to the government or something

Why has nobody pointed out that taxing something isn't the same as giving an individual money?

[D44kpunk]

oh I realized your malfunction

you think "$ spent lobbying" means "donations to a candidate"

that's not what it means.

No? Where did I say that? I also linked alphabets spending. Case and point your malfunction

[archibaldcrane]

I quoted where you said it you dumb motherfucker

[Mertron]

what exactly is a politic anyway

[D44kpunk]

I quoted where you said it you dumb motherfucker

my bad, i assumed from multiple links, articles and the topic of the conversation you would understand what was being discussed and try to refute it instead of just pointing out errors in my sentences while ignoring the gist of the idea.

you truly are an intellectual.

loooool