Would you be able to explain to someone what*Lobbying means,and how it works, with your own words, without searching over the internet/books ?
If so, please post here how you'd do so.
Would you be able to explain to someone what*Lobbying means,and how it works, with your own words, without searching over the internet/books ?
If so, please post here how you'd do so.
Yeah, that's pretty much it.*
An organization want a politician to vote a certain way so he gives him some money as a "campaign contribution", basically a bribe.*
It's what happens when a capitalist nation tries to let the big organizations have their way with the political system. One of the worst things that America ever thought up.
You hire someone who has inside connections with politicians to speak on your behalf to get laws passed that favour your interests.
I'm pretty sure lobbyists aren't actually allowed to give gifts, though that does happen. That would sort of invalidate the 'legalized' thing though. I may be completely wrong though, and it's kind of like that regardless...
Essentially, lobbyists are people arguing a position to Congressmen. They're usually hired by interest groups, private-sector entities, or other large groups in order to make their positions known and get legislation passed in their favor. The problem is this usually involves a lot of money, and better and more numerous lobbyists can corrupt the system. It's seen by the public as bad, but I personally believe that's just because there isn't nearly enough oversight.
---------- Post added 2012-03-06 at 09:14 PM ----------
Only that's a different phenomenon altogether and involves a ton of loopholes.
Last edited by Caiada; 2012-03-07 at 02:15 AM.
@Caiada - How could oversight over Lobbying be improved?
More clarity, improving disclosure, especially required disclosure, limiting the capitalistic influence (limiting the amount of lobbying one body could do, for example.) Also, not allowing former congressmen to do it would probably be a step in the right direction, but at that point you might as well outlaw it altogether.
I'm not educated enough about it to go more in-depth, unfortunately. The idea of allowing organizations to have more of a say through an advocate, imo, is not a bad thing, it's just that having people who's sole job is to get this legislation passed no matter what means more skilled lobbyists turn the power towards the organizations with more money.
It's a sticky situation no matter what, and I can definitely understand the point of people who want it removed entirely.
They usually don't give gifts directly (they save that for the regulators lol). Instead they promise campaign contributions and make promises of future payments in the form of grants, appearance fees, actual jobs. Usually there is also a threat component of withholding funds or public support unless they get their way.
Just another example of how money corrupts the systrem.
This guy sums up the lobbyist/politician relationship pretty well:
http://visual.ly/lobbyists-how-we-run-washington
So yeah, Noobadin is correct.
---------- Post added 2012-03-06 at 11:43 PM ----------
They're not technically allowed to give gifts, but they find ways around that pretty easily.
Putin khuliyo