Obama gives lobbyists the boot

[Meatball]

First, corporations by definition are " institution that is granted a charter recognizing it as a separate legal entity having its own rights, privileges, and liabilities distinct from those of its members." By having it's own rights, privledges, and liabilities gives a corporation all the legally granted rights of any person. They are as close to people as we are in the eyes of any (nearly world-wide) country, especially those doing business with the corporations overseas which contributes to our economy.

That's my point. This is a problem.

As far as campaign contributions go, why shouldn't they be able to contribute? If a contributions only given by individuals, we would not have a campaign process as we know it.

...which is a good thing.

You would get a poll every four years and not even have heard of any of the candidates.

..because the media has disappeared?

If Cell Phones united wanted to pass a law requiring cell phone usage while driving, we would all concider that rediculous ofcourse. But lets say thats what they wanted, and they sat down with Obama during his campaign, and said I want this passed, and we will give you 50 million for your efforts, he would say OK, and instantly pay for his campaign- No one would pass up such an offer.

So Obama gets elected thanks to Cell Phone united, and he introduces this idea to congress. Congress laughs.

Except a large portion of congress is also on the Cell Phone United payroll and they actually pass the law and fuck over the majority of americans.

My point is the system of checks and balances is in place so that no laws will be passed that is not for the greater good of the country.

Are you serious? Congress is considered a system of checks and balances? No laws are passed that aren't for the 'greater good'? You're seriously on crack.

Lobbyist don't bribe, they persuade. They show the other side of the issue, get the other information into their head. It doesn't mean the lobbyist is trying to persuade a bad thing, and even if he was, the senator has no reason to abide by what he says. A politician is in congress because he is an intelligent man capable of making logically decisions. We put them in office for their ability to make decisions, hard or easy.

They have a constitutionally-protected right to petition the government. The problem is that while a corporation has no problem allocating millions of dollars to spend getting lobbyists into powerful advisory committees and fighting for it's best interests, it's not as easy for me to do that. They have a distinct advantage and it shows in our lawmaking process. Why do you think the healthcare debate is as skewed as it is? You don't find it odd that such a large number of these intelligent men and women arrive at the logical solution that the insurance companies deserve a monopoly, that the government has no right to offer health insurance (even alongside private companies), that financial companies should function under little-to-no regulation (despite evidence that it doesn't work)? Either we ended up with a bad batch of logicians or there's something influencing their logic, like the documented millions of dollars they receive from lobbying groups, for example.

The "transparency of the government".

This is do not understand. Why have a government to be transparent? Why even have a government at all? They are entrusted BY US to improve the standards of our nation. They get paid to do there job.

If anything they need to be more solid. They do not need to guide our lives, just maintain a civil liberty between each individual.

You have no understanding of what transparency is.

I can't think of any rational argument against increased government transparency.