Obama gives lobbyists the boot

[Robpotter]

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.

First, your statements contradict each other. You want more transparency of the government... but you also want corporations to not be able to make campaign contributions... although im sure you don't get the connection yet meatball, I will explain your error.

You would like the people to make the decisions, as to not "fuck up [themselves]" correct? Who do you think that corporation is? It is made up from people all across America, relying on that paycheck to come through. They do make the laws. If you want the government to be more invisible, you would keep corporation contributions. This aligns the laws of the state to be akin to those of the people.

Also, you are not broad enough visioned. You would never make a good politician. Say they do accept a bribe, and pass a horrible law that truly hurts the United States. BAM, next state election everyone of those men who voted for the new bill is gone. Never to be elected again. Our government officials are much smarter then that.

and to just riddle your theory with bullet holes, do you really expect a law based solely on a corporation, that hinders all of America, to make it through BOTH houses of congress, and the president? Now you'l say it can pass without president approval, which is true if congress grants a 2/3 vote (a super majority, that is rarely seen on controversal laws). and then, the supreme court (which never is effected by campaign contributions... they dont take any) can easily scratch that law from existence declaring it unconstitutional (which it would be if it truly hindered America).

And now the media is the entire source of public opinion. How many commercials do you see for president elctions? tons. How do you think that each politician would even be noticed if they didn't even have the money to pay for a good marketer?

You say Im on crack as well? Well, since crack is a derivative of cocaine which is a powerful stimulant, encouraging thought, I see myself one leg up from you.. the mentally incompetent.