|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,767 Year: 4,024/9,624 Month: 895/974 Week: 222/286 Day: 29/109 Hour: 2/3 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Be afraid. Be very afraid. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
PT writes: Would it take much more than a few changes to accounting law? Unfortunately it would likely require a major change in the makeup of the Federal Courts and SCOTUS. As long as the Constitutional interpretation is that Corporations are individuals with the right of freedom of speech I see no way lobbyists could be prevented from having direct access to Legislators and members of the Executive branch.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 374 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined: |
Access is one thing but a 9 billion/yr industry is another. It really shouldn't cost anything to have your govts ear.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I couldn't describe the mechanics of the thing for you but my point was that it was a good idea. Would it take much more than a few changes to accounting law? So you believe you've heard something about which to be encouraged. You even think Trump's proposal is possible although you have no idea how. Let me play a bit of devil's advocate. A lobbyist is a person petitioning the government and advocating for action. Those actions may be anything from selecting who ought to be on a postage stamp to what recommending what position ought to be taken on any issue imaginable. Ideally those folks would be well informed experts and scientists with relevant information about facts and issues that on which government itself has little to no expertise. Given that and the first amendment, just what kind of restrictions do you think would pass muster. Do you imagine that every person petitioning the government must do so on a first person basis only, getting off from whatever work they need to do to support their families or would it be more efficient in some cases to have a professional who knows the ins and outs of the complex government to sit in a senator's office and wait to meet with him. I understand the desire to drain the swamp. Here is how you do it Trump style:
quote: That's right. We're going to clean out that stinky swamp of scientists and researchers and get some new denizens. Let's drain out that expertise and get in some deniers. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22490 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.0 |
Wrong thread.
Edited by Percy, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
PT writes: Access is one thing but a 9 billion/yr industry is another. It really shouldn't cost anything to have your govts ear. You might think so which is why I said to achieve that would require a change in the Federal Courts and in particular SCOTUS. Beginning with Buckley v. Valeo and continuing through a whole series of cases to the most recent McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission our Federal Courts have determined that money is a form of Free Speech, that Corporations may spend general treasury money during elections and that any limits on the amounts they can spend are unconstitutional. In addition the current mess of rules (almost every branch, every executive area and every committee has their own set of lobbying rules) there is a major loophole going back again to a court case, United States v. Harriss where the SCOTUS decided while the various legislative branches can pass laws controlling lobbying, that the act applies only to paid lobbyists who directly communicate with members of Congress on pending or proposed federal legislation. So if they instead talk to staff or just speak in public and not directly to the members of Congress then the laws do not apply. While the actual people holding elected position change regularly much of the staff remains the same from term to term. The newly elected may well bring in a few of his own people at the top but the vast majority of Federal workers do not just continue but are protected by law from being fired to bring in cronies.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1.61803 Member (Idle past 1530 days) Posts: 2928 From: Lone Star State USA Joined:
|
Lobbyist? we don't need no stinking lobbyist.
What need of lobbyist when you can just hire the fookin CEO to affect your goals and be done with it.Just yesterday: quote: Wait for it......
quote: Yep ladies and gents, "overwhelming science" that the Earth was flat. Hence we should not believe Science now because ya know it could just be a bunch of wrong facts. Source: http://thehill.com/...ber-on-climate-change-scientists-get-a Edited by 1.61803, : No reason given."You were not there for the beginning. You will not be there for the end. Your knowledge of what is going on can only be superficial and relative" William S. Burroughs
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
caffeine Member (Idle past 1050 days) Posts: 1800 From: Prague, Czech Republic Joined:
|
I couldn't describe the mechanics of the thing for you but my point was that it was a good idea. Would it take much more than a few changes to accounting law? Anyway my real point was that not all of the voices will be coming from inside his head and that seemed encouraging. Banning lobbyists seems a stupid idea. The personal access of top CEOs and the megarich would not go away - some of them are in the cabinet, after all. But access becomes harder for non-profits, advocacy groups, unions etc. What's this supposed to achieve?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 374 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined: |
A lobbyist is a person petitioning the government and advocating for action. Those actions may be anything from selecting who ought to be on a postage stamp to what recommending what position ought to be taken on any issue imaginable. Ideally those folks would be well informed experts and scientists with relevant information about facts and issues that on which government itself has little to no expertise. The idea of being able to petition the govt is a good one and every citizen should have that ability. The idea of congregating opinions and petitioning the govt with the weight of the number who hold that opinion is a good one. The problem comes with the mechanism that allows the weight of money to replace the weight of individual opinion. Wealth makes one opinion heavier than the next. Perhaps that is not an entirely bad thing as wealth is a good indicator of having been right (or lucky or guilty) in the past. However, it certainly goes against the idea that, in a democracy, opinions should be held with equal regard. The fact that well monied professional advocates snatch up all of the access time is proof positive that the system is not working as intended or achieving the goals that make it a good idea. It is working in direct opposition to those goals. The access of unions, non-profits, citizen coalitions etc is miniscule compared to those who can afford an army of top level lobbyists. The vast majority of the lobbying that takes place serves commercial interests and essentially seeks to keep things the way that the are. I am not saying that industry shouldn't have an influence on the govt but I am saying that they shouldn't have all of the influence. The thought that you can spend billions to get the 'best' information into the hands of govt is retarded and about as far from the ideals of democracy that you can get. So yes I think it is a good idea to stick a wrench in the gears of this machine.
That's right. We're going to clean out that stinky swamp of scientists and researchers and get some new denizens. Let's drain out that expertise and get in some deniers. You are conflating the issues. Lobbyists are not the same thing as the scientists at the DOE.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
However, it certainly goes against the idea that, in a democracy, opinions should be held with equal regard.... The fact that well monied professional advocates snatch up all of the access time is proof positive that the system is not working as intended or achieving the goals that make it a good idea. You are preaching to the choir. I know that there is a problem. What I am wondering is why you are hopeful that president elect Trump is likely to fix the problem.
You are conflating the issues. Lobbyists are not the same thing as the scientists at the DOE. I am not conflating issues. I'm pointing to something that is more indicative of what Trump might actually accomplish, something not very hopeful and comparing that to your hope that Trump might accomplish something outside of his power set. In short, Trump's draining of the swamp promise seems more likely to include things such as making the Departments of Energy, Education, and the EPA into dangerously ineffective nothings, and unlikely to include getting the lobbyists out of Washington. About the only thing about Trump for which I am optimistic is that he is less likely to needlessly provoke a fight with Russia than Clinton might be. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Genomicus Member (Idle past 1967 days) Posts: 852 Joined:
|
Relax, Lammy, nobody is coming after you. Says the white, cisgender, heterosexual Protestant.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 420 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Actually there are several recent events related to that. In North Carolina the Republican Legislature is trying to remove most of the power of the incoming Democrat Governor who opposed recent bathroom laws and in Louisiana a Republican attorney general filed a lawsuit challenging the Democratic governor’s order that protected state LGBT employees from discrimination even though it allowed an exception which would allow religious organizations that contracted with the state to continue their discriminatory practices.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dogmafood Member (Idle past 374 days) Posts: 1815 From: Ontario Canada Joined: |
I'm pointing to something that is more indicative of what Trump might actually accomplish, something not very hopeful and comparing that to your hope that Trump might accomplish something outside of his power set. Obama made changes to the lobbying rules that had a positive if not substantial effect. Perhaps Trump can advance on that. The DOE is not primarily involved with the processing of fossil fuels but rather with nuclear energy/weapons and their proliferation. So the whole issue is a bit of a red herring. On top of that what ability does Trump have to purge the scientists at the DOE? How many would be left if he got rid of those who accept AGM? Why would he even bother? Consider the appointment of former CEO of Exxon Mobile Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State. The fear mongers will say that the sky is falling but when I look at Exxon's position on global warming I see
quote: So does Rex believe the science on AGM? Does Elon Musk? Why would he be looking to these people for their opinions if they do?
You are preaching to the choir. Yes I am in the choir as well most of the time. Usually drunk and singing out of tune.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Obama made changes to the lobbying rules that had a positive if not substantial effect. Perhaps Trump can advance on that. Thanks for your answer. At least that's something substantive.
The DOE is not primarily involved with the processing of fossil fuels but rather with nuclear energy/weapons and their proliferation. So the whole issue is a bit of a red herring. The Department of Energy conducts and funds research on alternative power sources, and regardless of whether they are primarily involved with fossil fuels, they do have significant input into clean energy technologies are part of Obama's energy policy. So the issue is not a red herring.
On top of that what ability does Trump have to purge the scientists at the DOE Trump's appointee to the Department of Energy can do whatever he decides to do. He will be appointing a large portion of the managers at the agency who have the power to evaluate, hire, and fire. Is your question serious? What would prevent them from letting go scientists based on a list of AGW proponents other than the fact that the department refused to provide the list? If that leaves too few scientists to be effective, well, Perry wanted to close the department down anyway. How many scientists are needed to enforce a policy of giving the oil companies exactly what their scientists ask for anyway?
So does Rex believe the science on AGM? Does Elon Musk? Why would he be looking to these people for their opinions if they do? I don't see that Tillerman's opinion on AGW is important here given that he is the Secretary of State. It looks as if what is valued is Tillerman's opinion on how to make oil deals with Russia. Elon Musk is definitely not an AGW denier, but he's also not being appointed to either the EPA or the Department of Energy. Who did get appointed to the EPA?Scott Pruitt, a climate change skeptic. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1431 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined:
|
And in other news, North Carolina just passed a series of laws (both house and senate and signed by current governor) gutting the power of the governor and supreme court ... because they didn't win the elections.
This is abuse of power. Is it just the start? Edited by RAZD, : .by our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
This is abuse of power. Is it just the start? More of a continuation. After the previous governor was elected, the legislature expanded the governor's power, and now they decrease it back to what they tolerate when the governorship is held by Democrats. The Republicans are also tinkering with the makeup of election boards to make them more amenable to partisan oversight. McCrory is gone because he became the face for the most abusive things the Republican legislature did over the last 8 years. However McCrory was far more moderate than was the legislature, and in fact, McCrory was the only NC Republican to lose this past election. I expect that governor elect Cooper is going to have a hard time making changes in NC. The republicans still have a veto proof majority in the state legislature. His efforts are probably best spent in the bully pulpit and in getting more Democrats elected over the next four years. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson Seems to me if its clear that certain things that require ancient dates couldn't possibly be true, we are on our way to throwing out all those ancient dates on the basis of the actual evidence. -- Faith
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024