Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-16-2009, 03:52 PM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,947,486 times
Reputation: 3159

Advertisements

Everyone with two brain cells should understand that special interest groups have too much control over our politicians. I have a simple idea as to end this. Not complicated. Does not take a 1000 page bill. Here is the bill.

If a representative takes any money in contributions or from lobbyist in any form, that representative may not vote on any bill that would affect the special interest group. Also, the representative may not lobby on behalf of the special interest group to have any other representative vote for or against a bill affecting the special interest group. Furthermore, no representative will be allowed to work for or receive financial compensation from a speciail interest group that he voted for or against in any legislation within 5 years after he leaves office.

Any representative found in violation by a court of law and not the house rules committee will be found in violation and guilty of a felony punishable with up to 10 years in prison.

I don't care if it is the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Insurance companies, or the national association of farters. It is time to take our government back.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-16-2009, 03:54 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,970,206 times
Reputation: 1401
Agreed. The concept of "free speech" is a convenient loophole, but it still amounts to bribery.

lobbyists and former lobbyists are nothing more than unAmerican parasite leeches, as close to the bottom of the totem pole as trial lawyers. Edwards and Thompson are examples of the most unAmerican folks in our country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2009, 03:56 PM
 
Location: Central Maine
4,697 posts, read 6,447,687 times
Reputation: 5047
Sounds good to me!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2009, 04:02 PM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,947,486 times
Reputation: 3159
Quote:
Originally Posted by ViewFromThePeak View Post
Agreed. The concept of "free speech" is a convenient loophole, but it still amounts to bribery.

lobbyists and former lobbyists are nothing more than unAmerican parasite leeches, as close to the bottom of the totem pole as trial lawyers. Edwards and Thompson are examples of the most unAmerican folks in our country.
There is no problem with free speech. There is no restriction on the lobbyist. The restriction is on the congress. The lobbyist can give money, but why would they if the person that give money to can't vote on the issue they want.

This is the grass roots issue that needs to take hold. Why would a congress person be against it, and if they are, vote them out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2009, 04:04 PM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,852,928 times
Reputation: 9283
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
Everyone with two brain cells should understand that special interest groups have too much control over our politicians. I have a simple idea as to end this. Not complicated. Does not take a 1000 page bill. Here is the bill.

If a representative takes any money in contributions or from lobbyist in any form, that representative may not vote on any bill that would affect the special interest group. Also, the representative may not lobby on behalf of the special interest group to have any other representative vote for or against a bill affecting the special interest group. Furthermore, no representative will be allowed to work for or receive financial compensation from a speciail interest group that he voted for or against in any legislation within 5 years after he leaves office.

Any representative found in violation by a court of law and not the house rules committee will be found in violation and guilty of a felony punishable with up to 10 years in prison.

I don't care if it is the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Insurance companies, or the national association of farters. It is time to take our government back.
You do realize if that ever took place... then nobody would be "able" to vote on any legislation... and when we need a "minimum" number of "Yes" votes, that would mean new bills/legislation would be impossible to pass... and then what about the Federal Budget? Nobody would be able to pass it.. instead of allowing lobbyist as you posted about... how about we BAN all and any lobbyist PERIOD... I doubt the liberals would go for that... their entire existence is tied to lobbyists...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2009, 04:07 PM
 
Location: Raleigh, NC
9,059 posts, read 12,970,206 times
Reputation: 1401
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
There is no problem with free speech. There is no restriction on the lobbyist. The restriction is on the congress. The lobbyist can give money, but why would they if the person that give money to can't vote on the issue they want.

This is the grass roots issue that needs to take hold. Why would a congress person be against it, and if they are, vote them out.
You cannot vote them out because the district is constantly gerrymandered to favor their re-election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2009, 04:14 PM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,947,486 times
Reputation: 3159
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
You do realize if that ever took place... then nobody would be "able" to vote on any legislation... and when we need a "minimum" number of "Yes" votes, that would mean new bills/legislation would be impossible to pass... and then what about the Federal Budget? Nobody would be able to pass it.. instead of allowing lobbyist as you posted about... how about we BAN all and any lobbyist PERIOD... I doubt the liberals would go for that... their entire existence is tied to lobbyists...
That is actually not the case. The sierra club does not give money to every congressman, nor do most special interests groups. Besides that you would have to start it sometime in the future. Say 2010. Need more than getting rid of the lobbyist. Need to also get rid of the campaign contributions from special interests groups. If they know that a congressman will likely vote their way they will not give him any money.
Both parties entire existence is owed to lobbyist and special interest groups. Most of the time he who gets the most financial contributions wins the election.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2009, 04:22 PM
 
20,187 posts, read 23,852,928 times
Reputation: 9283
I have to say that you are wrong... how many Sierra club-esque groups are there? You look at any representative and pretty much all of them have contributions from one point or another... corporations tend to donate to BOTH parties at the same time... its easier to buy the winner that way... If one special interest group don't give money to them there will be another SIMILAR interest group that will...

I would ban "corporate" donations to candidates, ban corporations from making ads or voice political rhetoric... I would also ban corporations from even pressing for or against political agendas... the Congress works for the people and only the people... not corporations or special interests... I am tired, so tired of special interests...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2009, 05:12 PM
 
12,436 posts, read 11,947,486 times
Reputation: 3159
Quote:
Originally Posted by evilnewbie View Post
I have to say that you are wrong... how many Sierra club-esque groups are there? You look at any representative and pretty much all of them have contributions from one point or another... corporations tend to donate to BOTH parties at the same time... its easier to buy the winner that way... If one special interest group don't give money to them there will be another SIMILAR interest group that will...

I would ban "corporate" donations to candidates, ban corporations from making ads or voice political rhetoric... I would also ban corporations from even pressing for or against political agendas... the Congress works for the people and only the people... not corporations or special interests... I am tired, so tired of special interests...
Well unfortunately, I don't think we will be able to ban ads as that is probably a freedom of speech issue unless the Constitution is amended. Actually I think that has been tested before.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-16-2009, 05:13 PM
 
4,465 posts, read 7,999,750 times
Reputation: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2 View Post
Everyone with two brain cells should understand that special interest groups have too much control over our politicians. I have a simple idea as to end this. Not complicated. Does not take a 1000 page bill. Here is the bill.

If a representative takes any money in contributions or from lobbyist in any form, that representative may not vote on any bill that would affect the special interest group. Also, the representative may not lobby on behalf of the special interest group to have any other representative vote for or against a bill affecting the special interest group. Furthermore, no representative will be allowed to work for or receive financial compensation from a speciail interest group that he voted for or against in any legislation within 5 years after he leaves office.

Any representative found in violation by a court of law and not the house rules committee will be found in violation and guilty of a felony punishable with up to 10 years in prison.

I don't care if it is the Sierra Club, Greenpeace, Insurance companies, or the national association of farters. It is time to take our government back.
The problem begins with the Supreme Court, which in the 19th century gave corporations personhood.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top