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.
But why would he offer that line as a campaign promise in 2008 yet do it anyway?
I'm not defending Obama, because it was a really dumb thing to say. What he didn't realize is that industry and organizations hire lobbyists because they're often experts in their field--they understand all the intricate sides of the issues they're working on. Lobbyists aren't bad--it makes sense for groups with skin in the game on a policy issue to bring people in who can argue their side to the people setting policy. Lobbying groups are only a problem when they give huge campaign contributions and freebies to elected officials to sway people to their side, vs. helping them to understand the issues.
I think Obama found out pretty quickly that if you want to hire smart people who understand how government works, and know the issues inside and out, he was a fool to bring up a ban on hiring former lobbyists. Lots of lobbyists work for groups that DON'T do huge campaign contributions. Others do.
ANOTHER:
January 8th, 2009
WASHINGTON (CNN) - President-elect Barack Obama, who campaigned on lessening the influence of lobbyists in government, has chosen a defense expert who is currently a vice president and lobbyist for one of the country's biggest defense contractors to be his deputy secretary of defense.
Here's my question--if the lobbyist is no longer a lobbyist--if he no longer works for the group and gets any kind of financial support from them, and he's no longer in a position to give money to candidates--how great is his influence? The ability to give money and freebies is the issue. When you hire a former lobbyist, you have someone on board who understands the players, understands how the legislative process works, and understands the issues inside and out.
Do you belong to a church, have kids in boy scouts, or participate in any kind of civic organization? I promise you--all those groups have lobbyists. People who are elected to office can't be experts in every area. They pass laws every day that impact millions of people. The job of a lobbyist is to follow proposed legislation, and let elected leaders know how that law will impact the people they represent. It's not evil--it makes government work. The only problem is when the influence of those groups moves from educating leaders to essentially paying them off. That's where the corruption comes in.
Again--it was really dumb for Obama to make that promise.
Do you belong to a church, have kids in boy scouts, or participate in any kind of civic organization? I promise you--all those groups have lobbyists. People who are elected to office can't be experts in every area. They pass laws every day that impact millions of people. The job of a lobbyist is to follow proposed legislation, and let elected leaders know how that law will impact the people they represent. It's not evil--it makes government work. The only problem is when the influence of those groups moves from educating leaders to essentially paying them off. That's where the corruption comes in.
Again--it was really dumb for Obama to make that promise.
Ah, but many of these lobbyists still have ties to corporations and special interests.
Ah, but many of these lobbyists still have ties to corporations and special interests.
That's exactly right. It isn't the role as a lobbyist that's the problem--it's their own financial investment in a group that has the ability to give big dollars to sway elections. I think you should have to divest yourself financially from any group that could have an influential role if you're appointed or hired to a job that writes policy in an administration. As I said before--get that money out of politics and you fix lots of problems.
I'm not defending Obama, because it was a really dumb thing to say. What he didn't realize is that industry and organizations hire lobbyists because they're often experts in their field--they understand all the intricate sides of the issues they're working on. Lobbyists aren't bad--it makes sense for groups with skin in the game on a policy issue to bring people in who can argue their side to the people setting policy. Lobbying groups are only a problem when they give huge campaign contributions and freebies to elected officials to sway people to their side, vs. helping them to understand the issues.
I think Obama found out pretty quickly that if you want to hire smart people who understand how government works, and know the issues inside and out, he was a fool to bring up a ban on hiring former lobbyists. Lots of lobbyists work for groups that DON'T do huge campaign contributions. Others do.
But how many votes did he "buy" with the promises about lobbyists? All of them had to be very unhappy to see him appointing lobbyists go bureaucratic jobs before he got his bed warm in the White House.
Lobbyists may not be bad people but when they start throwing money around to politicians they become bad people. Your argument is very weak and holds no water at all.
Here's my question--if the lobbyist is no longer a lobbyist--if he no longer works for the group and gets any kind of financial support from them, and he's no longer in a position to give money to candidates--how great is his influence? The ability to give money and freebies is the issue. When you hire a former lobbyist, you have someone on board who understands the players, understands how the legislative process works, and understands the issues inside and out.
I just heard a very annoying bit of news about lobbyists. What was said was, essentially, that lobbyists who are not registered as such are bundling money from those who are registered and spreading it around. Explain how that works out with your statement about influence and registration. If hey are so untruthful with politicians maybe they can play the same games among themselves.
But how many votes did he "buy" with the promises about lobbyists? All of them had to be very unhappy to see him appointing lobbyists go bureaucratic jobs before he got his bed warm in the White House.
Lobbyists may not be bad people but when they start throwing money around to politicians they become bad people. Your argument is very weak and holds no water at all.
It's simply a way to rationalize why Obama broke his campaign promise and yet doesn't need to apologize for doing so.
Everything this moron said he was NOT going to do IS doing and the Left still buys it hook line and sinker. What maroons!
You got that right. Morons believe a moron, power for the course. Some dang big bait on the hook!
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.
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.
