3 ms·

I think sometimes people assume that x amount of lobbying dollars = y influence, but it's not a linear equation at all. At the end of the day, it is still peopl

by jimmy1 8y ago

I think sometimes people assume that x amount of lobbying dollars = y influence, but it's not a linear equation at all. At the end of the day, it is still people you are dealing with, and sometimes people can happily take your money, make you believe they are going to do what they said, and then not do it. Source: family members are lobbyists.

YeahSureWhyNot 8y ago
so what you are saying is its possible that poor Amazon wasn't able to get all the political influence it paid for and we are should not be angry at it for trying to buy itsel support that it otherwise would not have
- jimmy1 8y ago
  I think it's not as black and white. Amazon has all of that money because we as a society supported it's growth. We like Amazon, and we gave them our money. If the tables were turned, and you were a billionaire altruistic philanthropist, would you not attempt to do the same thing with your money? It's the same concept, just different side of the coin. Lobbying is not an exclusive concept. I could right now pay someone to go lobby the government for me. Obviously I wouldn't get very far, but what if my neighbors and I pooled our money together? And their neighbors? And so on and so forth and indeed that is how many lobbying arms are formed outside of industry. Ultimately at the end of the day, Lobbying is viewed with contempt because we have corrupt officials that weigh the opinions of certain lobbyist who are looking to corrupt the law for their own interests more than what is good for the general public. If you took out lobbying right now, you would still be left with corrupt officials that weigh the opinions of people with money more than the general public. But here is the kicker: you would do more harm than good, because now advocacy groups do not have a way to influence officials. Lobbying, however contemptible it seems to most people, exists because it does serve a purpose. Your elected officials cannot possibly keep up with the sea of issues in their constituencies. Lobbying provides a sort of self-selecting way for the more important issues to "bubble up to the top" What is always missing from conversations on lobbying is the hundreds of other lobbying groups that have as their mission to serve to improve the general good or public and how eliminating it would impact the good that is done by them (as evidenced by sibling comment by mtgx).
michaelbuckbee 8y ago
This just means that it's "pay to play" not "play to win". There was a freshman congressperson who noted that during their initial, explicitly nonpartisan policy briefings that both sides of issues were represented by different lobbying firms. Imagine if there was a policy briefing for Congress around encryption standards and the only voices in the room were vendors selling encryption software. There's no space in that framework to communicate with our governmental leaders about things like open source / the benefits of non-proprietary standards, etc. And it's that way for every conceivable topic.
mtgx 8y ago
Sure, they may not get their way 100% of the time, but studies have shown that corporate lobbying highly correlates with what U.S. politicians support or don't support. Meanwhile, what the People support has ZERO correlation with how politicians will vote for something. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig Also, the U.S. system of "vote transparency" (votes are anonymous in almost all other cases, and for good reason) in Congress means that the lobbyists know which politician voted for what, and the politicians also know that the companies donating tens of thousand of dollars to them will know how they voted, too - so they will vote "accordingly" if they want that income stream to continue in the future. This is a rotten/corrupt relationship/dependency that should not exist in a democracy that's supposed to listen to the "voice of the people".
refurb 8y ago
And people should also understand where lobbying dollars go. You could consider lobbyists management consultants for the gov't. You hire a firm who will develop a lobbying strategy for you - who you should talk to, what you should say, who you should partner with, etc. It's not like you spend $600K on lobbying and it's a $600K transfer from the corporation to the elected officials. A lot of that money ends up in the hands of the lobbyists.
vicpara 8y ago
The nice thing about lobbying is that you only need to spend just the minimum amount that tips the balance. Just like Trump used money and what not in his elections to win just enough votes, where it actually mattered :). Another cool thing about lobbying is that you can explore the landscape and find the weakest link that gets you what you want. You choose your own target at your own pace and time. Unlike the democratic process that happens only now and then. Additionally, you can apply pressure in one or multiple points. Whoever is lobbying not only has resources as in $$$ but also has a bit more time to wait. People die, companies survive for decades or even centuries. You only need to get things 'right' once and then you are set for life. If it wouldn't work, nobody would use it.

by jimmy1 8y ago

YeahSureWhyNot 8y ago

so what you are saying is its possible that poor Amazon wasn't able to get all the political influence it paid for and we are should not be angry at it for trying to buy itsel support that it otherwise would not have

jimmy1 8y ago
I think it's not as black and white. Amazon has all of that money because we as a society supported it's growth. We like Amazon, and we gave them our money. If the tables were turned, and you were a billionaire altruistic philanthropist, would you not attempt to do the same thing with your money? It's the same concept, just different side of the coin. Lobbying is not an exclusive concept. I could right now pay someone to go lobby the government for me. Obviously I wouldn't get very far, but what if my neighbors and I pooled our money together? And their neighbors? And so on and so forth and indeed that is how many lobbying arms are formed outside of industry. Ultimately at the end of the day, Lobbying is viewed with contempt because we have corrupt officials that weigh the opinions of certain lobbyist who are looking to corrupt the law for their own interests more than what is good for the general public. If you took out lobbying right now, you would still be left with corrupt officials that weigh the opinions of people with money more than the general public. But here is the kicker: you would do more harm than good, because now advocacy groups do not have a way to influence officials. Lobbying, however contemptible it seems to most people, exists because it does serve a purpose. Your elected officials cannot possibly keep up with the sea of issues in their constituencies. Lobbying provides a sort of self-selecting way for the more important issues to "bubble up to the top" What is always missing from conversations on lobbying is the hundreds of other lobbying groups that have as their mission to serve to improve the general good or public and how eliminating it would impact the good that is done by them (as evidenced by sibling comment by mtgx).

michaelbuckbee 8y ago

This just means that it's "pay to play" not "play to win". There was a freshman congressperson who noted that during their initial, explicitly nonpartisan policy briefings that both sides of issues were represented by different lobbying firms. Imagine if there was a policy briefing for Congress around encryption standards and the only voices in the room were vendors selling encryption software. There's no space in that framework to communicate with our governmental leaders about things like open source / the benefits of non-proprietary standards, etc. And it's that way for every conceivable topic.

mtgx 8y ago

Sure, they may not get their way 100% of the time, but studies have shown that corporate lobbying highly correlates with what U.S. politicians support or don't support. Meanwhile, what the People support has ZERO correlation with how politicians will vote for something. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5tu32CCA_Ig Also, the U.S. system of "vote transparency" (votes are anonymous in almost all other cases, and for good reason) in Congress means that the lobbyists know which politician voted for what, and the politicians also know that the companies donating tens of thousand of dollars to them will know how they voted, too - so they will vote "accordingly" if they want that income stream to continue in the future. This is a rotten/corrupt relationship/dependency that should not exist in a democracy that's supposed to listen to the "voice of the people".

refurb 8y ago

And people should also understand where lobbying dollars go. You could consider lobbyists management consultants for the gov't. You hire a firm who will develop a lobbying strategy for you - who you should talk to, what you should say, who you should partner with, etc. It's not like you spend $600K on lobbying and it's a $600K transfer from the corporation to the elected officials. A lot of that money ends up in the hands of the lobbyists.

vicpara 8y ago

The nice thing about lobbying is that you only need to spend just the minimum amount that tips the balance. Just like Trump used money and what not in his elections to win just enough votes, where it actually mattered :). Another cool thing about lobbying is that you can explore the landscape and find the weakest link that gets you what you want. You choose your own target at your own pace and time. Unlike the democratic process that happens only now and then. Additionally, you can apply pressure in one or multiple points. Whoever is lobbying not only has resources as in $$$ but also has a bit more time to wait. People die, companies survive for decades or even centuries. You only need to get things 'right' once and then you are set for life. If it wouldn't work, nobody would use it.