5 ms·
This is like saying any engineer would like it to be illegal to have people paid to write documentation. There's an art to communication, especially in niche ar
by kuhewa 3y ago
This is like saying any engineer would like it to be illegal to have people paid to write documentation. There's an art to communication, especially in niche area like getting the ear of the right legislators and translating a topic in terms they will understand. Louis Rossman hired lobbyists to get right to repair legislation passed. If hiring a lobbyist is illegal it wouldn't prevent lobbying, it will keep occuring just in wink wink nudge nudge smoke filled back room quid pro quo sort of channels and less accessibly.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- tough 3y agoNah, It's just corruption smoke and mirrors, it's just wealth transfer in exchange for kickbacks but adding a middleman some how makes it legal. Like SuperPAC's and all that bullshit
- kuhewa 3y agoYes, but making it illegal would mean well meaning groups also can't bend the ear of politicians when they need to. The heavily moneyed interests don't really need professional lobbyists so much when they can offer high six figure consulting salaries to politicians once they leave office, have former company people in govt positions, can communicate through campaign funding etc. Bigger broader problem. Meanwhile a right to repair advocate very much could benefit from hiring a guy that knows the office hours of the legislator and who the best staffers would be to float an idea with.
- hanselot 3y agoSo what you are saying is that we should allow people with bad intentions the ability to influence politicians monetarily (literally bribery), so the few morsels of good money that can buy any influence may have a chance to also be considered for inclusion? Edit: I see your point wrt alternative bribery schemes existing, and isn't the solution perhaps for those schemes to also be shut down, instead of allowing it because some good might come of it? Hmmmm, it's difficult not to assume you are yourself a lobbyist or politician if you take this position, given that the coffers of those with ill intent are vastly more lined than the alternative...
- tough 3y agoThanks for putting words on what was rubbing me wrong. We need something better than this fake democracy we inherited.
- kuhewa 3y ago> Hmmmm, it's difficult not to assume you are yourself a lobbyist or politician Well, it probably is difficult if one is not very good at thinking. Regarding your edit, sure, but that's not the content of the post I replied to. That was about banning lobbying and I'm making the point that consequences of that could be counterproductive and make for an even less level playing field.
- themitigating 3y agoNothing in the government should benefit those with more money.
- kuhewa 3y agoThat's a nice soundbyte. How are you doing to get us there though without worse unintended consequences than the status quo?
- themitigating 3y agoBy banning lobbying and political donations
- j16sdiz 3y agoIt should be do it the reverse way: we should vote for lobbyists and have the lawmaker paid to write the law for us. Voting lawmaker who don’t know the subject don’t help
- Etrnl_President 3y agoIt would be far more effective to strike the incentive for lobbying by eliminating the coercion inherent to the system.
- kuhewa 3y agoRun for office. Seriously. Also I'll point out no lawmaker is going to be very well versed in every subject on which legislation is necessary.