4 ms·

they aren't wildly different the overlap between 'gifts' and 'lobbying' is significant, and the latter term is often used euphemistically to describe exactly t

they aren't wildly different the overlap between 'gifts' and 'lobbying' is significant, and the latter term is often used euphemistically to describe exactly that overlap

JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> overlap between 'gifts' and 'lobbying' is significant Source? Most federal electeds are prohibited from accepting gifts from lobbyists [1]. (Meals are capped at $50. Yes, most electeds take these limits seriously.) > is often used euphemistically to describe exactly that overlap This is a reflection of the state of civic education in our country. Someone who cannot differentiate lobbying (paid to reimbursed to pro bono) from gifts from bribery is almost entirely lobotomised from being able to wield one of the most basic civic powers: assembly. [1] https://ethics.house.gov/content/gifts/prohibited-lobbyist-gifts https://ethics.house.gov/content/gifts/prohibited-lobbyist-g...
- bluGill 2y ago
  What is the value of me telling you [some very specific economic indicator] is [good/bad]? Technically this is public information you can get from many sources, but you call the lobbyist in that industry because they know. One the one hand the information is free, on the other hand to understand what all those numbers mean and give a quick summary is very valuable.
  - JumpCrisscross 2y ago
    > on the other hand to understand what all those numbers mean and give a quick summary is very valuable A Taylor Swift concert ticket from Ticketmaster obviously isn’t in that grey area.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    The proper and intended purpose of lobbyists is to communicate information that is not readily available or understood. Ideally we want our electors to have information so that they can make informed decisions about the law. If new legislation would bankrupt bluegill inc., you would want your legislator to know that is a consequence. The lobbyists is who tells them that. Law is made in an information poor environment where few of the consequences are understood. I think that most of the people that object to lobbying don't understand this.
    - johnnyanmac 2y ago
      I think we understand this. I think we also understand that current lobbyists are not neutral actors, like how they (ideally) would be in a court proceeding. ideally, politicians would seek out or be invited to a forum to help understand these issues. a boring forums with as many bells and whistles as some random meetup, not some fancy ball with subsidized dinners. But at this point I think it's just easier to punish "gifts" more harshly.
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        Lobbyist arent supposed to be neutral actors, and we shouldn't want or expect them to be. It is the politician that is expected to be neutral. The goal of Johnny's lobbyist is to communicate Johnny's concerns. The same as if you were to write a letter to your congressman - you are sharing your thoughts and insights. >ideally, politicians would seek out or be invited to a forum to help understand these issues. a boring forums with as many bells and whistles as some random meetup, not some fancy ball with subsidized dinners. But at this point I think it's just easier to punish "gifts" more harshly. 99% of lobbying is exactly what you describe: boring emails, phone calls, technical essays and testimonials.
        johnnyanmac 2y ago
        "neutral" is doing a lot of heavy lifting and I apologize for that. Let me recontextualize it to this: a proper lobbyists should be speaking in their own interests, not necessarily as a paid actor for a corporation. Paying someone a full time job to more or less woo over politicians as an envoy carries a bunch of financial perversions that leads to this very conversation. My "neutral" comment should refer to my proposed forums. I feel people in such forums should be relatively neutral and able to compile arguments from multiple perspectives. If lawyers and reps can't do this, it makes sense to lean on a subject matter expert. But that expert should not be speaking for themselves in such a context. They should be doing what I imagined a rep to do: read a lot of different viewpoints and compile it for the lawmaker. >99% of lobbying is exactly what you describe: boring emails, phone calls, technical essays and testimonials. Sure, I imagine we're mostly focusing on the 1%, but it's a very powerful 1% (as usual). Enough to spoil the barrel and require reform. It rarely takes a consensus of bad to regulate the bad.

they aren't wildly different the overlap between 'gifts' and 'lobbying' is significant, and the latter term is often used euphemistically to describe exactly that overlap

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> overlap between 'gifts' and 'lobbying' is significant Source? Most federal electeds are prohibited from accepting gifts from lobbyists [1]. (Meals are capped at $50. Yes, most electeds take these limits seriously.) > is often used euphemistically to describe exactly that overlap This is a reflection of the state of civic education in our country. Someone who cannot differentiate lobbying (paid to reimbursed to pro bono) from gifts from bribery is almost entirely lobotomised from being able to wield one of the most basic civic powers: assembly. [1] https://ethics.house.gov/content/gifts/prohibited-lobbyist-gifts https://ethics.house.gov/content/gifts/prohibited-lobbyist-g...

bluGill 2y ago
What is the value of me telling you [some very specific economic indicator] is [good/bad]? Technically this is public information you can get from many sources, but you call the lobbyist in that industry because they know. One the one hand the information is free, on the other hand to understand what all those numbers mean and give a quick summary is very valuable.
- JumpCrisscross 2y ago
  > on the other hand to understand what all those numbers mean and give a quick summary is very valuable A Taylor Swift concert ticket from Ticketmaster obviously isn’t in that grey area.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  The proper and intended purpose of lobbyists is to communicate information that is not readily available or understood. Ideally we want our electors to have information so that they can make informed decisions about the law. If new legislation would bankrupt bluegill inc., you would want your legislator to know that is a consequence. The lobbyists is who tells them that. Law is made in an information poor environment where few of the consequences are understood. I think that most of the people that object to lobbying don't understand this.
  - johnnyanmac 2y ago
    I think we understand this. I think we also understand that current lobbyists are not neutral actors, like how they (ideally) would be in a court proceeding. ideally, politicians would seek out or be invited to a forum to help understand these issues. a boring forums with as many bells and whistles as some random meetup, not some fancy ball with subsidized dinners. But at this point I think it's just easier to punish "gifts" more harshly.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      Lobbyist arent supposed to be neutral actors, and we shouldn't want or expect them to be. It is the politician that is expected to be neutral. The goal of Johnny's lobbyist is to communicate Johnny's concerns. The same as if you were to write a letter to your congressman - you are sharing your thoughts and insights. >ideally, politicians would seek out or be invited to a forum to help understand these issues. a boring forums with as many bells and whistles as some random meetup, not some fancy ball with subsidized dinners. But at this point I think it's just easier to punish "gifts" more harshly. 99% of lobbying is exactly what you describe: boring emails, phone calls, technical essays and testimonials.
      - johnnyanmac 2y ago
        "neutral" is doing a lot of heavy lifting and I apologize for that. Let me recontextualize it to this: a proper lobbyists should be speaking in their own interests, not necessarily as a paid actor for a corporation. Paying someone a full time job to more or less woo over politicians as an envoy carries a bunch of financial perversions that leads to this very conversation. My "neutral" comment should refer to my proposed forums. I feel people in such forums should be relatively neutral and able to compile arguments from multiple perspectives. If lawyers and reps can't do this, it makes sense to lean on a subject matter expert. But that expert should not be speaking for themselves in such a context. They should be doing what I imagined a rep to do: read a lot of different viewpoints and compile it for the lawmaker. >99% of lobbying is exactly what you describe: boring emails, phone calls, technical essays and testimonials. Sure, I imagine we're mostly focusing on the 1%, but it's a very powerful 1% (as usual). Enough to spoil the barrel and require reform. It rarely takes a consensus of bad to regulate the bad.