3 ms·

Well, there's also the professional lobbying class that wine and dine the reps and probably know them on a first name basis, and are supported by multi million

Well, there's also the professional lobbying class that wine and dine the reps and probably know them on a first name basis, and are supported by multi million dollar war chests from multinational mega corps. That's what most people think of when they say lobbying, not Joe Schmoe writing an email or two every four years.

bluGill 2y ago
I know someone who used to think that, but the company all but forced her to become a lobbyist anyway. She quickly discovered that most of her job is being a free expert on topics the company is in but doesn't have a political position on. Sometimes her job is to kill some bill the company doesn't like, but most of the time she is the expert on what is really going on in the real world.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  >Sometimes her job is to kill some bill the company doesn't like, Wish I could fund a bill hitman. >but most of the time she is the expert on what is really going on in the real world. Sure, but they are inevitably influenced on what to say or not say by the ones funding her. Conflict of interest. I'm guessing if she finds out about some inconvinient truth that's she's not necessarily free to lobby for the truth. She's representing a company, after all.
JumpCrisscross 2y ago
> there's also the professional lobbying class that wine and dine the reps and probably know them on a first name basis In many cases because they once worked for them. (I tend to support a cooling-off period for electeds and staffers.) On wining and dining, the limits are usually $50. If you go to the D.C. lobbying haunts, you’ll notice that number coming up in specials. Most lobbying is actually advising the client, not the elected. > what most people think of when they say lobbying, not Joe Schmoe writing an email or two every four years What about the ACLU or EFF? I’m not arguing against your characterisation of the popular representation. I’m arguing that representation is wrong. To the absurd point that it disempowers those who hold it.
- johnnyanmac 2y ago
  >On wining and dining, the limits are usually $50. If you go to the D.C. lobbying haunts, you’ll notice that number coming up in specials. Oh that makes me feel better. They are limited by $x, so why not spend Y million dollars subsidizing some establishment so they can sell "gifts" for $X? >What about the ACLU or EFF? Do they use their money to lobby millions to politicians or for proper signal boosting and PR to make the populace aware? I'm not a fan of my money going towards "gifts" either. Ideally these orgs simply help make issues aware and the voters do the rest.

bluGill 2y ago

I know someone who used to think that, but the company all but forced her to become a lobbyist anyway. She quickly discovered that most of her job is being a free expert on topics the company is in but doesn't have a political position on. Sometimes her job is to kill some bill the company doesn't like, but most of the time she is the expert on what is really going on in the real world.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
>Sometimes her job is to kill some bill the company doesn't like, Wish I could fund a bill hitman. >but most of the time she is the expert on what is really going on in the real world. Sure, but they are inevitably influenced on what to say or not say by the ones funding her. Conflict of interest. I'm guessing if she finds out about some inconvinient truth that's she's not necessarily free to lobby for the truth. She's representing a company, after all.

JumpCrisscross 2y ago

> there's also the professional lobbying class that wine and dine the reps and probably know them on a first name basis In many cases because they once worked for them. (I tend to support a cooling-off period for electeds and staffers.) On wining and dining, the limits are usually $50. If you go to the D.C. lobbying haunts, you’ll notice that number coming up in specials. Most lobbying is actually advising the client, not the elected. > what most people think of when they say lobbying, not Joe Schmoe writing an email or two every four years What about the ACLU or EFF? I’m not arguing against your characterisation of the popular representation. I’m arguing that representation is wrong. To the absurd point that it disempowers those who hold it.

johnnyanmac 2y ago
>On wining and dining, the limits are usually $50. If you go to the D.C. lobbying haunts, you’ll notice that number coming up in specials. Oh that makes me feel better. They are limited by $x, so why not spend Y million dollars subsidizing some establishment so they can sell "gifts" for $X? >What about the ACLU or EFF? Do they use their money to lobby millions to politicians or for proper signal boosting and PR to make the populace aware? I'm not a fan of my money going towards "gifts" either. Ideally these orgs simply help make issues aware and the voters do the rest.