3 ms·
In the US is already legal. It is called lobbying.
by amunozo 3mo ago
In the US is already legal. It is called lobbying.
- ceejayoz 3mo agoThere was at least a veneer of legitimacy there. These days, they just do it with crypto: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$Trump https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/$Trump
- kulahan 3mo agoThis is such an annoying attitude. Who is against the concept of an industry being able to say “are you aware this will decimate the jobs of tens of thousands”? Catch phrases like this, I swear, are half the reason so many people have a mind an inch deep and a mile wide.
- rocqua 3mo agoThe issue is that lobbying extends to PAC and Super PAC campaign donations. Which is pretty close to a bribe. Lobbyist giving opinions, isn’t anywhere near corruption. Lobbyist giving campaign support by the $100,000 is a lot closer though.
- kulahan 3mo agoOk, so complain about PACs and super PACs. Who goes "Sandwiches are bad. The issue is that sandwiches lead to buffets and WEIGHT GAIN!!! BAN SANDWICHES!!!"
- preg_match 3mo agoBecause lobbying in the US is realistically dominated by money. We’re not stupid here - I think we all know money works better than words.
- kulahan 3mo agoSo... the solution is to ban speaking to your representatives to tell them how their actions will affect you? I dont get it. If you don't like the money aspect, take that out. It's not like it's inherently required for the overall concept to work. It sure seems like we're pretending to be stupid, if the only solutions we can come up with are "unabated lobbying with infinite money" and "constituents must be outlawed from speaking with their representatives".
- preg_match 3mo agoI mean in our current legal framework yeah - those things are equivalent. Money IS free speech. Maybe that’s dumb, but it’s not an argument we can ignore because it’s the predominant argument.
- kulahan 3mo agoYes, it’s dumb, and yes, that’s the topic of discussion here.
- afavour 3mo agoLobbyists exist in a lot of countries. It’s only in the US where they’re as problematic as they are.
- Xixi 3mo agoPACs and super PACs are the key difference. Lobbying in the US includes practices that would fall squarely into the definition of corruption in many other Western countries. There's nothing inherently wrong with people or groups talking to representatives and advocating for their interests, even in an organized way. The problem is when it gets closer to: "Pass this law or regulation, and we'll put $USD_AMOUNT into your PAC".