4 ms·

>Tech Freedom and the Progress and Freedom Foundation are think tanks, not lobbying outfits Think tanks develop policy proposals and other types of information

by sc68cal 13y ago

>Tech Freedom and the Progress and Freedom Foundation are think tanks, not lobbying outfits Think tanks develop policy proposals and other types of information, that is then used by political parties. The Cato Institute and the Heritage Foundation are think tanks, that heavily influence policy proposals by Republicans. >As for Henke, just because he's a Republican doesn't mean he's wrong... I absolutely agree. I don't think he's wrong. I just think it's useful to know someone's background. It provides context.

rayiner 13y ago
> Think tanks develop policy proposals and other types of information, that is then used by political parties. Sure. Nobody would ever formulate policy proposals if they never felt anybody would adopt them! That doesn't make them lobbyists.
- bgilroy26 13y ago
  What makes someone a lobbyist? Do they have to bribe somebody?
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Lobbyists make more money, because they lobby on behalf of clients for the money, while think tanks do it for the ideology.
    - dragonwriter 13y ago
      > Lobbyists make more money, because they lobby on behalf of clients for the money, while think tanks do it for the ideology. Think tanks often do it for the money, too; the difference is that lobbyists directly and overtly represent clients to policy makers in seeking change, while think tanks tend both to minimize their direct link to funders and direct their output to the public (in theory), though it often ends up as material that allied lobbyists present to policy makers. If the interests backing them were sovereign states, then (in terms of their role in promoting policy) lobbyists would be ambassadors, and think tanks would be "public diplomacy" operations.
  - thaumasiotes 13y ago
    The employer makes someone a lobbyist, I believe.
  - NoPiece 13y ago
    From Wikipedia: There are numerous regulations governing the practice of lobbying, often ones requiring transparency and disclosure.[7] People paid to lobby must register with the secretary of the Senate and the clerk of the House of Representatives within 45 days of contacting a legislator for the first time, or 45 days after being employed.[5][7] An exception is that lobbyists who earn less than $3,000 per client for each fiscal quarter, or whose total lobbying expenses are less than $11,500 each quarter, do not need to register.[7] Part-time lobbyists are exempt from registering unless they spend more than 20% of their working hours doing lobbying activities in any quarter. If lobbyists have two or more contacts with a legislator as a lobbyist, then they must register.[5][7] Requirements for registering also apply to companies that specialize in lobbying, or ones that have an in-house lobbyist, particularly if they spend more than $11,500 on lobbying.[7] Generally, nonprofit organizations, other than churches, are exempt from registering if they hire an outside lobbying firm.[7] Filing must be made each quarter, and a separate file is needed for each of the lobbyist's clients, and include information such as the name and title of the client, an estimate of lobbying expenses, and an estimate of income the lobbyist achieved after doing the lobbying.[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States
  - lmkg 13y ago
    Well technically it's not bribery (note that the people who define the technicalities are the ones being not-bribed), but effectively yes. While many organizations put out proposals and recommendations, lobbyists are the ones who get face-time with an elected official to try and convince them to enact their proposal. This access is usually obtained through a combination of political influence and not-bribery (campaign donations and indirect campaign support--look up "soft money").
- roc 13y ago
  Say I've got a retail arm that sells consumer products and does consumer research on possible improvements, new products, etc. If I send all that data out to an R&D arm to develop and improve my products, an arm run by the same parent corporation(s), and the R&D arm's only gig is supplying those new and improved products back to my retail arm that really doesn't sell anything else, how useful is it to point to the legal distinction between the two outfits whenever someone conversationally implies they're the same thing?
  - rayiner 13y ago
    Because think tanks are nothing like a subdivision of a parent company?
    - roc 13y ago
      Except the part where their product (notwithstanding a little PR now and again) is fed pretty much exclusively to another group with largely the same financial backers and that product is shaped for and supported only insofar as it usefully services that other group.

by sc68cal 13y ago

rayiner 13y ago

> Think tanks develop policy proposals and other types of information, that is then used by political parties. Sure. Nobody would ever formulate policy proposals if they never felt anybody would adopt them! That doesn't make them lobbyists.

bgilroy26 13y ago
What makes someone a lobbyist? Do they have to bribe somebody?
- rayiner 13y ago
  Lobbyists make more money, because they lobby on behalf of clients for the money, while think tanks do it for the ideology.
  - dragonwriter 13y ago
    > Lobbyists make more money, because they lobby on behalf of clients for the money, while think tanks do it for the ideology. Think tanks often do it for the money, too; the difference is that lobbyists directly and overtly represent clients to policy makers in seeking change, while think tanks tend both to minimize their direct link to funders and direct their output to the public (in theory), though it often ends up as material that allied lobbyists present to policy makers. If the interests backing them were sovereign states, then (in terms of their role in promoting policy) lobbyists would be ambassadors, and think tanks would be "public diplomacy" operations.
- thaumasiotes 13y ago
  The employer makes someone a lobbyist, I believe.
- NoPiece 13y ago
  From Wikipedia: There are numerous regulations governing the practice of lobbying, often ones requiring transparency and disclosure.[7] People paid to lobby must register with the secretary of the Senate and the clerk of the House of Representatives within 45 days of contacting a legislator for the first time, or 45 days after being employed.[5][7] An exception is that lobbyists who earn less than $3,000 per client for each fiscal quarter, or whose total lobbying expenses are less than $11,500 each quarter, do not need to register.[7] Part-time lobbyists are exempt from registering unless they spend more than 20% of their working hours doing lobbying activities in any quarter. If lobbyists have two or more contacts with a legislator as a lobbyist, then they must register.[5][7] Requirements for registering also apply to companies that specialize in lobbying, or ones that have an in-house lobbyist, particularly if they spend more than $11,500 on lobbying.[7] Generally, nonprofit organizations, other than churches, are exempt from registering if they hire an outside lobbying firm.[7] Filing must be made each quarter, and a separate file is needed for each of the lobbyist's clients, and include information such as the name and title of the client, an estimate of lobbying expenses, and an estimate of income the lobbyist achieved after doing the lobbying.[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States
- lmkg 13y ago
  Well technically it's not bribery (note that the people who define the technicalities are the ones being not-bribed), but effectively yes. While many organizations put out proposals and recommendations, lobbyists are the ones who get face-time with an elected official to try and convince them to enact their proposal. This access is usually obtained through a combination of political influence and not-bribery (campaign donations and indirect campaign support--look up "soft money").
roc 13y ago
Say I've got a retail arm that sells consumer products and does consumer research on possible improvements, new products, etc. If I send all that data out to an R&D arm to develop and improve my products, an arm run by the same parent corporation(s), and the R&D arm's only gig is supplying those new and improved products back to my retail arm that really doesn't sell anything else, how useful is it to point to the legal distinction between the two outfits whenever someone conversationally implies they're the same thing?
- rayiner 13y ago
  Because think tanks are nothing like a subdivision of a parent company?
  - roc 13y ago
    Except the part where their product (notwithstanding a little PR now and again) is fed pretty much exclusively to another group with largely the same financial backers and that product is shaped for and supported only insofar as it usefully services that other group.