The new Congressional session hasn't even started yet, but Democrats are already scurrying about like cockroaches trying to obtain every morsel of lobbyist money possible. Here are some samples from the Wall Street Journal:
Democrats may be promising a clampdown on lobbyist freebies once they take control of Congress. But ahead of that push, party leaders are collecting lobbyists' checks, while Democratic staffers angle for jobs inside their well-appointed offices.Verizon Communications Inc. earlier this week sponsored a reception for newly elected Missouri Sen. Claire McCaskill. Illinois Democratic Rep. Melissa Bean was the beneficiary of a Tuesday night fund-raiser in the new Capitol Hill offices of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In addition to retiring Ms. Bean's debt, Chamber Political Director Bill Miller said the reception was a chance for corporations and lobbyists who didn't back her re-election to "meet her and see what a great representative she is."
Ome might argue that these are just minor, isolated events, except:
Yesterday, Illinois Rep. Rahm Emanuel, mastermind of the Democrats' House takeover, accepted donations at Sonoma, a trendy Capitol Hill restaurant that features California cuisine to match the wine list, for his leadership committee, a type of account employed by ambitious lawmakers to make donations and curry favor with their colleagues.
There's a whole lot more in the article, but I thought I'd provide one more example:
Or to bask in their newly empowered status. Last night, incoming House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel hosted a Capitol Hill fund-raiser for his leadership committee. Mr. Rangel has never been seriously challenged. He was elected in 1970 with 87% of the vote and has won re-election by margins of more than 90 points ever since. But the New York congressman did shell out $370,000 to the House re-election committee to help his colleagues in last month's races. He now has a chance to recoup that investment -- and more.
Nancy Pelosi's office at least gave us some spin to chew on:
"We will break the link between lobbyists and legislating," said Pelosi spokesman Brendan Daly. "People still need to raise money to run campaigns."
What ever happened to raising money the old fashioned way: From individual campaign supporters?
Well, sometimes critics of the campaign make it very difficult. I'm thinking of the Badnarik campaign which was run to win, but nevertheless still has to endure bitter (i.e., unfounded or personal) attacks against its motives by some who want to discourage "individual campaign supporters." One can see the temptation of appealing for support from a group who actually wants to give one money.
I'm not against lobbyists per se. Banding together to exercise free speech as a group isn't a bad thing. And, I doubt we'll ever be able to control the temptations those in power face when those they govern want their favor.
That's why it's more important than ever to reduce the amount of power we give to voters, their elected representatives and government employees, and reserve it, instead, for individuals.
Well I've heard enough but what can be done to keep all this dirty money out of the government? It's obvious that the Republicans who for a time billed themselves as anti-government and anti-interference have actually just been lying all the while, spending our money on crackpot projects on the other side of the world that have nothing to do with us as individuals. And it's equally obvious that the Democrats are just as big of fatcat, machine politicians as their other halves- despite any anti-corruption rhetoric they spout in the push to gain power for themselves. Could a popular movement (orderly marches on a massive scale etc.) ever catch the collective spirit of the country? Certainly this would be more authentic than trying to pay some politician's way into the government who was sympathetic to our cause. Ideas?!
Yeah, Ideas. We need something to draw attention. A march of like-minded individuals would certainly do that. News, even the peaceful variety, gets reported. If we had 100,000 people marching down Broadway in NYC, or gathering in Central Park they'd have to ask us why. Then we tell them that "we're here in support of liberty, low taxes, and Constitutionality." 100,000 people wearing gold and blue or blue and gold LP.org t-shirts would draw some serious attention.
Well, sometimes critics of the campaign make it very difficult. I'm thinking of the Badnarik campaign which was run to win, but nevertheless still has to endure bitter (i.e., unfounded or personal) attacks against its motives by some who want to discourage "individual campaign supporters." One can see the temptation of appealing for support from a group who actually wants to give one money.
I'm not against lobbyists per se. Banding together to exercise free speech as a group isn't a bad thing. And, I doubt we'll ever be able to control the temptations those in power face when those they govern want their favor.
That's why it's more important than ever to reduce the amount of power we give to voters, their elected representatives and government employees, and reserve it, instead, for individuals.
Posted by: Sandra at December 8, 2006 01:30 PM