What can we do to get back control of Washington DC from the lobbyists?

Answer 1

I disagree with those who've posted before me. Voting 3rd party won't do anything except put in another group of people who'll eventually be forced to fall into the same trap. Nor will increasing pay for government officials. This isn't about people accepting bribes because they're underpaid, it's about the dramatic power of interests to fund issue ads, make campaign contributions and influence the outcomes of elections. Can anyone seriously believe that doubling the salary of a Representative is going to impact that? It's a fatuous notion.

No -- look -- this is an extravagantly complicated problem, and nobody who posts here is going to come up with a silver bullet. So if you want an ideological "Aha--here's-what-we-need" answer, I'm sure someone on this forum will post one for you. The problem is, it will be facile and unworkable.

This isn't a new problem. It plagued James Madison who wrote on it at great length in Federalist 10 & 51 -- the problem of "Faction." He concluded that "Faction" is to freedom what fire is to air. You want to extinguish the power of fire? He asked. Easily done -- just get rid of the air that feeds it. And likewise faction. You want to extinguish that? Just get rid of freedom. But, he concluded, if you accept freedom as a non-negotiable point then you have to accept that faction is going to go along with it. And he was right.

Oh there are tons and tons of suggestions that might be used:

Public funding of campaigns. (Really BAD idea -- as it puts a virtual lock on the two party system, and doesn't address the power of independent issue ads or "get out the vote" drives by interest groups).

Outlawing PACs. (Stupid idea, as it runs afoul of the 1st Amendment)

Amending the Constitution to limit the timing of political speech (UNBELIEVABLY BAD IDEA -- as once we accept even in principle the limitations of liberty to speak, we've opened the door to the worst sort of tyranny).

I could go on and on -- but here's the point. Madison was right. If you accept liberty as the starting point, you will automatically end up with faction. And any attempt to limt the latter must inevitably result in a curtailing of the former. That's the bottom line truth.

So what is the answer? If you don't like what one interest group is saying, support another group that says what you want to hear, and do what you can to get THAT message across.

Take responsibility to make informed choices at the ballot box, regardless of what the interest groups tell you to think.

Pay attention to the voting records of those who you believe are captive to the special interests and do what you can to get the word out about their failure to do right by the nation.

All of these things require people to actually give a damn about the political process. And the fact is, the vast, vast majority of people are only concerened with their private lives and fail to see the connections between what government does, and how their personal futures unfold.

So if there's a reason for the rise of interest group power, it is always to be found in direct correlation with the rise in voter apathy.

As the journalist H. L. Mencken said so long ago... "Democracy is the theory that the common man knows what he wants and deserves to get it -- Good and Hard." He was right.

Or, as another wise being named "Pogo" once said... "We have met the enemy, and he is us."

The fault, dear Brutus, lies not with the stars, but with ourselves. And if you think that any tinkering with the mechanisms of government and the law will change that, you're gravely mistaken. People have to WANT it; and at this exact moment in time, they don't. That's why education is so important. The word needs to be gotten out -- THIS is what is being done to YOU by people whom YOU'VE put in power. If YOU don't want it, be informed, be involved -- give a damn. I'm afraid there's no way to make people WANT that. Thus, the government we get is the government we deserve. That's a hard pill to swallow, but there it is.

I've answered enough of your questions in the past to know something of how your mind works. You deal with mechanical, mathematical problems. And when something goes wrong, you naturally seek out the mechanical, mathematical solution. The problem with applying that mindset to social and political problems is that neither people, societies nor the governments that emerge from them are machines that can be made to function better by replacing a part, re-writing a program, or improving the fuel efficiency standards. Unlike the hard sciences where closed ended problems exist, this problem is open-ended and doesn't allow for mechanical solutions. It's far too complicated for easy fixes or correct formulas. Sorry -- I wish it were otherwise. So I guess this is a gut-check for you. What are you really looking for -- a serious answer, or just some feel-good piece of ideological tripe? Your call.

Cheers, mate.

Answer 2

obama made a marketing campaign promise he could end Lobbiest even in spite of the undeniable fact that he became into between the biggest recepients of monies, he nevertheless gets money from Lobbiest by potential of how. He additionally propmiosed to convey attempt against troops out of Iraq and close Gitmo, restoration Unemployment and end nukes ( Iran and NK have them now)

Answer 3

the general problem with removing the lobbyist is that we pay our government officials soo little, around i believe 50k a year, when they have the background and exp to be CEOs earning 1+million a year. so why take the job right? because they can get in things from the lobbyist, cars food basicly anything. so the way to remove the lobbyist would be to change the whole american system of goverment. btw lobbyist are not all bad. a lobbyist is basicly how you get anything though congress.

Answer 4

You have to form an organization that represents the rank and file working people and have that group lobby the House and Senate on your behalf! Since this would most likely be the largest voting group lobby they would have to give some credence to what you want!

Answer 5

Summary executions, French Revolution style.

Answer 6

I have a simple answer for you: vote 3rd party beginning in 2012, when they should be viable, and before then write letters or place phone calls to your representatives and senators. George W. Bush won't answer, but most senators will.

Answer 7

After reading the post by Jack all I can say is Well Said.