Remember, we're not just talking about big money lobbyists, but lobbyists of all kinds, including those that look out for children, the elderly, etc.
If so, what would you replace it with?
2007-08-10 08:27:26 · 13 answers · asked by Bookworm 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I think that they should be allowed to speak with the representatives, but that they should not be allowed to exchange any form of gifts or money. I also think that large corporations should not be able to make contributions to political candidates or people already in office.
I really like wrecker's idea.
2007-08-10 08:38:46 · answer #1 · answered by Lori B 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I was a lobbyist for senior citizens for more than seven yeas.
I was instrumental in doing away with the earning limitation on Social Security.
There are lobbyists doing something for the good of all. And that is regardless of political party. Health! Environment!
And there are many more.
Do you still want to ban all lobbying?
2007-08-10 08:42:43 · answer #2 · answered by Rifraf 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, lobbying is a good thing. Congressmen and women cannot possibly know everything or even nearly enough about every issue which comes before them in legislation. Lobbyists explain situations and issues to staffers and Congress members.
However, lobbyists should NOT be allowed to contribute to re-election campaigns. Period.
2007-08-10 08:36:20 · answer #3 · answered by plezurgui 6 · 2⤊ 2⤋
People seem to think it goes like this.
Lobby "here is the money, vote this way"
When in fact it is;
Lobby "if you vote this way, we will contribute"
It is not the lobby that is the problem, it is the greedy politician with no morals. But heaven forbid they police themselves.
I think lobby's provide a needed voice, I don't have time to go to Washington to promote my beliefs, but I can contribute to causes that do.
2007-08-10 08:41:30 · answer #4 · answered by Reston 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes it should. If I were prince of the planet, lobbyists would not be allowed to entertain, contribute to, or even speak face to face with politicians.
And to answer the second part of your question. NOTHING.
2007-08-10 08:37:34 · answer #5 · answered by namsaev 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I like this question.they should not be able to contribute to campaigns.If their weren't any lobbyists than alot of the politicians would not fair well.In America money,and power outweigh character
2007-08-10 08:36:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
no, lobbying does a lot of good.. maybe if lobbyists couldn't make campaign contributions?? that might help to fix some of the problems.
2007-08-10 08:32:18 · answer #7 · answered by pip 7 · 3⤊ 4⤋
Yes, I believe in separation of capialism and state, but not church and state (liberals don't know whether to thumb up or down now).
2007-08-10 08:34:22 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Yes, it's legal bribery. It should be replaced with politicians who can lead instead of read polls.....Maybe we should just ban them from giving money.
2007-08-10 08:30:50 · answer #9 · answered by Holy Cow! 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Hard to do that as it violates the 1st ammendment
2007-08-10 08:32:38 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋