Quote Originally Posted by cffisher View Post
If you (we) were to do away with the lobbiests this country would be farther ahead. JMO
Charlie, you and I usually see things from a very similar perspective, so a word of caution here.

There has been an effort for the past few decades to demonize the notion of lobbying. It's not a conspiracy, it's a ploy. If anyone signs the above referenced petition, that's lobbying. If anyone sends a letter or email to their Congress person, that's lobbying. If you join a group, say to preserve Social Security, and you pay a visit to your Congress person to advance your point of view, that's lobbying. This is all protected specifically in the First Amendment. It's a right granted to ensure that those who reside in this country have a way to seek redress, or protect themselves from overbearing laws/regulation. It could also be seen as a pesky nuisance by certain politicians who seek greater power and control.

If enough citizens end up being convinced that "lobbying" is the problem, we'll see laws limiting our ability to protest and protect in a civil manner, thus enriching the power of the political class. It will be in a small way at first, then ever more restrictive, each time presented as a "necessary action to limit corruption...." or some such deceitful cloak.

The problem isn't the act of lobbying, it's the act of the political person accepting some form of quid pro quo, e.g. a bribe, political contribution, a future "job", whatever. The person offering the bribe to someone they believe would accept it isn't a saint, but nothing "bad" happens until the politician accepts and acts on the bribe. THAT is where we need to focus our ire and action...............................not on limiting our rights.