Donations for access?

[kentuck]

It is a well-known fact that Sheldon Adelson and the Koch Brothers donate big money to Republicans running for office.

It can be assumed that if they call these Senators' offices, they will have immediate access. It is doubtful that they are put on hold.

But, with the Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court, money is free speech. They can donate whatever they wish.

However, is there a "quid pro quo" that comes with their donations? Do these Senators and Congressmen sponsor legislation, such as tax cuts or tax breaks for certain business interests, as repayment for those donations?

Although they may argue otherwise, it appears that there is a "quid pro quo" for their donations. They give huge donations and they get access. They all do it.

[unblock]

1. in our system of legalized bribery, mere "access" is not considered problematic.

it's only when you can point to specific official actions that there's a problem.


thing is, corporate contributions are all done by businesses that are all about maximizing profit. investors could actually *sue* if the corporation was simply throwing money away for mere "access" -- unless that phone call and private meeting with the congresscritter could be reasonably expected to result in material profit for the corporation. i.e., that the corporation gets back more than it contributes.


studies have universally shown that businesses do indeed get a return, in fact in the neighborhood of 100 to 1.

but no, don't call it bribery. call it free speech.

or, perhaps more realistically, expensive but profitable speech.

[Warpy]

2. Well, of course there is a quid pro quo

While CU legalized donations of any size to political organizations, direct donations to candidates are still limited. Now candidates start their own PACs, so those organizations can get the big donations. Pretty slick, huh?

What these assholes also do is "bundle" a bunch of single donations from their organizations together so the candidate sees a huge lump sum going into his campaign coffers. Quite a few of those single donors would be surprised that they'd donated if anyone ever bothered to contact them, but I digress. What the candidate sees is a million bucks from Adelson's casinos or Koch Industries, and he knows from then on that he needs to take their phone calls.

In 2000, the GOP Congress actually put a price tag of a cool million in bundled donations to buy access. Why nobody picked up on this as a classic example of bribing public officials is beyond me. The price tag has since gone up.

Bribing Republicans has always been a more satisfactory arrangement, they stay bought. One never knows when a Democrat might display vestiges of youthful idealism.

But it's naive to ask about a quid pro quo. It's legalized bribery. Of course there is.

[orpupilofnature57]

3. Casuistry's like " everybody does it " shows We've become an oligarchy .

[kentuck]

4. I think you're right...

It gives them a "get out of jail free" card.

[kentuck]

5. Also, the analogy of Hillary Clinton taking money for access...

as charged by the Republicans, rings rather hollow, in my opinion.