***Should foreign lobbies operating in United States be banned?***

[clarquistador]

I never understood how lobbies with loyalty to foreign powers are permitted to have the kind of awesome power they have nowadays in DC. They don't represent American interests at all, so they should have little-to-no say over how the United States conducts it's foreign and domestic policies.

And I don't understand why people defend them.

[The Magistrate]

1. What Organizations Do Have In Mind, Sir?

Just about every foreign government retains a firm to lobby on its behalf. So do large foreign companies, and U.S. companies with substantial foreign interests. A variety of ethnic groups maintain lobbies to press for special regard to events in the "old country", so do groups with specific interests in foreign affairs and policies of many descriptions....

[clarquistador]

2. But what if they have ties to foreign powers, doesn't that bother you?

AIPAC, the Saudi and Pakistani governments have lobbies in the US, so do the Chinese and all of that is just the tip of the iceberg. And I think they all do more harm than good because of their distinct allegiance to controversial foreign powers.

You know, I have traveled extensively to other western democracies and have studied their political systems and must say that they do not have nearly the kind of foreign-lobby apparatuses that we have. It's just that in the US, since we are so corporate in our culture and mode of business, that is has come acceptable to have foreign lobbies.

I think it's ok to have foreign chamber of commerces to promote economic policies, but foreign lobbies are really crossing the line if they can pay off our politicians to back policies that serve the interests of foreign capitals.

[The Magistrate]

3. Very Little Bothers Me, Sir

Life is more easily lived that way....

So long as the United States is the major power on the globe, foreign governments and foreign interests are going to solicit favor from it for themselves, and seek to place their enemies in disfavor with it.

[clarquistador]

13. Well it bothers me...

because the foreign entities drag and commit us to their messes.

[The Magistrate]

23. Than You Should Relax, Sir

It will be better for your health in the long run....

Perhaps you might want to clarify which of "their messes" you have upper-most in your mind?

[OzarkDem]

19. Money should be disconnected from it

Foreign countries should be allowed to educate legislators and make their case, but they should definitely be prevented from influencing the process with money, trips, perks, campaign donations, etc. IOW, any legislator should not have to be concerned about any political retribution for not supporting a policy advocated by a foreign lobbyist organization.

[clarquistador]

22. Agreed. n/t

[jilln]

4. do you have the same concerns about US "lobbies" - in the form of military bases, corporations, etc.

in other countries? Should that be allowed?

As to some extent the whole world's interests are linked, I think it's OK to have foreign lobbies in DC, so long as they follow the same rules as as the US lobbies. In theory, the problem is not the LOBBIES but the fact that our government sells out to the highest bidder rather than doing the right thing.

And remember, a few years ago when DHP was all gung-ho to make us the most ridiculous country on earth, they were pushing a law that would have made donating to Amnesty International (headquarters in London) considered a possible terrorist act as it was foreign.

Time to stop fearing the "foreign" and fix the system.

[clarquistador]

9. Chambers of Commerce

Any lobbying these governments conduct, should solely be done through the use of their local Chamber of Commerces.

[OzarkDem]

24. I don't agree

It would seem inappropriate for a foreign government or lobbying organization to advance its cause through US organizations. They shouldn't be allowed to use the power, influence and access of a U.S. organization.

And foreign lobbying groups should be held to different standards than U.S. led organizations that are made up of U.S. citizens, particularly when it comes to financial quid pro quo. There should be no financial linkage to any US lawmaking body from a foreign government.

[clarquistador]

26. I think you misunderstand....

By "Chamber of Commerce", I'm not referring to like the Los Angeles Chamber of Commerce, but rather the Brazil-US Chamber of Commerce, the China-US Chamber of Commerce, etc etc.

[blondeatlast]

5. Shall we also do away with foreign embassies?

Just curious as to your thinking...

Edit: BTW, no need to shout, thanks.

[clarquistador]

7. Embassies are diplomatic entities

therefore, they need to exist. Foreign lobbies one the other hand represent interests and their role is basically superfluous.

[salin]

6. there are disclosure laws per lobbying efforts on behalf of foreign

interests, and their are strict bans on giving campaign money (from foreign interests). What I am not sure about - is if foreign entitities can give to PACs that then blend the money with other donations and give it to individual campaigns.

[clarquistador]

8. The regulations are ridiculous

Everytime these politicians want to "reform" the system, be it campaign finance of whatever, they deliberately incorporate loopholes into the legislation of which interest groups can exploit.

It's totally laughable when they implement these "reforms".

[file83]

10. I think ALL lobbies should be banned. (Lobbies = Bribes)

IMO, there is way too much "influence" over Washington.

[clarquistador]

11. Right on.....

The reason we have lobbies is because in the US, political rights and access are tied closely with purchasing power. It's a very class-based system.

[geek tragedy]

14. You favor revoking the right of citizens to petition

their government?

[blondeatlast]

16. Beat me to it. nt

[file83]

21. Of course not!! Individual citizens should be the only "entities" allowed to petition

their government. I never said anything about banning that form communication from the voters.

What I'm talking about banning is FINANCIAL influence coming from corporations, foreign entities (of all types), and any other potential corporate proxy groups.

Bribes is what I'm talking about banning - not individual citizens signing petitions. Petitions are obviously not a bribe, so I'm all for it.

[cali]

28. Frightening.

In your little world, only wealthy individuals would have any ability to press their cases and causes. Organizations that lobby for the poor, the environment, educational access, etc., would all be banned. Talk about jumping from the frying pan into the fire! Say goodbye to the Sierra Club, NRDC, and many others.

[file83]

32. What is more frightening is how you reached a conclusion that could NOT have

been in any way inspired by what I wrote.

What you paraphrased is in complete contradiction to what I wrote. Those conclusions you came up with are based on your own flawed reasoning. You might want to check your reading comprehension / thinking skills.

[blondeatlast]

15. Careful there--"lobbying" simply means organizers attempting

to make contact in the Congressional lobby.

Any citizen is entitled to lobby--you, me, a homeless man. Contributions to lobbying need to be strictly regulated--not lobbying itself.

[clarquistador]

17. Money should not be involved in lobbying

we can keep lobbying without bribes and pay offs.

[blondeatlast]

20. With that, I unequivocally agree. No free lunches, and then some. nt

[file83]

18. Citizen lobby AS individuals should obviously be allowed, but everything else

should be tossed out.

[blondeatlast]

25. I understand your feeling, but--we have to be careful about such a restriction.

Are we willing to restrict the ability of say, the Sierra Club, stem cell research advocates, or labor unions to lobby? All of whom have much less money to spend than say, big Pharma?

The abuse is in the deep pockets many lobbies have--anything from free lunches ($600 for three people) to trips to Scotland to play golf.

The trick is to level the lobbying playing field. Elimination of corporate personhood is a good start, but even that needs serious consideration (the examples I cite above).

[leftofthedial]

12. yes. so should domestic lobbies.

[cali]

29. Yep. Let's get rid of the evil Sierra Club and the Natural

Recources Defense council.

[leftofthedial]

30. let's limit all requests for legislation

to meetings between members of congress and groups of their constituents.


and let's make all campaigns 100% publicly funded.

money is not free speech.

the gross farce that lobbying has become is bribery, pure and simple.

Sierra Club and other "good" lobbies are losing the game overwhelmingly as it is currently practiced. Let's change the rules and eliminate the coorosive, corrupting influence of capitalism.

[Igel]

27. No lobby should be banned.

Graft and corruption should be banned.

Everything else flows from that.

Lobbies have no say over how the US conducts its foreign and domestic policies. They try to convince congressfolk and the executive branch to conduct the US's foreign and domestic policies in accord with their wishes.

So do RW lobbies, business lobbies, ethnic lobbies (including things like the CBC which forms an internal lobby), and progressive lobbies. The NAACP constitutes a lobby; so does the Nature Conservancy. The University of California Students Association is a lobby in California, and the United States Students Association is a national lobby. They pretty much all have people on their staff responsible for on-going outreach to legislators.

Lobbies make points that the legislators may overlook, they are biased fact-providers that sometimes provide facts that other biased fact-providers overlook. They frequently write legislation they'd like to see proposed. Legislators are free to formally propose their legislation or use it as toilet paper.

It all constitutes free speech.

The case has been made that if the government weren't doing so many things there wouldn't be nearly the number of lobbies there after government attention. This is likely true, but completely beside the point. We've decided we want a rather large central government; lobbies ensure feedback to the legislators. Sometimes too much, but them's the breaks.

Now, when it comes to moral deficiencies on the part of the legislators, something should be done. Whether Abramoff or Abscam, bribes and graft are already illegal. But the congressfolk are human; the opportunity for bribes should be limited. I have trouble imagining that most congressfolk are so petty as to allow small gifts to swing huge sums of money to a business or rewrite the legal code; fortunately for us and the US, no one congressman can get legislation passed; unfortunately for us, bills are far too often omnibus in nature and nobody actually reads the damned things to weed out the dross.

Forcing everybody that can't personally afford to actually mount an argument as to why certain legislation or regulations are both necessary and sufficient to be quiet because s/he can't form collectives to fund people to do the necessary research and argumentation is unconstitutional, with a big 'C'.

[MasonJar]

31. All lobbyists should be banned!