The Policemens Lobby is Not Equal with the Chamber of Commerce Lobby

It's absolutely insane to say that the policemen and environmental lobby have an equal say with the Chamber of Commerce Lobby.

It's absolute nuts.  Yes everyone can lobby or start a PAC but the fact is the total amount is heavily biased.  On this Obama and Edwards seem to agree. ex.asp?txtindextype=s

on the top spenders list this is what you see.


US Chamber of Commerce


American Medical Assn


General Electric


American Hospital Assn


Edison Electric Institute




Pharmaceutical Rsrch & Mfrs of America


National Assn of Realtors


Business Roundtable


Northrop Grumman


Blue Cross/Blue Shield


Freddie Mac


Lockheed Martin


Boeing Co


Verizon Communications


Philip Morris


General Motors


Fannie Mae


Ford Motor Co


US Telecom Assn


General Electric alone spent $137 million on lobbying over an 8 year period.

This does not include campaign contributions of high ranking executives to the RNC, DNC ,  various PACs and individual campaigns.

It's almost impossible to know exactly how much money employees of general electric and the company have spent influencing legislation in congress but it's a lot.

I would imagine that this list underestimates certain sectors.  If you notice the "business roundtable" and "chamber of commerce" are listed as separate lobbying industries but I bet they both lobby congress to not increase the minimum wage.

You'll notice all three military contractors - Lockheed Martin, Boehing and Northup Grummon all made the list.  Want to know why we have  needless wars and spend so much on military hardware?

In 2006, $2.55 BILLION was spent on lobbying.  Again this doesn't even include PACs or political contributions to campaigns.

You want to know why you can't raise fuel economy standards?  See Ford and GM on the list.

Want to know why the government agreed never to negotiate drug prices.  See PhRMA.


It's nuts to argue lobbying is fair cause the sierra club can lobby too.

You can read read about lobbying firms that create astroturf campaigns to build support for certain bills or release fake Youtubes attacking Al Gore. 851-115.stm

In the video, Mr. Gore appears as a sinister figure who brainwashes penguins and bores movie audiences by blaming the Mideast crisis and starlet Lindsay Lohan's shrinking waist size on global warming. Like other videos on the popular YouTube site, it has a home-made, humorous quality. The video's maker is listed as "Toutsmith," a 29-year-old who identifies himself as being from Beverly Hills in an Internet profile.

In an email exchange with The Wall Street Journal, Toutsmith didn't answer when asked who he was or why he made the video, which has just over 59,000 views on YouTube. However, computer routing information contained in an email sent from Toutsmith's Yahoo account indicate it didn't come from an amateur working out of his basement.

Instead, the email originated from a computer registered to DCI Group, a Washington, D.C., public relations and lobbying firm whose clients include oil company Exxon Mobil Corp.

A DCI Group spokesman declines to say whether or not DCI made the anti-Gore penguin video, or to explain why Toutsmith appeared to be sending email from DCI's computers. "DCI Group does not disclose the names of its clients, nor do we discuss the work that we do on our clients' behalf," says Matt Triaca, who heads DCI's media relations shop.

Tags: lobbying (all tags)



get it?
exxon mobil hires a lobbying firm to secretly go after al gore..
etc.. etc...
by TarHeel 2007-08-04 02:33PM | 0 recs
Re: get it?

I've also read about Exxon Mobil, through being the major backer of (I believe) the American Enterprise Institute, offering $100,000 "grants" to scientists writing articles challenging global warming

by Max Fletcher 2007-08-05 01:45PM | 0 recs
Re: The Policemens Lobby is Not Equal with the Cha

Can you give me the list of people who are allowed to have lobbyists and a list of those who are not?

This is the bottom line. No bullshit.Straight up. The majority of people who complain about lobbyists are just mad because some organizations that they dont support have  a significant lobbying presense. They only oppose lobbying when they disagree with the cause.

I don't like exxon mobile anymore than you do but you can't selectively say some lobbying is okay but some is not. Thats cherry picking.

by world dictator 2007-08-04 04:15PM | 0 recs
we should not have lobbyists PERIOD

our votes are supposed to be our lobbying.

by TarHeel 2007-08-05 11:47AM | 0 recs
Re: The Policemens Lobby is Not Equal with the Cha

It's not that lobbyists are automatically evil. The issue is that lobbyists are in the business of influencing politicians, and with that being the case someone would have to be a real idiot to think the huge amounts of money they "give" to some campaigns is purely out of the kindness of their hearts. The whole point is to minimize the impact of dollar contributions on the political process.

Best case scenario is we still have lobbyists, but they are forced to influence politicians with the power of their arguments instead of the power of their pocketbooks.

by Mystylplx 2007-08-05 12:51PM | 0 recs
Exactly. Thank You.

Some of the good things that get accomplished in Washington couldn't be done without the information provided by lobbying communities (i.e., labor organizations voicing their opinions on work laws and how they'll affect members). However, it is obvious that the system has been seriously corrupted and needs reform.

Check out Obama's Ethics Reform Plan (12-page PDF). Not sure if anyone else has a plan or not.

by Max Fletcher 2007-08-05 01:51PM | 0 recs
Re: Exactly. Thank You.

Again- exactly right. Poster such as the one above want to contribute to a false frame that this means no lobbying. No it means lobbying through means other than deep pockets.

by bruh21 2007-08-05 01:55PM | 0 recs
Re: The Policemens Lobby is Not Equal with the Cha

Exactly right. this isn't about eliminating lobby influences in terms of arguments. If Phrma can make its argument in a better way than some other group then the argument should be made on teh argument- not how much more money they have in terms of how it will help the American people. However I should say you are wasting your time with the above poster- he really doesn't care about the issue. Only how the issue affects perception of his/her candidate. Its sad but true.

by bruh21 2007-08-05 01:54PM | 0 recs
who lobbys

for people without money?

that's the whole problem those with the most money will be most effective lobbyists....

pretty obvious right?

campaign finance was obviously a recognition of more money = more power

by TarHeel 2007-08-05 02:57PM | 0 recs
Re: who lobbys

unfortunately with the present court legally a lot of our hands are tied. what we can say however is that ethically and politically democrats shouldn't be taking money from certain parties. Clinton is terrified of this argument. So are her supporters. They will throw whatever they can at this sort of discussion because like several areas these are issues on which theya re volunerable. This is the thing that gets me- on the issues- if Edwards and others would go oafter her, she would lose fairly quickly. Her supporters here in terms of democratic primary are arguing the indefensable. the only reason why they are makign teh claims is that they know this probably won't gain traction. but one can always hope that honest discussion of real issues will gain traction. i was on obama's side last week about pakistan although i support edwards because of the issue. a lot of people don't get hta t kind of thinking here. there are some who do- some said they disagreed with obama although he was there candidate. i can respect that even as i disagreed with them. what i can't respect is all this spin about how all lobbying is equal and trying to throw every thing against ht ewall to see what sticks. now people are saying shit like well there must be something on edwards as if edwards is the point rather than the vehicle. sadly too much of this reminds of the GOP and I am remembering why by th elate 90s i was becoming apolitical

by bruh21 2007-08-05 03:09PM | 0 recs
Great video

TPM made that?  They sure do good work.

by psericks 2007-08-06 03:20AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads