IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 2 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Oh, my goodness.
The former Senator from Wall Street is your example of a non-corrupt politician? Sure, most of the ones that stay are power mongers reaping huge rewards from the real power in this country ("The owners" that the late George Carlin spoke about).
“Candidly, those who count on quote ‘Hollywood’ for support need to understand that this industry is watching very carefully who’s going to stand up for them when their job is at stake.”

That was a veiled warning. But then, what did that darn Dodd do? Here’s the money quote: “Don’t ask me to write a check for you when you think your job is at risk and then don’t pay any attention to me when my job is at stake.”

http://www.zdnet.com...cs-as-usual/11152
Think he only started doing that sort of thing after he left office? Think again.
"This seems a straight-up quid pro quo. Dodd helped his apparently crooked friend and seems to have received a cut-rate real estate deal on a property in Ireland in exchange. Moreover, it appears Dodd attempted to cover up the gift by failing to disclose it on his financial disclosure forms. To put it mildly, this type of behavior clearly does not reflect well on the United States Senate. We hope the Senate Ethics Committee does a thorough and speedy investigation. Federal prosecutors also need to take a look at this, as knowingly filing false financial forms is a crime," stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

http://www.judicialw...christopher-dodd/
New Meh.
Dodd is no saint. I don't take JudicialWatch as an unbiased source - YMMV.

He's not in the same league as Balgo, or Rita Crundwell, or the folks who ran Bell, CA, or ... That's what I call Corruption. And that's ignoring the fact that even those examples are small-time compared to examples one could easily find over seas.

There are levels of gray in this stuff that get washed out when one talks about Corruption in Congress. People who leave Congress usually need to earn a living (the congressional pensions are good, but hardly lavish). People are hired for their expertise, knowledge and contacts. Unless we have a law that elected officials must work for universities or think tanks after they leave office, most are going to end up working for companies that want to make more money than the person costs.

Would robust public financing reduce a lot of these problems of apparent quid-pro-quos? I like to think so. Would it eliminate them? No, because one person's quid pro quo is another person's pushing something because it's the right thing to do.

Cheers,
Scott.
New How about the Washington Post?
Nearly 5,400 former congressional staffers have left Capitol Hill to become federal lobbyists in the past 10 years, according to a new study that documents the extent of the revolving door between Congress and K Street.

The data published by the online disclosure site LegiStorm found close to 400 former U.S. lawmakers also have made the jump to lobbying.

The report, which tallies a greater number of workers moving between Congress and lobbying than found in previous studies, underscores the symbiotic relationship: Thousands of lobbyists are able to exploit experience and connections gleaned from working inside the legislative process, and lawmakers find in lobbyists a ready pool of experienced talent.

Of the 5,400 lobbyists with recent Hill experience, the study found that 2,900 were registered to lobby on behalf of clients this year. Twenty-five powerhouse firms and organizations employ 10 or more former Hill workers. The largest number are at the Podesta Group, followed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which employs at least 21.

...

The study also documents the reverse movement, finding 605 former lobbyists who have taken jobs working for lawmakers in the past decade.

“For every person the American people have elected to sponsor legislation of public benefit, special interests have more than one former legislative advocate now working on the inside in Congress,” said Jock Friedly, founder of LegiStorm. “That represents a large network of people to influence decisions and to provide valuable intelligence.”

In the House, the study found at least 11 former lobbyists working on the Republican staff of both the Energy and Commerce and Ways and Means committees. Democratic members of those committees together employ five former lobbyists.

http://www.washingto...xPYROK_story.html

Then, of course, I might be forgiven for being a little more sensitive about this since the complete and utter idiots of my home state re-elected Dan Coats to the US Senate. And don't get me started on Dan Quayle.

If there were any question where lobbying ranks in popularity these days, the attacks on former senator Dan Coats of Indiana over the past week provide a pretty clear answer.

Coats, a Republican who served in Congress for nearly 20 years, is preparing a run to win back the seat occupied by Sen. Evan Bayh (D). National Republicans see an opportunity to target Bayh for his support of President Obama's stimulus and health-care plans.

The problem for Coats is that he spent a good part of the past decade as a well-connected Washington lobbyist, ...

The former senator has had scores of corporate lobbying clients over the years, including health-care firms (Amgen, United Health Group, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America), bailout recipients (Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch) and communications companies (BellSouth, Sprint Nextel, Verizon). Another past client is Cerberus Capital Management, where Dan Quayle -- whose seat Coats took over in the Senate -- is a top executive.

http://www.washingto...010021003529.html
New Not much better.
The WP isn't much better than a right-wing rag in its political and economic coverage these days. ;-)

Anyway...

5400 over 10 years. Out of how many? That post doesn't say.

http://en.wikipedia....ngressional_staff In the year 2000 there were around 24000 people who could be called Congressional Staff (I don't know where the article got 14000). 5% turnover a year is 1200 people a year. 540 people a year (5400/10) is around 2% becoming lobbyists every year. Is it really a huge problem? Without context we can't know. Is it really a problem if some junior staffer leaves the government and goes to work for the AAAS or the IEEE or Greenpeace or some university consortium or Consumers' Union and is a registered lobbyist? The story doesn't say. "Lobbyist == BAD!" is the message.

Sure, there are people who will gladly sell their position to the highest bidder. See Randall "Duke" Cunningham. They're rare, though.

Be careful what you wish for. People who aren't bribe-able are generally extremely wealthy already. Do we only want plutocrats running our government? I don't. Do we only want people who go to government as their last job? I don't.

Cheers,
Scott.
     make 2014 the last year to buy a new car - (boxley) - (22)
         I think car computers have done that for about 20 yrs now... - (Another Scott) - (21)
             who was that? Government motors? - (boxley) - (20)
                 Meh. It's only a difference of degree. It's not Big Brother. - (Another Scott) - (19)
                     FWIW, BIg Brother is mostly a difference of degree. -NT - (drook)
                     Oh c'mon - (crazy)
                     It IS another way to snoop on the general population - (hnick) - (16)
                         People can voluntarily give the info to insurance cos now. - (Another Scott) - (15)
                             I will let you ride my truck after the emp explosion :-) -NT - (boxley) - (3)
                                 It wouldn't be any better off. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                     Fuck your Subaru - (pwhysall) - (1)
                                         Catchy. :-) Thanks. -NT - (Another Scott)
                             I guess you have a lot more faith in the corrupt than I. - (hnick) - (9)
                                 I think there are few truly corrupt people in government. - (Another Scott) - (8)
                                     Re: more money on the outside. - (mmoffitt) - (5)
                                         I don't think it's that simple. - (Another Scott) - (4)
                                             Oh, my goodness. - (mmoffitt) - (3)
                                                 Meh. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                                                     How about the Washington Post? - (mmoffitt) - (1)
                                                         Not much better. - (Another Scott)
                                     definitions, definitions... - (hnick) - (1)
                                         Yup. -NT - (Another Scott)
                             Drum on Progressive's program. - (Another Scott)

For what it's worth, gangrene makes one testy.
46 ms