It is the lobbyists--issue #1

[ginnyinWI]

This is what separates Hillary from Barack. She takes lots of lobbyist money and he doesn't. She would govern with "business as usual" and he would work for transparency. People would know who was voting for what, and legislators who didn't vote the will of the people would be pushed out. This is what he means when he says Washington is broken and we need to fix it. We need to get corporate lobbyists out of the halls of Congress and the offices of the White House!


Lobbyists v.s. the will of the governed: how can partisan Democrats (like we are at DU) vote for anything but getting the lobbyists out of Washington?

[antigop]

1. Speaking of lobbying...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=4869721&mesg_id=4869721

[NightWatcher]

6. ding, ding, no more posts we have a winner

[elixir]

2. Not only does Barack have 75 lobbyists working on his campaign, he has received $ from same. Too bad

[ginnyinWI]

3. corporate lobbyists? n/t

[onenote]

4. you've been here too long to be as naieve as your post makes you seem

Speaking as a "corporate lobbyist" who supports Obama (and who knows any number of Obama supporters who also happen to be "corporate lobbyists", I can tell you that you're kidding yourself if you think that an Obama presidency will "get lobbyists out of the halls of Congress and the offices of the WHite House."

There may be, and should be, more transparency in lobbying and the rules governing fundraising by lobbyists should be tightened (because they are rife with loopholes), but lobbyists aren't going to disappeear no matter who is president. Nor should they.

[ginnyinWI]

5. you've put it better than I did--thanks for clarifying

You're right--it is transparency that is needed. Expose it all to the light of day. Lobbyists will always be with us, but people need to be able to track what their own legislator does and decide if they are working for the people's best interests or not.