Why Campaign Finance Reform Is A Waste Of Time

[hblask 1]

There is only one way to ever get rid of the corrupting influence of lobbyists in Washington, and that is to get rid of the system of winner takes all spoils. The more we give government to do, the worse this problem gets. This is Public Choice Theory 101. All the talk about taking the money out of politics is just hot air when it comes from people who just keep making government bigger and bigger.Workarounds to campaign finance lawsWASHINGTON — On a mild evening last September, Citigroup lobbyists mingled with South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn at a rooftop reception — complete with miniature putting greens — as the company hosted a party to honor the third most powerful Democrat in the House and raise money for one of his favorite golf charities. Health insurers and hospitals, meanwhile, are donating millions to help build an institute in Boston to celebrate the career of Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., who is attempting to overhaul the nation's health care system. Despite a ban on gifts to lawmakers and limits on campaign contributions, lobbyists and groups that employ them can spend unlimited money to honor members of Congress or donate to non-profits connected to them or their relatives. The public — until now — had little insight into the scope of this largely hidden world of special-interest influence. Under ethics rules passed in 2007, lobbyists for the first time last year had to report any payment made for an event or to a group connected to a lawmaker and other top federal officials. USA TODAY undertook the first comprehensive analysis of the lobbying reports and found 2,759 payments, totaling $35.8 million, were made in 2008. The money went to honor 534 current and former lawmakers, almost 250 other federal officials and more than 100 groups, many of which count lawmakers among their members. The total cost is roughly equivalent to what the U.S. government spends to operate Yellowstone National Park each year. Most of the money — about $28 million — went to non-profit groups, some with direct ties to members of Congress. In two cases, USA TODAY found, the donations to non-profits associated with a member of Congress came in response to a personal appeal for funds from the lawmaker. "It's another example of the many pockets of a politician's coat," says Ellen Miller of the Sunlight Foundation, a watchdog group. The spending amounts to an "end-run" around campaign-finance laws "that are designed to limit the appearance of undue influence," she says. The money came from companies, trade associations and labor groups that lobby Congress and the government on a range of issues, from seeking a share of last year's $700 billion financial bailout package to trying to shape the debate on climate change. The donations cover various activities — from a golf tournament that raises money for a lawmaker's non-profit to gifts to the alma mater of a powerful House committee chairman. "You can still have a gala or something or the other for a charity and earn some favor with members of Congress, which is what the gift ban was put in place to avoid," says Dan Danner, CEO of the National Federation of Independent Business and a veteran Washington lobbyist. The spending demonstrates the subtle ways that special-interest groups try to sway lawmakers, without making "something as crass as a payoff," says Kenneth Gross, a former Federal Election Commission official. He credits Congress for mandating the disclosure of the gifts and giving the public another view of the relationships between lobbyists and lawmakers. [article continued at link]

[Nimue1995 1]

I know people usually hate this idea and always want it for the other guy's legislator and not their own, but I still say: Term limits FTW.In my opinion, there shouldn't be any such thing as a career politician.

[El Guapo 8]

I know people usually hate this idea and always want it for the other guy's legislator and not their own, but I still say: Term limits FTW.In my opinion, there shouldn't be any such thing as a career politician.

I agree. There should be 12 year limits for House and Senate. This does open up some other problems, but I think they are less than what we are already dealing with.

[Balloon guy 158]

I know people usually hate this idea and always want it for the other guy's legislator and not their own, but I still say: Term limits FTW.In my opinion, there shouldn't be any such thing as a career politician.

We already have term limits for everyone every election.A stupid voting public is getting what they deserve

[hblask 1]

We already have term limits for everyone every election.

Only in the sense that if you had a track meet, whoever won the last 100m race got a 30m head start for the next one. It's not exactly a fair fight.

[Nimue1995 1]

Only in the sense that if you had a track meet, whoever won the last 100m race got a 30m head start for the next one. It's not exactly a fair fight.

This is exactly right. The reason that money buys politicians is because it can. And because the politician knows that if he keeps those lobbyists happy, he'll have more money to put into his campaign chest come election time and therefore have a better chance of keeping his job (sorry for all you hers out there but I'm using the male term generically and mean no sexism with it). So in a sense, H's marketplace is working in this case just the way you'd expect it to. If we want to change that and take the profit out of politics then we need to place a limit on how long these guys can serve. I know that's interfering with the marketplace but in the case of politicians, it's my opinion that there should BE NO MARKETPLACE.

[hblask 1]

If we want to change that and take the profit out of politics then we need to place a limit on how long these guys can serve. I know that's interfering with the marketplace but in the case of politicians, it's my opinion that there should BE NO MARKETPLACE.

I don't think term limits necessarily removes the market for political favors. The principal argument for term limits is that with each passing year, politicians become more corrupt by power and more removed from the concerns of the average citizens. That, and the incumbent advantage.The only way to remove the market for political favors is to stop having political favors up for sale. I'm not sure how we reach that point except to keep pointing out the folly of the old ways and hope people start to vote for those with principles instead of people who have the best warm fuzzies in their ads.