Lobbying is supposed to be making your case to a politician, and hoping they vote/propose a bill/etc. With that interest in mind. You yourself are allowed to lobby your congress critters...technically.
The lobbying is not the problem. The donations that sway opinions are the problem. If it was entirely unrelated to donations and the congress person was just hearing out all sides of an issue, that's a good thing.
Donations aren't to sway opinion they're to maintain a stock of dependent politicians who already agree with your position but who also need your funding to stay in office
If you ever called or wrote a letter to your congress person about an issue you cared about you were a lobbyist when you did that.
The problem is not lobbying, the problem is pay-for-play. Something like 80%-90% of candidates who spend the most money end up winning their election. Our politicians are owned by wealthy corporate interests who fund their elections. The solution is to get money — especially corporate money — out of politics.
There are a number of policy proposals that might limit the power of money in our politics, federally funded elections, regulations for how much air time each candidate gets, perhaps bring back the fairness doctrine, just to name a few.
The "tea party"/freedom caucus are literally groups funded by the Koch brothers. The entire "movement" existed because they willed it to be with their money.
"Americans for prosperity" is Koch manipulating politics through who they fund to run.
In theory, it's partially meant to educate politicians who cannot be experts on everything in a world where information exponentially grows, but this system has clearly been intentionally used to abuse power.
Its extremely obvious. "Oh, these? These aren't bribes. They're uh, free speech! Yeah! And companies speak in money so this is their free-"
Shut the fuck up.
Its absolute evil. I can't believe us citizens haven't burned it to the ground in a fit of rage. Its blatant fucking bribery. I'm seein' red just typing this post.
That is why the Democratic party drastically changed its primary rules after Carter was elected (to make them less democratic, and to give establishment elite party members more power).
They tried to tighten the collar on the public even more when Occasio-Cortez primaried an establishment Democrat.
The left-wing of the Democratic Party, including President Jimmy Carter, are the red-haired stepchildren of the party, and they'll never let us forget it.
There are more secret fascists than it appears who will Hail Hydra when Secret Hitler makes his appearance.
I agree with what is being said in the article. However, I have seen an uptick of articles older than 2 years being posted as "recent news" or "breaking news". This article is from 2015 and while it is pretty accurate, especially in these times, something from 8 years ago should be noted as such.
I think people really overestimate the power that the president has, realistically when it comes to these sweeping systematic changes the only thing the president has is veto power. Otherwise you just have to hope that everyone else in congress and the supreme court do what you want them to do
Yeah, that's true. I also remember a time when the CIA was doing their dirty work down in South America while Jimmy Carter was in office. Dude isn't as great as everybody thinks he is
Jimmy Carter may have not have been a great president and the US government may have sone some shitty things while he was in charge, but he is probably the most upstanding American president of the last half century. Pretty much everyone after (with maaaybe the exception of Obama) has been of lesser character.
Which, now that I’ve written it out, sounds really sad. The best the country could do was Jimmy Carter, who … wasn’t great.
Dude, Obama ordered more drone strikes than any president before him. Just because he was a good speaker and charismatic doesn't make him a good person.
I'm an idiot, so I don't know if this is a sensible take. However, coming from a place of political strategy, I'm not sure a lot of presidents can out-maneuver military much. Presidents have term limits and military personnel don't. Both for understandable reasons to be clear. However, it sets up a dynamic where one knows the ins and outs like the back of their hand and the other is like a substitute teacher with a class full of CIA operatives.