This angers me. It angers me because people don't realize that most often, a politician gets donations from organizations that already know he agrees with their goals.
I worked for a politician from a Western State. He got tons of money from mining, gaming and defense contractors. He openly stated that without those three industries, his home state would barely exist. Those three employed a vast majority of his constituents and would thus would always have him in their corner.
Interestingly, he had a hard time raising money when running against an opponent who also agreed with the above points.
The problem I have isn't with the idea of organizations making donations, but rather when those donations create a "direct line" from the lobbyist group to the politician, bypassing the constituents.
Representatives are there to represent contituents because the USA is too big for direct democracy. If industry x really has such a profound impact on a community then it's in the self-interest of voters to reflect that at the voting booth by voting for the politician that will help said industry, and by extension, their community.
A private organization greasing the hand of a politician in order to ram a piece of legislation through, against the wishes of said politician's constituents is beyond contempt. From all the evidence I've seen, the only ones who like SOPA are the entertainment industry, and last time I checked they weren't elected to any governmental position.
From all the evidence I've seen, the only ones who like SOPA are the entertainment industry, and last time I checked they weren't elected to any governmental position.
Look, I hate SOPA etc etc, but I think you are going a bit overboard here.
The entertainment industry is a large employer, and the people employed by it are constituents.
You and I may think that SOPA isn't the best way forward, but it is easy to argue that it might protect old, dying industries and the jobs they represent.
Lobby groups are how the voices of people are heard in Washington. It isn't ideal, but nor is it necessarily as corrupt as you are making out.
"A private organization greasing the hand of a politician in order to ram a piece of legislation through, against the wishes of said politician's constituents..."
I would like you to prove to me this has ever happened. I am not saying it ever happened, as I am sure it has. Show me one time it did.
"If industry x really has such a profound impact on a community then it's in the self-interest of voters to reflect that at the voting booth by voting for the politician that will help said industry, and by extension, their community."
In my experience, that is why 90% (my guestimation) of donations--by both individuals and organizations--happen.
I worked for a politician from a Western State. He got tons of money from mining, gaming and defense contractors. He openly stated that without those three industries, his home state would barely exist. Those three employed a vast majority of his constituents and would thus would always have him in their corner.
Interestingly, he had a hard time raising money when running against an opponent who also agreed with the above points.