Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Nanjeanne

(4,975 posts)
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:10 PM Feb 2016

DNC rolls back Obama ban on contributions from federal lobbyists -

The Democratic National Committee has rolled back restrictions introduced by presidential candidate Barack Obama in 2008 that banned donations from federal lobbyists and political action committees.

The decision was viewed with disappointment Friday morning by good government activists who saw it as a step backward in the effort to limit special interest influence in Washington. Some suggested it could provide an advantage to Hillary Clinton’s fundraising efforts.

“It is a major step in the wrong direction,” said longtime reform advocate Fred Wertheimer. “And it is completely out of touch with the clear public rejection of the role of political money in Washington,” expressed during the 2016 campaign.


<snip>

For the most part, they said, the DNC has returned to business as usual, pre-2008. The DNC has even named a finance director specifically for PAC donations who has recently emailed prospective donors to let them know that they can now contribute again, according to an email that was reviewed by The Washington Post.


<snip>

Reformers complain that the new rules have already changed Washington ethics. They provide opportunities for “influence-buying by Washington lobbyists with six-figure contributions to the Hillary Victory Fund,” said Wertheimer, suggesting that lobbyists could also face “political extortion” from those raising the money. He called on Obama to reverse the recent DNC decision to change the rules.


More . . . https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dnc-allowing-donations-from-federal-lobbyists-and-pacs/2016/02/12/22b1c38c-d196-11e5-88cd-753e80cd29ad_story.html?wpisrc=al_alert-COMBO-politics%252Bnation

So . . . we now have even MORE money in politics. Good job DNC. Do you think Hillary will tell the DNC to cut it out - and honor President Obama's changes? *sarcasm*
14 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies

global1

(25,270 posts)
1. It's Like They Are Throwing Salt In The Open Wounds Of The American People.....
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:13 PM
Feb 2016

this is just outrageous.

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)
2. Not a chance that she would tell them to cut it out.
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:14 PM
Feb 2016

Especially since it appears that they changed the rules just for her.

So much for her wanting to get corporate money out of politics.

global1

(25,270 posts)
4. This Is Just Another Example Of The Establishment Fueling Bernie's Political Revolution.....
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:18 PM
Feb 2016

Don't they realize how incensed the American People are about typical business as usual things like this. They are actually helping Bernie make his case. They are adding fuel to this fire and showing just how corrupt and rigged this system is. Moves like this are just "Fueling the Bern!!!!!"

Go Bernie!!!!

Feel The Bern!!!!

Dragonfli

(10,622 posts)
6. This is good news for the candidate with the right sponsors! Debbie is only looking out
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 04:59 PM
Feb 2016

for who she works for.

Empowerer

(3,900 posts)
7. This ban was far to widespread
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:07 PM
Feb 2016

All lobbyists are not evil. For example, every major civil rights organization lobbies Congress to advocate for civil rights. Because they cannot afford to hire outside lobbyist or lobbying firms, people on the staff do the lobbying and, therefore, have to register as lobbyists. As a result, none of those people can donate to the campaign. The same prohibition applied to getting jobs in the Administration - there are many good, solid people who would have been great assets to the federal agencies but they were barred from jobs because they had registered as lobbyists in the past few years. These people were not influence peddlers or big money people. They were grassroots activists who try to convince Congress to pass good laws and stop bad ones, to confirm fair, liberal judges, etc.

You know those grades that Sanders supporters like to tout - the high grades he gets from the NAACP, NARAL, etc.? Those grades are based solely on his voting record and that voting record is monitored by those organization's in-house lobbyists who not only keep an eye on how he's voting but also spend a lot of time talking to him about the bills they care about.

The blanket prohibition looks good on paper and sounds good in speeches, but in reality, it is much too broad and throws the baby out with the bathwater.

TCJ70

(4,387 posts)
9. It doesn't just look good on paper...
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:09 PM
Feb 2016

...it IS good. Money in exchange for securing a vote, is bribery, regardless of the topic. If an organization/industry has a point to make, make it on its merits. Feel free to talk, convince, whatever. Money just makes the whole thing dirty.

Empowerer

(3,900 posts)
10. So, if you're working for a small non-profit that fights hunger in your community
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:15 PM
Feb 2016

and who organizes your community residents to oppose a bill cutting food stamps. You make $35,000 a year and want to donate $50 to Bernie, you think you shouldn't be allowed because you're a registered lobbyist?

TCJ70

(4,387 posts)
11. I have no problem with that...
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:20 PM
Feb 2016

...any hint of impropriety is not good. If you want to give money to a candidate, you better stop lobbying.

Empowerer

(3,900 posts)
14. Here's the problem with that
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:32 PM
Feb 2016

Smaller organizations - the ones that fight the 1% and are already at a disadvantage - don't have the luxury of making that choice. Often, everyone there must do some lobbying - which is really just advocating to Congress on behalf of their constituents. Unlike big money places who can hire outside lobbyists, therefore keeping everyone on the inside "clean," these organizations have to do everything, including the lobbying.

Blanket rules like this actually benefit the big money companies to the disadvantage of smaller organizations. Like I said, it sounds good, but in reality, it's really unfair to them. There has to be some middle ground.

BainsBane

(53,057 posts)
8. They weren't getting enough donations to fund the convention
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:09 PM
Feb 2016

The rhetoric against them certainly didn't help with that.

Nanjeanne

(4,975 posts)
13. I guess everyone who supports this rollback must be bashing Obama!
Fri Feb 12, 2016, 05:25 PM
Feb 2016

Isn't that how it works? You don't like something Obama did and you say that - so you are bashing him?

Oh wait . . . that's only Sanders!

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»DNC rolls back Obama ban ...