Lobbying is a form of advocacy with the intention of influencing decisions made by legislators and officials in the government by individuals, other legislators, constituents, or advocacy groups. A lobbyist is a person who tries to influence legislation on behalf of a special interest or a member of a lobby. Governments often define and regulate organized group lobbying that has become influential.- 'Advocacy'?...what's that?...and who are 'advocacy groups'? Glad you asked!
Advocacy by an individual or by an advocacy group normally aim to influence public-policy and resource allocation decisions within political, economic, and social systems and institutions; it may be motivated from moral, ethical or faith principles or simply to protect an asset of interest. Advocacy can include many activities that a person or organization undertakes including media campaigns, public speaking, commissioning and publishing research or poll or the 'filing of friend of the court briefs'.- Yeah, anyone else get confused by those two?...they seem actually mutually exclusive instead of meaning the same thing. Lobbyists seek to intercede legislature (...that means Congress) while Advocates seem more like public awareness groups for people in your community (...kind of like Jehovah's Witnesses). Technically, lobbyists are the advocates in Congress even though it's on the basis of the Congressman's stance ON issues that...well, kind of gets him/her elected...in the...first...place. Sooo...why are there lobbyists?...and what are they doing hassling Congress? Let's look a little deeper into this, shall we?
Lobby groups may concentrate their efforts on the legislatures, where laws are created, but may also use the judicial branch to advance their causes. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, for example, filed suits in state and federal courts in the 1950s to challenge segregation laws. Their efforts resulted in the Supreme Court declaring such laws unconstitutional.- Well...score one for lobbyists, eh? Still, I'm kind of confused...are we to believe that PURELY on the intercession of lobbyists that segregation was ruled unconstitutional? I thought that was accomplished through social awareness and petitioning...hmmm, petitioning...
The ability of individuals, groups, and corporations to lobby the government is protected by the right to petition in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.- A-HA! I knew I'd find the Constitution somewhere in this - let's see what the Constitution says about the 'Right to Petition', shall we? This is covered in the First Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law...abridging...the right...to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."- Well THAT makes sense...after all, as written in the Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776:
"In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury..."- I can see why Our Forefather's would want to insure that the citizenry be reserved the right to petition, especially if it is regarding grievances pertaining to an unconstitutional law...individuals and groups should have the right to be heard. Still, there's something wrong here...looking back at the previous discussion regarding 'petitioning' lies this one statement that just doesn't make sense to me..., "The ability for individuals, groups and corporations to lobby the government...". What the?! WHY do corporations 'need' to lobby Congress...I mean, that's a business, right?...we're not talking about a living, breathing human being here...
Corporate personhood refers to the controversy of what subset of rights afforded under the law to natural persons should also be afforded to corporations as legal persons.- *blinks*
- No, it's not a joke folks...there's people out there in America who honestly think that a BUILDING...a corporate LOGO...err...what?...has the right to vote? Maybe we should ask the question as to whether or not a business is democratic or republican? Is a corporation required to get a "green card" and "work permit" in order to be in the United States?...I don't remember Proctor and Gamble raising issues about 'Freedom of Speech"...what's it's stance on abortion issues? Does anyone else feel like Alice down the rabbit hole?...can a corporation keep and bear arms (...pirates do...are THEY corporations?). What about National Health Care?...when a corporation gets 'sick', is the government required to render aid? Apparently that issue was pressed regarding the car industry and even after the bailout, those agencies still crumbled. Is anyone seeing the absolute ABSURDITY regarding this?
- Look, folks...no matter how you slice it...a corporation is NOT a living, breathing person - I don't care WHAT those corporate lawyers say. It doesn't take a rocket-scientist to know that even if you take all the workers out of a corporation...it doesn't 'die', because it wasn't freakin' 'ALIVE' in the first place. Cmon, folks...let's get real, this 'corperate personhood' malarky is just a smoke-screen to protect the 'captains of industry' from being targetted for the misgivings they allow thier corporations to create. If there is ANY WAY a corporation can be 'acknowledged' as a 'person' then it's under a default 'power of attorney' which the CEO, President and/or Board of Trustees are ULTIMATELY RESPONSIBLE FOR...and it is the responsibility of the corporation that these individuals are sincerely seeking to shift over to a 'legally recognized', but ulitmately false identity. This is called a 'straw man' argument which is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position (i.e. - "This is how we do things here at Joe's...it's our corporate policy." "No, it's NOT 'our corporate policy'...it's just how the CEO wants things done - stop evading the issue.").
- How does this tie in with lobbyists (...and why CORPORATE lobbyists need run out of Congress)? Real simple, we got a bunch of clowns running around trying to push legislature to protect thier investments from thier own wrong-doing by insisting that thier errors cannot be arbitrarily be targetted (...it's a 'corporate problem'...not the fault of the execs in charge, it's the fault of the 'economy', 'the market'...anything but them...). Look, lobbying Congress is reserved for PERSONS...not property, but a PERSON'S property. The 'slippery slope' argument (which is also a fallacy of reasoning) states that a relatively small first step inevitably leads to a chain of related events culminating in some significant impact, much like an object given a small push over the edge of a slope sliding all the way to the bottom. Just because your corporation blows chucks and can't sustain itself due to mismanagement of corporate funds and over-extended projected sales does NOT make this a government issue - it just means you're lousy at business, cannot adapt and need to go under so that others (who probably know a great deal more then you) can start up thier own business (...or banks, for that matter). That's why it's called a 'free market'...that means 'free for all' - you want to keep your business afloat then YOU need to make it work!...by maintaining a stable business model that can adapt and advance in accordance to the ever fluctuating market!
- I read Ann Rand's 'Atlas Shrugged'...I thought it was the biggest joke in the history of literature - pity most business execs swear by it as the example unto which derives the 'importance of business'. Pulease, believing in that rhetoric only makes you narcissistic. Please, go away and take your corrupt 'corporate lobbyists' with you - Congress is for we, the People...not straw men. Weight in, America...abolish 'corporate personhood' and ban 'corporate lobbyists' in Congress? They're not even representing themselves, they're representing a brand name - trees having lobbyists I can understand more then corporations: stop trying to turn our free market system into 'governmentally-sponsored capitalism'. Be the man or woman you professed to be...the one in charge - the leader: a 'captain of industry'. Be proud of your successes...and failures - be willing to 'go down with the ship', be 'the last one overboard' and 'women and children first', remember? Sometime ago, I think we lost our ability ability to be 'noble' and 'civil'...now, we use laws to regulate ourselves - to keep us from being anything, but civil (i.e. - we cannot seem to do anything now without being uncivil). Kind of like myself (knowing I shouldn't), but I'm calling a 'spade' a 'spade' - to the 'Captains of Industry' that exist today, who are trying to "blame the victim": a fake identity 'YOUR corporation'...it's a psychological disorder called:
the fundamental attribution error (also known as correspondence bias or attribution effect) describes the tendency to over-value dispositional or personality-based explanations for the observed behaviors of others while under-valuing situational explanations for those behaviors. The fundamental attribution error is most visible when people explain the behavior of others. It does not explain interpretations of one's own behavior—where situational factors are often taken into consideration. This discrepancy is called the actor-observer bias.- The belief that people get what they deserve and deserve what they get, which was first theorized by Melvin Lerner (...no, I don't know him). Attributing failures to dispositional causes rather than situational causes, which are unchangeable and uncontrollable, satisfies our need to believe that the world is fair and we have control over our life (...meaning, 'I was tempted by teh DEBIL!"). We are motivated to see a just world because this reduces our perceived threats, gives us a sense of security, helps us find meaning in difficult and unsettling circumstances, and benefits us psychologically (...in other words, 'playing with 'imaginary friends' is still GOOD for you!'). Unfortunately, the just world hypothesis also results in a tendency for people to blame and disparage victims of a tragedy or an accident, such as victims of rape and domestic abuse to reassure themselves of their insusceptibility to such events (...like some 'religions' who force 'rape victims' to MARRY thier rapist - are you freaking KIDDING me?! OUCH!). People may even go to such extremes as the victim's faults in "past life" to pursue justification for their bad outcome...'cognito ergo sum', eh (...'I think, therefore I am')?
- O.o
- Really?...are you serious?! Oh c'mon...show at least a LITTLE backbone, will ya? Like we say down here in Texas, 'Cowboy UP!' (...or 'cowgirl'...look, don't make me 'get all legalesse on you'...). You chose to get on that bull...you sat in that saddle yourself - it's just you and the bull now: no one forced you to ride, and thier ain't a single soul that's ever tried gonna say, 'it's easy'. So, you didn't last long - so what?...you survived, isn't that enough? The punishment for being a coward and not owning up to your own mistakes (in accordance to most military laws) is typically severe - ranging from corporal punishment to the death sentence. Be graceful, be civil and take a bow...that was your turn on stage - maybe you'll do better with your next opportunity. The world's still full of opportunities...and that looks (and sounds) a lot better then you're desperate attempt to hold onto YOUR failure. Is it not through the honour and civility of man that can acknowledge and accept reponsibility for thier own mistakes? Exit stage left, you hypocritical narcissistic...
- ...COWARDS!
"Radix malorum est cupiditas,"
The American Deist,
M.D. Little
Don't get me wrong folks,
ReplyDelete- I'm not against capitalism...I think it's an economical model that's fairly self-sustaining - the only problem is those who saught to make thier fortunes in the open market didn't learn the immutable truths of supply and demand: in a reccession, cut back on production...but don't eliminate production entirely. Adjust in accordance to the market - be flexible. 'Say's Law' states:
"No matter how much people save, production is still a possibility as it is the prerequisite for the attainment of any additional goods of consumption".
- This is a proven fallacy of reasoning since if, regardless of the demand, if the targetted buyer is incapable of affording said commodity/service - it simply cannot be purchased and YOU will experience a loss. Projected sales were derived on ignorance instead of factual data regarding the month-by-month decline of the market in general...production was based on last year's figures only to realize (too late) that the projected sales eroneously erred. Offering money to companies incapable of maintaining thier own finances was an excercise in pure stupidity. Nothing in the end, was gained - only debt when the car industry filed for bankruptcy (those that didn't, moved to different countries accelerated the reccession into it's current state - leaving those former employees jobless only makes the situation worse further discounting 'Say's law' as anything remotely based on sane judgement).
- I believe reducing the margin of profit per unit/service would greatly assist in these current troubled times....but that still leaves all the jobs (currently outsourced/worked by migrants) that further harm the economy. Bank's MUST be willing to take TRUE RISKS and sponsor loans to new AMERICAN businesses and/or agencies. Not doing so INHIBITS the private sector, the free market and, ultimately, the American economy itself.
- If we are not willing to perform these few basic, but neccessary, changes...we'll be looking forward to more difficult times. There may be a few successes here and there, but ultimately - the unemployed will not change much without new enterprise surfacing. If America's future is without production, service and labor - what is there? These questions need answered...and soon. I will, again, post the links regarding labor jobs and attaining a certificate respectfully:
http://www.takeourjobs.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certificate
- I'm not ready to give up on America just yet, just on those who helped put us in this bind. For me, 'those who helped' is the reflection I see in the mirror, because I allowed (regardless of cognizance) our economy to be left in the hands of children. There's still hope, though...we have some time left - we now have to take the 'reigns' and steer ourselves back unto the right path and actually put some ETHICS, back into business:
BUYING AMERICAN KEEPS AMERICANS EMPLOYED IN AMERICA, FOR AMERICA.
The American Deist,
M.D. Little.