• stoy@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      39
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      7 months ago

      Lobbying in and of itself isn’t bad, it makes our politicians aware of issues and alternatives.

      Unrestricted lobbying is the problem, I recently read that lobbyists from Amazon would no longer have access cards to the European parliament so they no longer could come and go as they liked.

      I just wonder why lobbyists ever got that access in the first place…

    • Salvo@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Owning shares when you are an elected official with jurisdiction over the industry you own shares in.

      Also, any political figure owning shares in a media organisation, regardless of whether it is traditional media or “new media”.

    • BennyHill500@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      7 months ago

      God the nerds in here are annoying.

      “Ackchually banning lobbying would mean nobody could talk to politicians anymore blah blah…”

      Everyone knows what you mean when you say that lobbying should be illegal.

      • otp@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        7 months ago

        Everyone knows what you mean when you say that lobbying should be illegal.

        Could you explain?

        • kali@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          7 months ago

          Lobbying as in “bribery with extra steps” where companies give money to politicians, ask them to do something, then say it’s ok because it’s “lobbying” and therefore not bribery, but people are coming in and pointing out how lobbying technically just means talking to politicians, but that’s not what RotatingParts meant.

          • otp@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            Isn’t the problem that the “extra steps” are loopholes?

            And legal loopholes are like a hydra. Close one and the lawyers will open up two more.

            I imagine the line is hard to draw. But of course, the ones doing the drawing of that line are also on the receiving end of the good stuff, so there’s incentives to not close those loopholes…

        • jkrtn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          Probably the part where they’re straight-up bribing politicians to rubber stamp the garbage that ALEC writes.

      • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        7 months ago

        Everyone knows what you mean when you say that lobbying should be illegal.

        People who don’t know anything about lobbying know what you mean when you say lobbying should be illegal.

    • JCPhoenix@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      7 months ago

      Banning lobbying would mean no one would be able to talk to a politician/official about an issue. Not even writing your local officials, proposing a local ordinance to making bike lanes or spending money to fix-up/improve a local park. Because that’s lobbying. You’re asking a government to wield their official power and/or spend public money, for your (and potentially others’) benefit.

      Even lobbying groups aren’t necessarily bad. The Sierra Club, EFF, ACLU. These are American, but I’m sure there are equivalents of these in other countries.

      So banning lobbying doesn’t really work. Now if you’re talking financial contributions and gifts and nice dinners from those who lobby, yeah that probably needs to be more highly regulated or stopped altogether. Generally speaking, any kind of quid pro quo.

      But just talking to a politician should not be made illegal. In democracies, talking to people, talking to politicians, and trying to convince them to align with your view is the name of the game.

    • shalafi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      7 months ago

      Gonna overturn the 1st Amendment?

      “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

      I’m sure there are ways to dial in the abuse, but what legislator is gonna vote for that?