yurbud
yurbud's JournalLetter asks retiring members of Congress if negotiating for lobbying job and posts responses
Drawing attention to this is at least as important as campaign finance reform and overturning Citizens United.
Even if elections were totally clean on the front end, corporations have a profound advantage over any union, consumer, environmental, or social policy group on what they can offer politicians on their way out of office:
Jobs that pay up to 14.5 times as much as their congressional salary or more as lobbyists, CEO's, do-nothing board members, consultants, and lawyers.
Republic Report asked retiring members of Congress if they were already in negotiations for lobbying jobs, got some responses, and even a couple on video.
If the media did their job, this would be a standard exit question leaving office, and coming in the front door, politicians should be asked how we can be sure they aren't working for their former employers or their own bank accounts rather than the public welfare.
Corruption is at the root of all the other problems our democracy has, and we've don't weld the revolving door shut (especially with a couple of pols stuck inside) to fix things.
You can also SIGN THEIR PETITION demanding Congress end this backdoor bribery.
By Lee Fang posted Mar 15th 2012 at 11:01AM
Is your member of Congress serving you, or serving himself? Many lawmakers, when they approach retirement, begin negotiating with lobbying firms to receive multimillion dollar salaries after they leave office. In some cases, a Senator or Representative will slip language into a bill or write an earmark that benefits a special interest, and when they leave Congress, a big paycheck is waiting for them from the very same company.
While the process of public officials going to work for lobbying firms is often called the “revolving door,” we think this issue deserves more emphasis and urgency. With members of Congress secretly manipulating the laws we must all live under, and then receiving lavish rewards, so they can live lavish lifestyles, we call that Backdoor Bribery.
Yesterday, we published a report detailing the problem, and revealed that the lawmakers-turned-lobbyists we profiled received up to a 1,452 percent raise on average. Congressman Billy Tauzin (R-LA), for instance, made $158,100 as a lawmaker his last year in office. He went on to make nearly $20 million the next few years as a drug company lobbyist — after he wrote the law in Congress that prevents Medicare from negotiating for lower drug prices for seniors (a rule that costs taxpayers billions). And Backdoor Bribery occurs on both sides of the aisle. It was reported earlier this year that Congressman Bill Delahunt (D-MA) earmarked hundreds of thousands of dollars in special projects before retiring, then began a lobbying job that counts his earmark recipients as clients.
Members of Congress owe their loyalty to the people they represent, not to big companies offering them future riches. We need to stand up against this abuse of our democracy.
FULL TEXT
59 Schools Parents Boycott Field Tests for High-Stakes Exams, demanding more teaching less testing
Too many Democrats are on the same side as Republicans on this issue, and these parents have figured out one of the ugly reasons why: constant redundant testing puts money in the pockets of testing companies which they then use to buy politicians to require more testing.
These parents bypassed the politicians and went directly to the source of the problem: they protested at the testing company.
Like the Occupy Movement, to get action to stop education "reform" that is destroying our public schools so for-profit charter and management companies can take over, we need to go to the source, the companies buying the corrupt politicians.
Pearson might make a good test case. Since it's clear even many Democrats are ignoring good policy on this educators have a simple way they can effect change themselves: Whenever they have an individual choice of textbooks or materials or are involved in purchasing decisions for their schools, districts, or even states, they should refuse to consider Pearson, and send them a brief letter saying why. Pearson also does a substantial business in college textbooks, so higher ed instructors can cut them off too.
Over time, educators should figure out which textbook, software, and other companies are pushing for these policies, and boycott them until education decisions are back in the hands of educators and those who put kids ahead of profits.
Parents across New York City and New York State, fed up with high-stakes and excessive standardized testing in public education, are boycotting the “stand-alone” field tests scheduled for middle and elementary schools this week. And many are joining a protest at the headquarters of Pearson, the state’s for-profit test development contractor, to demonstrate their anger as well.
From June 5^th to June 12^th , children across the state are being forced to give up learning time solely to serve the research purposes of billion-dollar test publisher Pearson, which has a $32 million contract with the New York State Education Department. But parents in 59 schools – an unprecedented number – are fighting back by refusing to allow their children to take these field tests.
In support, the Chancellor’s Parent Advisory Council (CPAC) passed a resolution on May 31 endorsing the boycott and urging all parents to opt their children out of the field tests. The Community Education Councils (CECs) of District 3 in Manhattan (Upper West Side) and District 20 (Bay Ridge, Dyker Heights, Borough Park, Kensington) in Brooklyn passed similar resolutions.
“All this testing is out of control,” says Dani Gonzalez, a Bronx parent who is protesting at today’s demonstration. “Real learning happens when children can explore and experiment and do projects, when they can read books and discuss them. All this testing is crowding real learning out of the classroom. My children can’t learn when all they do is prepare for tests and take tests.”
FULL TEXT
PIC: Occupy credit card?
From a small regional bank or credit union, this might seem legit, but Barclays?
What do they think they'll accomplish with this?
PHOTOSHOP: Abe Lincoln robbed me of my freedom
This raises a good question about what the limits of economic freedom should be when they interfere with someone else's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Should one person's right to unlimited profit trump (no pun intended) other people's rights of all kinds?
PS: I don't think Lincoln was Muslim, but Marx did write him a fan letter. http://www.marxists.org/history/international/iwma/documents/1864/lincoln-letter.htm
PPS: in case it isn't clear, I am anti-slavery, anti-unregulated business rights, and don't think being called a Muslim or a marxist is an insult (though I'd like to talk to the latter and figure out where they went off the rails).
Democrats appear to take Senate; Walker plans bipartisan summit
Source: Journal Sentinel of Milwaukee, Wisconsin
By Jason Stein and Patrick Marley of the Journal Sentinel Updated: 12:10 p.m.
Madison - A triumphant Gov. Scott Walker will meet with his cabinet Wednesday on jobs and start planning a Wisconsin-style bipartisan summit with lawmakers over brats and beer.
But for at least six months, it appears that he could have to accommodate a newly Democratic Senate. Republicans needed to win all four state Senate recall races Tuesday to hold onto that house but were declared winners in only three of those contests.
According to the unofficial tally by The Associated Press, GOP Sen. Van Wanggaard of Racine trailed by 779 votes to Democratic challenger and former Sen. John Lehman. The race has not been called by The Associated Press nor conceded by Wanggaard, though Democrats have declared victory.
Read more: http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/walker-to-meet-with-cabinet-on-jobs-8i5mapa-157488605.html
If the Democrats do their job this will be almost as good as removing Walker.
But will they have the balls to be as obstructionist as the GOP can be?
PIC: GOP 7 step program of governance
The only "problem" with this analysis is it leaves out the right's definition of problem: anything that impedes the free flow of all cash and property into the hands of the very few.
GREAT PHOTOSHOP: Obama is not the foreign born socialist giving away free healthcare...
Has Obama or Congressional Dems ever used lefty web sources to do an end run around MSM?
Someone said in another thread that Eric Holder might be doing the right thing on voter suppression, but the media isn't covering it.
In the early 1990's and before, that excuse was probably legitimate, and even in the run up to the Iraq War, I wondered why so few in Congress asked the right questions, only to find out after much digging that they DID, and with only one or two exceptions, those words fell down the memory hole without leaving the slightest ripple.
Dennis Kucinich, Alan Grayson, and a handful of others seemed to know how to be heard in the lefty web even when the MSM wasn't interested in what they have to say.
Are the others just clueless, or do they figure that those with money and power don't look any further than a handful of papers and cable news for their info, so there's no point in spreading the word through sources that only reach actual people?
I guess this is a web variation on the "bully pulpit and why it remains empty" question.
Why is it largely not done?
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Jul 11, 2004, 07:58 PMNumber of posts: 39,405
