Gift ban law heads to state high court

Nearly two-and-a-half years after the Legislature passed a law banning lobbyist gifts and requiring lobbyists to disclose fees, a lawsuit by two of the state's best-known lobbyists is headed to the state Supreme Court. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Atlanta Thursday certified to the state court the questions of whether the law was enacted properly in a special session in December 2005 and whether the law violates separation of powers and infringes on Supreme Court jurisdiction.

Plaintiffs are lobbyists Ron Book, Guy Spearman and the Florida Association of Professional Lobbyists, and defendants include former House Speaker Allan Bense and former Senate President Tom Lee. The court sided with the Legislature in ruling that the law is not overly vague or broad, but revived an issue intensely discussed at the time of the gift ban's passage: whether the House followed its own rules and read the bill by title a third time before adopting it (see page 9 of the 16-page order here).

This case is mainly about the fee-disclosure requirements, however, and the order gives the lobbyists the forum they wanted all along in the state's highest court. "The case is headed to the Florida Supreme Court," Book said. "That's what we wanted."

Comments

They'll never rule on the 3rd reading thing. The court has declined to wade into that issue before on much more dubious readings, I doubt they'll do it now

[Truth]

“…a lawsuit by two of the state's best-known lobbyists is headed to the state Supreme Court.”

Only in Floriduuh, can lobbyists sue for the right to bribe public officials… un-freaking-believable.

8:32,

Go jump off a bridge you idiot. So I guess lobbyists shouldn't have the same legal rights as the rest of us? You know not all lobbyists work for major corporations and are crooked. Some work for schools, some work for mental diseases or for the poor. Typical liberal rant.

Go Ronnie! This was just Lee's failed attempt to create an election platform for himself. There should be limits on gifts, but it has to be higher than zero to allow for trivial things like pens and even the proverbial cup of coffee.

8:38,

Go build a bridge to nowhere you idiot. Lobbyist is just a PC word for bribery, for which no one has a legal right? I know not all lobbyists work for major corporations and are crooked, but no public official should need to be "lobbied" (aka: bribed) to do the right thing, so sell your snake oil spin elsewhere. Typical criminal lobbyist rant.

8:49,

Apparently you are such a smart person that you have never been convinced by an argument you heard before. You are such a smart person because you already know everything and and are an expert on every topic. I guess not all lawmakers are as smart as you and occasionally look to outside sources for information. How do you know contributions change votes? Or could it possibly be that contributions go to lawmakers because lobbyists already know they have their vote and want them to remain in office? $500 donations aren't that much, let alone a cup of coffee. You sound like a person to me that is making 20k/year and is a self described political genius, yet I guarantee you've never talked to a legitimate lobbyist in your life.

8:49

Lobbyists should be allowed to give whatever they want or get asked for. Its capitalism. Does the company you work for spend money to attrack new clients? Do newspapers host dinners and pay for expences for informants and to get exclusives and interviews. This is still America, right?

The members are the ones representing the people, not the lobbyist. This just pushes the blame onto lobbyists who wouldn't give if the members didn't take. Why not have the members file disclosure forms each quarter detailing the gifts they took from lobbyists and let the voters decide if they have been bought and paid for?

[rjm]

Lobbyists are essential for democracy. You can't expect a representative from St. Pete to understand the intricacies of a farming bill. Lobbyists help inform legislators and move democracy along.

How many times have you actually contacted a legislator? Most of the American public is too lazy to ever do so.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution says that the people have the right to petition their government. The "people" referred to in this instance can range from corporations, to non-profits, to individuals. If they want to pay a lobbyist to this for them, then they are well within their right to do so.

As the previous poster said, the burden should be on the elected official to determine whether they should take anything from the lobbyist.

8:57, 9:01, 9:09 is probably the same jack@ss who was up in arms yesterday about the local governments spending tax money to inform voters about issues. Bribes for legislators - OK! Educate the voters? - Nein!!!!

[terminator]

agree with 8:38 and 8:45

Lee's bill was a crock.

just the other night we were having a get together at Clyde's and one of our reps came in

we couldn't even give the guy a coke for cryin out loud.

if these guys REALLY wanted to clean up influence peddling they would restrict how much lobbyists and special interest groups can donate to 527's and CCE's.

the gift ban thing is a joke

9:17

Nope, but thanks for trying to change the topic away from your pathetic argument about how all lobbyists are "bad" and all legislators are "corrupt".

All the gift ban did was raise the limit from $25 to $500

[Donald Lance]

I feel the entire "Lobby" issue must fall on the Reps more than the Lobbyists themselves. Afterall, it's the Reps who do the taking. "Just Say No" is really not that hard. One just needs morals and integrity to do it, but these are elected reps I'm talking about.
But one cannot deny that Lobbyists are a big part of the problem as well. I feel they are on the same plane as gangsters. It's just legal extortion. If a lobbyist doesn't get what they want, they'll just donate money to the challenger come the next election. Now that challenger has a debt to pay if elected. Capitalism created this, I will give you that. But it's the Lobbyists who bastardized the intended guidelines of gifts.
What I'm trying to say is that the system is broken and needs to be tossed out completely. The voters know the Reps credibility to speak on behalf of them is jeopardized when there is a carrot and stick approach from private entities. They violate our trust in them when a Corporation utilizes these tactics because a corporation is unable to vote. Therefore a corp's influence is greater than the people who elected the rep. It's just legal extortion in my book.

Donald Lance - I agree with you for once.

9:20 That wasn't me arguing with you before. The bill in question is not about Lobbyists, it's about bribery. All legislators aren't corrupt; just some Democrats and most Republicans.

Donald

The major flaw in your theory is that these same corporations and members of these associations employ a good percentage of the "people" you claim they disenfranchise. I would bet most people would take their job being made more secure through the efforts of their employers rather than no one lobbying members.

if the court goes WITH the lobbyists, then the next step is to legalize whoring!!

so, according to 9:23 and his copycat at 9:32, lobbyists for the elderly, lobbyists for veterans, lobbyists for abused children, etc., are all on par with gangsters - very nice dumba**

and toss out the whole system? and replace it with what - oh, do tell - you don't have an idea - so how about we stick with the constitutionally allowed for role that lobbyists play - how about we toss you over a cliff ignoramus.

[Dr_Dug]

“…a lawsuit by two of the state's best-known lobbyists is headed to the state Supreme Court.”
Only in Floriduuh, can lobbyists sue for the right to bribe public officials… un-freaking-believable.
THIS STATEMENT IS SO TRUE!!
Our Leaders are put in office by an election of Voters...not an election of lobbyists. The job of most lobbyists is to sway officials toward the beliefs of a company or organization..not the WORD of the people. An Arguement/Fact proven over-and-over again. The truth is in the history books..see for yourself nay-sayers!!

A lesson on why the Gift ban hurts the "little people" and helps the "Fat cats"

Lobbyist A: works for a major law firm/lobby group with several major corporations as clients. Although he can't buy legislators anything, he can bundle several $500 checks from various clients and contribute them to several different member's campaigns. He also has the ability and resources to travel the state and do campaign work for members that he believes will support his issues or better yet, he can hire someone else to do it for him.

Lobbyist B: Represents small community groups and sevral non-profit advocacy groups. Also can't buy legislators anything. Due to the nature on non-profits, he is unable to donate any money to a member's campaign or risk losing the non-profit's tax status. Also, with the limited resources of his clients, he can only do some local campaign work typically at his own expense.

How exactly did this help solve the problem your all railing against again?

[Dr_Dug]

9:41 your an idiot!
If our leaders did what thier suppose to do, without interference from lobbyists, life could be easier. Or, according to you, Allstate insurance needs thier lobbyists to ensure low cost protection for all Floridians. And of course, according to you, lobbyists are needed to further Gay Marriage laws, Guns in Schools, Welfare to illegals and more Condos on the beach!
Get with the program.....lobbyists don't work for the people...they work for corporations with a profit agenda.

Problems arise when you have legislators like Siplin who actively ask for stuff without a ban...

[Truth]

I will gladly give up 10 good lobbyists to rid our political structure of 1000 bad lobbyists.

As I’ve stated; no public official should have to be lobbied (aka: bribed) to do the right thing. And if a public official is not familiar with farming issues… read a freaking book – otherwise known as: do your damn job.

The majority of Lobbyist suck, and hide behind the few good ones while shoving it up our (taxpayers) as*es. The word lobbyist should be removed from the dictionary, and the industry stricken from and made non-existent in our democracy.

9:40 - it already is legal - it is called "running for office."

Truth- you obviously have never even been in tallahassee during session nor do you have any idea what you are talking about.

[terminator]

10:34
spot on

Truth speaks anything but the "truth"

what would you guys suppose we replace the current system with? (dictatorship)

do you really think most elected officials "will always do the right thing"?

was your momma smoking crack when you were conceived?

I can't do it. I just can't do it. But, . . .

Termie is right for once.

The original limit on $100 was reasonable, and allowed at least basic interaction between legislators and citizens (including lobbyists and citizens represented by lobbyists which is virtually everybody). Some legislators stretched the rules, but it wasn't the super lobbyists or the huge money issues that were crushed by Tom Lee's dumb pandering idea, it was the little issues represented by the little guy.

It would be hugely brave for a legislator to fix this stupid law, and I fear that the Court will fail to fix it.

[Truth]

Ok, pinheads... what say we try this slowly, using your cracksmoke logic there terminal...

Truth speaks anything but the "truth"

... Typical retort based on fear of the truth.

what would you guys suppose we replace the current system with? (dictatorship)

... No, how about the honor of representation and the duty of public stewardship... now there's a novel idea!

do you really think most elected officials "will always do the right thing"?

... no, that's why we have elections, term limits, and recall options. All we need is voters who pay atttention.

was your momma smoking crack when you were conceived?

... no, but clearly you were when you posted your ignorant rant.

To cloes, I will simply repeat the truth: "I will gladly give up 10 good lobbyists to rid our political structure of 1000 bad lobbyists.

As I’ve stated; no public official should have to be lobbied (aka: bribed) to do the right thing. And if a public official is not familiar with farming issues… read a freaking book – otherwise known as: do your damn job.

The majority of Lobbyist suck, and hide behind the few good ones while shoving it up our (taxpayers) as*es. The word lobbyist should be removed from the dictionary, and the industry stricken from and made non-existent in our democracy."

[terminator]

truth:
I can see the apple doesn't fall far from the tree!
now put down that crack pipe and get back to work!

Ahhh yes, the old "When out matched, just insult" approach. Good one there, terminal, let me know when the left one drops and you can man-up!

[Truth]

That was me, by the way.

turth - it is not about whether or not a lawmaker should be lobbied - it is about the right of the people to freely speak, associate, and petition their government as stated in the US constitution - so lobbyists are allowed for as much as elected officials within the constitution

and dr_dug - screw you, so i guess according to you that lobbyists for the elderly, lobbyists for veterans, lobbyists for abused children are scum too - you lead a sad little life

[Donald Lance]

Can somebody who disagrees with my feelings on Lobbyists please explain to me why corporations should weild more power then the voting public? Don't talk about jobs because people can vote. Tell me why corporations, as an entity, should be able to wield more influence over govt affairs then the people who elect the reps?

[Truth]

Oh, I get it now, 11:27, it’s not about child molestation… it’s about young people having the right not to have sex with people they don’t want to have sex with.

And so long as seniors get a few extra bucks, it's ok to shift 700-million to CSX.

Wheeeewww, thanks for clearing that up. Now, sit down before you fall down. Your slick spin even made me dizzy.

11:41 - what the he77 are you talking about? ever hear of logic? ever hear of our constituion? ever hear about how to construct an argument?

your analogy is pathetic as is i'm sure your understanding of government and politics

see if you can follow this logic:

Constitution protects:
1) free association - a group of citizens, whether they bge businesses or teachers associate and form a group

2) free speech - that group by the nature of it's citizens has the ability to speak for its members

3) petition the government - in exercising their free speech as a free association, the group of citizens may speak with one voice, usually through a lobbyist, and ask their elected officials to do...whatever

therefor lobbyists, whether you like it or not, are as part of the process as lawmakers

okay, let's see what "argument" your scrambled egg brain can come up with

[Donald Lance]

9:38 actually posted this; "I would bet most people would take their job being made more secure through the efforts of their employers rather than no one lobbying members."
Every other lobbyist who posted anonomously on this board talks of "Capitalism" Capitalism is all about competition. If a company cannot stay competitive on their own merits, they should fall by the wayside so another can do the job better. In your example, which sounds socialist to me, employees rely on the lobbyist to secure their jobs. Employees should be able to go work for a more successful company if their current one isn't cutting the mustard. That is capitalism in my book. It's about expanding choices and options - not limiting them to those that wield ALL the power within a sector.

I still say the law is about gifts and not about lobbyists. Why can't the lobbyists do their job without gifts.

One could argue against corporate lobbyists and for pro-senior, disabled, etc lobbyists, but in practice, there would be now way to draw a clear line between good & bad; too many different opinions.

But there's no way you can justify the gifts, either directly or indirectly. It's bribery, plain and simple. Democracy is not about who has the most money, its about who or what has the most support (votes.)

Chocolate, cashews, toothbrushes, coffee mugs, bowling pins, rare coins, DiMaggio baseballs, signed footballs and helmets...

those were the days...

[terminator]

11:31 (Donald)
probably because too many of our citizens are too lazy or too ignorant to get involved with the Democratic process.
Corporations and their political whores will get away with whatever we let them get away with.
At least unions hold politicians accountable since we weld considerable influence with large voting blocks who can make or break school board members, state legislators, county commissioners, etc.
Special interest groups are vital in the oversight process.
The spoils go to those of us who are involved. For you others, get off your lazy butts and get up to Tallahassee!

[Truth]

Just so I’m clear on this… we’re all agreed; lobbyists suck, are the scourge of the system, and should be banished from the process!

Oh, and 11:57 needs help with his crack and kool aid problem.

I can't believe I missed most of this thread. I guess I was too busy counting my money and laughing at the fact this law just lets me have more influence than regular citizens and small time lobbyists who don't have the deep pockets I have to write campaign checks. Thanks Tom. I didn't think we could pull the bait and switch, but we did!

I'm off to check my campaign event calendar and order some more checks to influence as many legislators and I can after Session.

So long rubes!

aw, poor truth - our school system really did fail you - you can't put up a single cogent argument against mine - and even after i wasted my time speaking about our constitution to you - so go suck an egg, our republic does not need idiots like you voting

[Donald Lance]

Termie! - I'm not disagreeing with you, I just want to expound on my point of WHY Corps. should have more say over policy than the voting public. I could throw up quote after quote from Tom Jefferson to Abe Lincoln talking about the potential for abuse of power by corps, and why they should be limited. But I'd like to hear from some of these lobbyists posting at the top who are hiding behind the red, white, and blue as to WHY corps should have more power then the masses. I don't think I'll ever get a good answer. But you are right when you say that the squeaky wheel gets the oil.

Donald,

If you feel that the threat of being voted out of office by constituents who don't feel that a member is representing their interests is less of a consern for legislators than not recieving contributions or gifts from corporate lobbyists who they've voted aginst on an issue, that is your personal feelings and not an absolute truth. I happen to believe that no matter what a legislator recieves from corporate lobbyists, he is ulimately responsible for representing the citizens who you have acurately stated have a vote. If they break that trust for contributions, vote them out.

What greater power is there in America over an elected official?

[Truth]

aw, poor 1:49 - your parents really did fail you - you can't get over the reality of truth versus spin - and even after i wasted my time speaking about the realities of life to you - so go suck on you lobbyist crack pipe, our nation does not need criminal lobbyist pimps like you voting in American Idol... let alone out political stucture.

... dink

Ok, I call foul... 2:13 is clearly delusional due to some form of drug or drink.

Donald and Truth are posting, but have no actual experience to back up their rant. It's crystal clear based on their suggestion that legislators "go read a book."

wow truth, really flexing your mental muscles there - taking what i said and replacing a few words to make it your own - BRILLIANT - get yourself a guiness - and who said i was a lobbyist - arguing with angry idiots like you is fun because you have no idea when you're outmatched

wow dink, really flexing your lack of mental muscles there - taking issues with what i replaced... BRILLIANT!... get yourself another glass of lobbyist kool aid - and who doubts you are a lobbyist - reading your rants in defense of your criminals like an angry idiot is sad because you have no idea you're an intellectual midget.

... simp

Ok, I call double foul... dink is clearly an idiot, and it's unfair to pick on the melonhead.

[Donald Lance]

2:31. I take umbrage with your remarks. I simply state a conviction I have that YOU have failed to address. What is your experience since you called me out? Your posting was snide and destructive and in no way was that an opinion. Those were truth's comments about the "book" not mine. I keep on hearing it's constitutional for lobbyists to exist. But the only information I could find - in a book, about corporations having the same rights as people come form the 19th century Supreme Court ruling and not the founding document. As I stated, I could throw up tons of quotes from some of the greatest leaders and economists this country has seen about the dangers of corporate power. So I'm trying to understand how we, as a nation, got from there to here. Humor me 2:31 and let your experience shine like a beacon in the night.

Donald,

You still haven't addressed why you feel the voter's power to vote out legislators who they feel are bought and easily influenced is not a significant power. The only way that power can be ceded to corporations is if the voters don't exercise their right to vote. It certainly isn't the corporation's fault for taking advantage if the voters won't do anything about corrupt and bought legislators.

hah! i love it - i'd really like to meet the fools at 2:49, 2:48, 2:28, and 2:26 - i just have this image in my head that they are a bunch of toothless morons sitting on a front porch wearing their tin foil hats just complaining about everything, and especially those d**n black helicopters that keep flying around

keep it up guys, you're ignorance is amusing - oh, and i know it's hard for your tiny minds, but try to at least put two cogent thoughts together

3:03 - he's not gonna address it - he's just gonna complain with no actual recommendations - just like all the other simple half-brained idiots in league with him

[Truth]

"It certainly isn't the corporation's fault for taking advantage if the voters won't do anything about corrupt and bought legislators."

Wow, dink... that's very American of you! Term Limits is how you avoid anyone taking advantage of voter apathy. And a complete ban on all lobbying is how you take care of the rest of your ilk.

As for you, 3:06... simp (or maybe also dink)...

Save you weaka*s attempts a bully humor. It only shows you adolescent and ignorant level of maturity.

By the way, Don is 100% correct... and if you could read, you'd know that.

[2:31]

Donald, 2:31 here.

Try Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Public Service Comm'n, 447 U.S. 557 (1980)

"Although the Constitution accords a lesser protection to commercial speech than to other constitutionally guaranteed expression, nevertheless the First Amendment protects commercial speech from unwarranted governmental regulation. For commercial speech to come within the First Amendment, it at least must concern lawful activity and not be misleading. Next, it must be determined whether the asserted governmental interest to be served by the restriction on commercial speech is substantial. If both inquiries yield positive answers, it must then be decided whether the regulation directly advances the governmental interest asserted, and whether it is not more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest"

[2:31]

By the way don, the supreme court's job is to intrepret the "founding document." Thus, for you to assert that it "come form the 19th century Supreme Court ruling and not the founding document" is innane

[Truth]

2:31,

You left out one very important point… a lobbyist pushed for that. Moreover, we’re talking about spirit of the law versus letter of the law. In other words; subjectivity… the very core of a lobbyist’s livelihood.

Great cite, but still no answer.

truth - again, not a single grain of fact included in your tantrum - but you are amusing

... a "Supreme Court” ruling ( a Supreme Court made up of individuals heavily lobbied for) is NOT the “Founding Document”… not matter how you spin it.

[Donald Lance]

3:03. I feel that voting ever 4 or 6 years on the electorate allows corps to have their sway. When the damage has been done, it really doesn't matter to the rep because they KNOW they have something lined up down the road. You scratch my back I'll scratch yours! They can walk away, yet the public has to deal with the repercussions. I'd cite examples but that would take to long. Yes, we can vote them out, but corps have their ear for 4 years. If that rep doesn't give them what they want, the lobbyist simply turns to the challenger next election. That's my issue.
My question, still left unanswered, is, "Why is it that corps have more influence over the govt then the voting public?" Let's play fill in the blank L_BB_ISTS! That's why I'm opposed to them. If it weren't for people, there would be no corporations. Why, then, do Corps have more power than the people?

hah! OMG - 3:24 sees lobbyists everywhere - shoot maybe they're all part of some secret society like the masons or who knows, the flintstones

[People who dont smoke crack!]

truth - again, loads of truth and fact included in your observation - and you are scaring the hell out of these rico boys...

If it weren't for corporations, people would not eat.

People ate before corporations, just not well.

3:30 yes, they did. But bigger and stronger people killed the food faster, and bludgeoned the weaker ones with their clubs.

Corporations helepd the little people avoid this step.

[Donald Lance]

Point taken! I don't want to have a dicussion on an amendment passed in 1980 by some decision in New York. I'm stating that lobbyists have more influence than the voting public on policy. The average Joe 6-pack says yes, I'm right. But the lawyers, lobbyists, etc. say I'm not. So who is right? The people with the money? Is it right that corps get special consideration while the working man pays for that? It's about morals and I just don't think that the average voter stands a chance when huge multinationals have the access they do to the elected reps. Fair or foul? It's all about perspective. I won't deny the Lobbyists "right" to exist, but in my book, it only serves the interests of the corps and not of the people. The people have to take a backseat because they don't have the attention of the electorate that the lobbyists do. It's this reason only that I oppose them.

[Truth]

If it weren’t for corporations, their criminal lobbyists, and puppet politicians… the people could eat plenty because they’d have more of their hard earned tax dollars in their pockets and not see it given to corporate welfare…

See: CSX & 700-million of our tax dollars. But I’m certain those lobbyists for the old people and tree huggers were responsible for that.

… freaking dopes

Truth,

I am a lobbyist and I make lots of money...so much that I have lost count. I probably will make more in one year than you will make in the next twenty years. I also control millions of campaign dollars.

Guess what? There is not a thing you can do about it.

Now I am going to take my BMW 750 to the car wash, pick up my $2,000 suits at the dry cleaners, and go home to my 7,000 square foot mansion where my hot wife is waiting for me with a $900 bottle of wine.

ok, 4:01 - glad you agree that at least the "right" exists for lobbyists - now, sure some lobbyists wield a great deal of power that an individual voter may not have - but that individual can join any number of advocacy groups that have their own lobbyists and gain a greater voice that way

we can either have people demonstrating in the streets over every issue, or they can band together and hire a lobbyist who roams the halls of the capitol and who expresses their grievances face-to-face

4:41 - if you were that good, your assistant would be picking up your dry cleaning...

4:41... if you even better, you'd know I was already at your house today with you hot wife and a 1000 dollar bottle.

They were both very, very good.

By the way... your car is due for an oil change... say next week about the same time?

[Donald Lance]

4:55. You nailed my point. My point has always been that the lobbyists have more influence then the masses. It should NOT be this way. I don't care what you do for a living, even if you are a lobbyist. But it's of,by & for the people. Not of by & for the Corps. That is my point. Now how did it get that way? Let me answer that for you. Lobbyists! The system is broken when an elite few hold the power over the govt (of, by & for the people).

Donald,

1. State Reps run every 2 years

2. Groups (firefighter, developmentally disabled, autism awareness, unions, cities, counties, citizen's groups, children's advocates, homeowners associations ect.) other than corporations employ lobbyists

3. Please read up on the issue before making generalizations about what goes on in Tallahassee if you really don't know the basic stuff (im not slamming you, just making a suggestion)

4. If Joe 6 pack isn't interested enough to vote or contact his legislator with his issues, no one will do it for him and any power he had, he gave away

[Dottie]

Of course not all lobbyists are corrupt. But many are and they ruin the playing field for the rest.

Considering what lobbyists do - influence the outcome of legislation (law) for their clients (not for the benefit of the citizens) they necessarily should be heavily regulated.

Besides - Ron Book is an arrogant self serving jerk. The fact that he's involved makes me more sure then ever.

Truth- Tom Lee wanted to pass this to help his bid for CFO (which ended up hurting him). He lived off the lobbyists for over eight years. Did he EVER pay for a meal at the slipper or any other restaurant in Tallahassee?

if you were a legislator or staff and paid for ANY meal or drink before the gift ban you were a moron.

if you were (are) a legislator or staff and let a lobbyist pay for ANY meal or drink before (or after) the gift ban you were (are) a bribed criminal.

"JAIL LOBBYISTS AND THE CRIMINALS WHO TAKE THEIR BRIBES"

The sad thing about the ban that no one ever talks about is the fact that as a result, the legislators increased their per-diem to cover the fact that they had to pay for their meals...

donald - i didn't quite nail your point - I understand what you are saying, but i think the system is fine the way it is

i see it as a choice between mass demonstrations on every issue and professional paid lobbyists meeting one-on-one with lawmakers on behalf of clients (whoever the clinet is) - i think the more civilized approach is the one-on-one approach - sure mass demonstrations can, will, and should continue, but on every little issue such demonstrations are not necessary and that's where lobbyists fill the gap

and 10:39 - exactly, and the other thing not spoken of is that lawmakers can still setup CCE's and accept unlimited donations which can then be used for session food/drinks

Ok, I see... they'll take bribes and steal out money anyway, so... why not let them. Good point.

Hey, let's just do away with murder charges, its gonna happen anyway... why bother trying to prevent it.

Oh Yeah... there's a reason they call us Floriduuuuh!

11:47 - because under the old system, it was required to be reported if an expenditure was made at a certain amount... the cup of coffee never hit the radar screen, but the lobster dinner did...

The new rules allow it to be hidden in 527's... and there is no limit.

[Donald Lance]

10:50. When it comes to govt spending our tax Dollars, every issue is important! I just don't agree that somebody who is bought & paid for by a private entity should weild more influence than the voting public. What do you think would happen to me if I were to knock on a Reps door consistently over the course of their term? Tresspassing? Disorderly conduct? Yet, one single Lobbyist has the ability to do this because the Reps know there is a carrot at the end of the stick! Reps will only listen to the public when the public becomes outraged. Other than those times, we really have no voice, yet lobbyists do. So I guess the point I'm trying to make has to deal with access to reps. As a person, call your rep and see if you can get a meeting with him. Then do the same as a Lobbyist and see which approach proves to be the most successful.

[Truth]

I will gladly give up 10 good lobbyists to rid our political structure of 1000 bad lobbyists.

As I’ve stated; no public official should have to be lobbied (aka: bribed) to do the right thing. And if a public official is not familiar with farming issues… read a freaking book – otherwise known as: do your damn job.

The majority of Lobbyist suck, and hide behind the few good ones while shoving it up our (taxpayers) as*es. The word lobbyist should be removed from the dictionary, and the industry stricken from and made non-existent in our democracy.

Low-life Conservative Republicans like Grover Norquist, Jack Abramhoff, and Ralph Reed are largely responsible for the K street lobbyist gang and the power they exercise over our government. They were also big-time fund raisers for George W. Bush. Now that loser GOP Haridopolis is trying to drag Norquist into Florida to destroy our government here too.

If you hate the corporate lobbyist takeover of our government, I have a suggestion for you...Vote DEM.

[Donald Lance]

yes 12:38. That'll stop the lobbyists! How much money has Hill and Ubama received so far from PACS and other shady organizations? Dems and Repubs are all the same when it comes to carrots being dangled. This is one issue where there is no line between the 2 partys.

12:03 - on the contrary - from what i've seen at the capitol, when a constituent comes knocking on the door of a member seeking a visit/meeting, they get bumped to the front of the line of any lobbyists waiting to be met

some members even kick lobbyists out so they can take some time to spend with a constituent

if it's one thing members understand, that constituent services and attention is more important than glad handing lobbyists

one last thing - have you seen how many citizen initiated bills have passed this session? it does happen - it's not just lobbyists who get their issues through

1:51

Exactly.

Donald,

Is your opinion of how legislators treat constituents as opposed to lobbyist based in any personal experience or all in theory? Have you ever even tried contacting your legislator or knocking on their door?

12:55 Donald, sorry, I know you have a patholical need to spin the issue to support the Libertarian point of view, but you know that's not true. The Repbulicans are at the very root of the lobbyist problem, as my post demonstrates, they have made lobbying the national passtime under Bush. Obama has pledged to do without lobbyists - whether he will succeed or not is unknown, but he has the right intentions. Hillary and Bill, while not anti-lobbyist, at their worst never imagined the level to which the payoffs would grow under the GOP.

Now as for supporting a Libertarian - he/she will not get elected anytime soon, and if I was willing to go down that road, I'd much rather support someone who would really put the coporatists back in their box - like Nader. So as I said, the practical thing to do is Get George II out of office, and keep George III out, and maybe we'll have a chance of dealing with the problem before its too late.

4:03 OK, so you're a lobbyist, lobbying against the gift ban - what a surprise. Do you expect us to believe you'd tell the truth?

[Truthiness!]

Lobbyists are the scum of the earth, and the reason our political structure is so corrupt and dysfunctional.

4:19 - hey, i am a libertarian and completely disagree with donald lance - as a libertarian i believe it is within the constitution to allow for lobbyists - free speech, association, and petitioning government - so i'm not sure why you are calling him a libertarian

ignorant citizens are the scum of the earth and the reason our politcal structure is so corrupt and dysfunctional

Posted by: | April 24, 2008 at 04:41 PM

------------------------------------

I'm still rolling on the floor in laughter.

“…a lawsuit by two of the state's best-known lobbyists is headed to the state Supreme Court.”

Only in Floriduuh, can lobbyists sue for the right to bribe public officials… un-freaking-believable.

Posted by: Truth | April 24, 2008 at 08:32 AM
_________________________________

A most excellent point and observation!

The First Amendment to the US Constitution says that the people have the right to petition their government. The "people" referred to in this instance can range from corporations, to non-profits, to individuals. If they want to pay a lobbyist to this for them, then they are well within their right to do so.

Illegal lobbying and fundraising afoot???
http://blogs.tampabay.com/buzz/2008/04/powerful-state.html