Elections Trump wants a billion dollars from oil for election. Promises them an easy time if elected .

[BFoe]

Campaign contributions are limited and have been. But lobbying is different. Calling a politician or sending a letter is lobbying. When people use the term, it often refers to professional lobbyists, who build relationships and then try to leverage them for clients. I don't see how any of that can be stopped without major violations of freedom of speech.

Ah, I see your point, that’s my misunderstanding, To the point that @Deorum made, I’d agree with him that lobbying in the classic sense—in which one meets with a congressman, or writes/calls/emails them to persuade them to address a certain issue—is petitioning the government under the 1st Amendment.

I could have framed it better by using examples of corporations who are funneling money to various political entities to achieve a result. I think then the issue would hinge on whether we view a corporation or legal entity doing that as the same action as a citizen meeting with a congressman to express a viewpoint or try to persuade them on an issue—and I’m not totally sure that they are the same (this was one of Justice John Paul Stevens’ arguments in his Cirizens United dissent).

We limit speech and expression of corporate entities all the time in various ways. Maybe we could at least change the way the financial contributions are tracked to something more centralized, where ordinary citizens could follow it better. It’s a sad irony when corporations’ power to petition ends up limiting ordinary citizens’ ability to get redress.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Ah, I see your point, that’s my misunderstanding, To the point that @Deorum made, I’d agree with him that lobbying in the classic sense—in which one meets with a congressman, or writes/calls/emails them to persuade them to address a certain issue—is petitioning the government under the 1st Amendment.

I could have framed it better by using examples of corporations who are funneling money to various political entities to achieve a result. I think then the issue would hinge on whether we view a corporation or legal entity doing that as the same action as a citizen meeting with a congressman to express a viewpoint or try to persuade them on an issue—and I’m not totally sure that they are the same (this was one of Justice John Paul Stevens’ arguments in his Cirizens United dissent).

We limit speech and expression of corporate entities all the time in various ways. Maybe we could at least change the way the financial contributions are tracked to something more centralized, where ordinary citizens could follow it better. It’s a sad irony when corporations’ power to petition ends up limiting ordinary citizens’ ability to get redress.

Couple of points in response here:

1. It's not clear that professional lobbying is effective beyond simply pointing out true information relevant to decision-making (including, for example, that a lot of constituents passionately support a particular position).

2. I think that ordinary citizens following contributions has been a source of a lot of confusion. Like Open Secrets aggregates employee contributions from different industries and companies, and many people misinterpret that as the companies/industry groups making the contributions (often to opposing candidates/causes), which leads to a lot of confusion.

Generally overblown issue IMO. The whole point of (right-wing) libertarianism as an ideology is to consolidate business interests so there's less need to try to advance particular goals.

Foundation for Economic Education - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[helltoupee]

2. I think that ordinary citizens following contributions has been a source of a lot of confusion. Like Open Secrets aggregates employee contributions from different industries and companies, and many people misinterpret that as the companies/industry groups making the contributions (often to opposing candidates/causes), which leads to a lot of confusion.

I still can't wrap my head around the above claim, which you pointed out to me in the past.

You stated that people misinterpret stats that show various corporations donating to politicians by declaring that these are just aggregates of individual employee political donations. I went on several donation pages for both candidates and have yet to see anything regarding asking people who their employer was. Further, as my mom is a tax accountant who I've helped over the years when I was younger, I've seen thousands upon thousands of W-2s in my life. I've yet to see people reporting a tax deductible political donation on their W-2, nor have I ever seen someone have a stewardship letter (citing the fact that you donated) come from an employer acknowledging that Joe employee made a donation through the employer.

So how do you arrive at these numbers that information showing X corporation donated to political candidate B, was really just the individual employees donating to candidate B? Where is the mechanism that allows for tracking that information? I've never heard of an employer facilitating political donations on behalf of employees, and I've still yet to see a donation form that requires someone to identify their employer. So, if what you say is true, how does this information get tracked? How do these polls/stats compilers determine that a certain percentage of employees at a certain company are donating?

This is not a gotcha, I sincerely can't figure out how this might done.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I still can't wrap my head around the above claim, which you pointed out to me in the past.

You stated that people misinterpret stats that show various corporations donating to politicians by declaring that these are just aggregates of individual employee political donations. I went on several donation pages for both candidates and have yet to see anything regarding asking people who their employer was. Further, as my mom is a tax accountant who I've helped over the years when I was younger, I've seen thousands upon thousands of W-2s in my life. I've yet to see people reporting a tax deductible political donation on their W-2, nor have I ever seen someone have a stewardship letter (citing the fact that you donated) come from an employer acknowledging that Joe employee made a donation through the employer.

So how do you arrive at these numbers that information showing X corporation donated to political candidate B, was really just the individual employees donating to candidate B? Where is the mechanism that allows for tracking that information? I've never heard of an employer facilitating political donations on behalf of employees, and I've still yet to see a donation form that requires someone to identify their employer. So, if what you say is true, how does this information get tracked? How do these polls/stats compilers determine that a certain percentage of employees at a certain company are donating?

This is not a gotcha, I sincerely can't figure out how this might done.

Look at this:

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/bloomberg-lp/summary?all=All+cycles&id=D000031992

Read the note. Lots of people are confused by this so I'm not singling you out. And OS does have the note so I guess you can't blame them. It's just a bit complicated for people who aren't obsessive about this stuff.

Ed: I'll just quote it because no one looks at links:

NOTE: The organization itself did not donate, rather the money came from the organization's individual members or employees or owners, and those individuals' immediate family members. Organizations themselves cannot contribute to candidates and party committees. Totals include subsidiaries and affiliates

 

[lilelvis]

Look at this:

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/bloomberg-lp/summary?all=All+cycles&id=D000031992

Read the note. Lots of people are confused by this so I'm not singling you out. And OS does have the note so I guess you can't blame them. It's just a bit complicated for people who aren't obsessive about this stuff.

Ed: I'll just quote it because no one looks at links:

Who funds open secrets?
The organization is funded by donations; since 2020, the largest donors have been: the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Democracy Fund, the Gaia Fund, Google, the Hewlett Foundation, the Kaphan Foundation, Mertz Gilmore Foundation, the Omidyar Network, Open Society Foundations, the Popplestone Foundation, and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

‘I like my propaganda funded by elite institutions that really care about the people’s rights and well being’

Jack (D) Average

 

[Michaelangelo]

Poor Chevron needs a helping hand lol

 

[Jack V Savage]

Who funds open secrets?
The organization is funded by donations; since 2020, the largest donors have been: the Carnegie Corporation of New York, Democracy Fund, the Gaia Fund, Google, the Hewlett Foundation, the Kaphan Foundation, Mertz Gilmore Foundation, the Omidyar Network, Open Society Foundations, the Popplestone Foundation, and the Rockefeller Brothers Fund.

‘I like my propaganda funded by elite institutions that really care about the people’s rights and well being’

Jack (D) Average

???

 

[LeonardoBjj]

- Trump down-plaeyd those coments. Was searching middle east news this morning, and saw a report.

He just does at open, what the others do a closed doors.

 

[helltoupee]

Look at this:

https://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/bloomberg-lp/summary?all=All+cycles&id=D000031992

Read the note. Lots of people are confused by this so I'm not singling you out. And OS does have the note so I guess you can't blame them. It's just a bit complicated for people who aren't obsessive about this stuff.

Ed: I'll just quote it because no one looks at links:

I'm not doubting what you are contending, however your link simply makes a statement. I'm more interested in the actual mechanism in place that tracks employee donations via employer. How is that done? The note on OS simply says that it is individual employee donations, and not representative of the employer. I guess the only reasonable guess here is that certain large employers conduct some kind of survey or poll amongst their employees as to who they are voting for?

Since I'm having a very hard time understanding how this works, can you walk me through it? Such as Joe Employee works for employer X, and once a year employer X asks each employee who they are voting for, and more importantly how much they donated (the only answer I could come up with). I've just never heard of that kind of thing and can't figure out how an individual employer would be able to report who employees are voting for and how much they donated.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I'm not doubting what you are contending, however your link simply makes a statement. I'm more interested in the actual mechanism in place that tracks employee donations via employer. How is that done? The note on OS simply says that it is individual employee donations, and not representative of the employer. I guess the only reasonable guess here is that certain large employers conduct some kind of survey or poll amongst their employees as to who they are voting for?

Since I'm having a very hard time understanding how this works, can you walk me through it? Such as Joe Employee works for employer X, and once a year employer X asks each employee who they are voting for, and more importantly how much they donated (the only answer I could come up with). I've just never heard of that kind of thing and can't figure out how an individual employer would be able to report who employees are voting for and how much they donated.

For my company, there's a compliance site. We use it to get clearance for stock transactions, and we also have to enter political contributions.

And here:

Can I Donate To A Political Candidate Anonymously? The FEC Has Strict Rules

With the 2020 presidential election thoroughly upon us, you may be thinking about sharing some of your hard-earned money with a political candidate. It's no secret that political campaigns are expensive, and candidates rely on donations to help get…

www.bustle.com

I honestly don't know why you're having so much trouble with this. Let's resolve it in this thread so you don't keep bringing it up and making the same mistake.

 

[Blayt7hh]

His legacy mainly consists of cutting taxes and regulations on corporations. How is what is being reported not so believable then ?

I dunno the amount he asked for is a comically absurd round number a-la Dr. Evil. Then again, if anyone would act so childish it would be him.

I have no doubt he would offer quid pro who deals to anyone. I also don’t think he even try’s to hide it much anymore. The man really can get away with murder.

 

[curryjunkie]

There are some stupid MF’ers on this site. Haha

 

[king hippo]

another friendly reminder that relying on windmills, solar panels, "equitable, sustainable, decarbonated economies", and climate cultisms won't get us anywhere but poor and starving.

drill baby, drill!

 

[Deorum]

drill baby, drill!

We are. USA has been the world's #1 oil producer for the last six consecutive years and is in the midst of all-time record levels of production.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/commodities/us-leads-global-oil-production-sixth-straight-year-eia-2024-03-11/

 

[Deorum]

America is also the world's largest food exporter by far. It'll be the last country to starve. People really don't realize how utterly fucking extraordinary this nation truly is. It's not just blind arrogance or rah-rah patriotism for the sake of it, god damn.