Nov 15, 2006 5:11pm
Lobbying Reform – First Order of Business
EmailABCNews’ George Stephanopoulos reports: "Several Democratic leadership sources say that lobbying reform will be the first order of business for House Democrats when Rep. Nancy Pelosi becomes Speaker in January.
The new rules will include a total ban on gifts from lobbyists and a total ban on travel paid for by lobbyists. These changes will be included in new rules package expected to pass the first week of January.
CPAC: Romney Struggles to Convince Voters 
Obama Backs Off Birth Control Battle?
That’s a great start Nancy, but just a start.
You need to ban all lobbying funds, and set up a government imposed and paid for cash limit for anyone (who meets qualifications) for running for federal office.
Posted by: Greg | November 15, 2006, 8:58 pm 8:58 pm
This would be a step in the right direction. I will wait and see what kind of loop-holes this law will have. I don’t know why we continue to think that our government is capable of policing its self when time after time they have demonstrated their willingness to prostitute their position for air line tickets, golf outings, and such.
We need an independant organization to create, and enforce laws concerning monies, gifts, or favors being given to our represenatitives.
We can no longer trust the government (FBI, CIA, Justice Department, or the Judicial system), because of political ties to people who put them in office, or appointed them.
In the case of lobbing reform we need total independant over sight.
Posted by: D. Sams | November 16, 2006, 9:05 am 9:05 am
The ONLY thing that will ever work is an outright, total and complete ban on ALL lobbying. Period. Granted there are some very “good” lobbies but they bad far out number the good. This is the only way we can get our elected official back to the business of protecting their constituents needs. I also firmly believe that Congress and Senate need to impose term limits to ensure that politicians don’t have anything further vested into protecting the common man. Does it make any sense that someone would spend $10 million on a campaign for a $100,000 a year job?
Posted by: stormkrow | November 22, 2006, 2:31 pm 2:31 pm