Nation Has Recently Been Rocked

¶ … nation has recently been rocked by the activities of lobbyist Jack Abramoff (Curtin). His activities as a lobbyist eventually landed him in jail but, along the way, the companies and organizations that hired Abramoff benefited from the efforts and influences that he was able to peddle and, therein, is the problem. Money and corporations have taken over the political environment in America and until such time as their influence and power is mitigated the democratic ideals upon which the country was founded are being compromised.

Abramoff's actions were certainly deplorable and cast a negative light on the role of lobbyists and corporations in the activities of the U.S. Congress but his activities are only a small part of what is happening in Washington, D.C. On behalf of special interests. The problems were highlighted by Abramoff but they have not eradicated by Abramoff's arrest and conviction. Instead, the problems are much more pervasive.

Discussion

The history of lobbying in the United States is colorful one but also highly questionable (Moss). In the early days of the republic it was actually legal for lobbyists to bribe members of Congress and it was done aggressively and openly. Businesses in those days, however, were much smaller and the stakes much smaller. Later, the use of bribes by lobbyists was ruled illegal but lobbyists sidestepped this problem by paying congressman consulting fees. This practice continued well into the twentieth century. Finally, after the Second World War, Congress adopted the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act that actually defined what actions constituted lobbying and requiring anyone whose actions fell within that definition to register with Congress as a lobbyist. The definition under the Lobbying Act is any person "who by himself, or through any agent or employee or other persons in any manner whatsoever, directly or indirectly, solicits, collects, or receives money or any other thing of value to be used principally . . . To influence, directly or indirectly, the passage or defeat of any legislation by the Congress of the United States."

The purpose of the Lobbying Act was to place some form of restraint on the groups doing the majority of lobbying in the United States. The public was suspect that the lobbyists were essentially buying votes and that by forcing them to register and having their budgets and contributions scrutinized would minimize the influence of the lobbyists. Like they always had, however, the lobbyists adjusted their methods and became more imaginative and sophisticated.

Today's lobbyists are well educated experts in their field and serve not only as advocates for their clients but also as advisors to members of Congress. Proponents of the process of lobbying point out that what is perceived as a negative activity is actually a positive one as the lobbyist serves as an essential link between members of Congress, business leaders, and federal regulatory agencies. Although there is some truth in the position, it ignores the large sum of money that is spent and the extensive contact that these lobbyists have with the powerful leaders in the U.S. government.

For over a decade, OpenSecrets.org, a research group that analyzes money in politics, has been tracking the spending and activities of lobbyists in Washington (OpenSecrets.org). OpenSecrets issues reports that establish that not only are the lobbyists pedaling influence throughout the halls of Congress but that there are thousands of former lobbyists working in some of the most powerful staff positions in Congress as well. With the preponderance of lobbyists in Congress the question is what does this mean for the American political system?

It has become popular rhetoric in political campaigns for politicians from both sides of the aisle to promise to rid government of lobbyists' undue influence but, to date, no affirmative steps have been taken to effectuate this result. Instead, the number of lobbyists on Capitol Hill and the amount of money being spent by those lobbyists to spread their influence continues to climb (Records).

The lobbyists and their influence on the government is only one aspect of the problem and the problem is not a new one and it is not limited to one political party. For election after election the most popular campaign slogan is changing the way Washington works but once the elected candidate arrives in Washington it is the big-money culture of Washington that perfect the changing. Those who are elected to Congress become too focused on raising money for reelection and, in the process, catering to the interests of big corporations and special interests, and not enough time on domestic issues such as creating jobs, addressing energy concerns, and fixing the nation's beleaguered health care system (Hart). The House voted to repeal health care reform while its members accepted millions of dollars in contributions from medical and insurance interests. Congressional committees hearing issues on energy issues sound more like conventions of big oil corporations than like oversight committees attempting to control energy costs and seeking new sources. The interests of major corporations and interest groups are strongly represented in these committees but the interests of the common citizen which are supposed to be represented by their elected officials are forgotten. Adding insult to injury are the various assaults taking place throughout the nation in place like Wisconsin, Indiana, and Michigan on the collective bargaining rights of nurses, teachers, and other public employees.

Big money has effectively worked to undermine the democratic process in America. It is positioning itself to overtake the entire electoral process. There is some encouragement on the horizon, however, in that there are grass root reform movements that are attempting to fight back against the corporate and special interest takeover. These grass root movements have brought together environmental groups that individually have their own agenda to ban together to coordinate efforts to expose the political clout and influence of the big oil. Groups concerned about the corruption in the banking industry have banned together and provided evidence of this corruption and the efforts of the public employee unions and their supporters have successfully fought back against the assaults on labor union rights. Yet, these efforts are fighting an uphill battle as the corporations and special interests are well financed and organized.

III. Counter Argument

Those who favor the right of corporations and special interests to participate in the democratic process argue that the interests of such groups are as important as any other and that they should be provided the right to protect their interest through participating in the democratic process. This participation should include the right to promote their point-of-view and that any restriction on this right is a violation of their First Amendment guarantee of free speech. This is the argument in support of the right of corporations to make campaign contributions and it is the argument that led to the announcement of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission) that struck down the limitation of donations to campaigns.

The proponents of this position argue that corporations should be provided with the same protections as any other citizen and that this includes the right to participate in the political process. This decision by the Court is a highly controversial one and has led to even greater participation by big corporate and private money in the election process and, some argue, the continued erosion of the rights of private citizens (Bingham). Super PACs and other entities have been popping up at the federal and state levels to take advantage of the opportunities provided by the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United and, unless bridled by new restrictions, will serve to dramatically change the political climate in America.