Senate passes legislation to reduce Congressional ties with lobbyists

[Roon]

Senate passes legislation to reduce Congressional ties with lobbyists
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/

[Mass]

1. Too many Democrats voted for it - It is an empty bill.

[havocmom]

2. Did you see the fine print? Is there something in there allowing

direct deposit? It wouldn't surpirse me in the least.

[Mass]

3. Kudos to the 3 dems voting against it: Feingold, Kerry, Obama.

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=109&session=2&vote=00082

[Selatius]

4. I'm willing to bet that there's a shitload of LOOPHOLES in the bill.

Either my suspicions are justified, or I've become too bitter and cynical over the issue of special interest money in the halls of Congress.

[RUZIK1]

5. Senate lobby rules

The lobbyists are not the problem. The problem is all of the Senators were elected by corporations. Why should they not expect a return for their millions in campaign money. The Senate is the best Seante that money can by!

[northofdenali]

6. "The best Senate money can buy"

my first thought every time an "ethics" bill is passed.

Feingold, Kerry, Obama - no. Go, guys!

Where's Boxer/Cantwell?

My few $$ allotted to political campaigns are going to stretch farther this year.

[salin]

7. Sure seems to be the reality these days...

btw, welcome to DU!

[OKthatsIT]

8. What are the LOOPHOLES?

I wanna know.

[ripple]

9. A couple

I can think of off of the top of my head:

1) Congress can still go on trips sponsored by lobbyists

2)While legislators must disclose monies and gifts from individual lobbyists, they are obligated to follow those rules when receiving donations from someone who works for or is representing the same organizaton, but doesn't carry the title of lobbyist. For example, a secretary at Merck can mail theatre tickets to a Senator and he wouldn't need to disclose it as a gift, because technically, it didn't come from a lobbyist. (Feingold proposed an amendment to close that loophole, but- no surprise- it was rejected.)

Plus, the House and Senate Ethics Committee are still the sole committees providing congressional oversight. Kind of like the fox guarding the henhouse. An independant oversight committee was proposed, but rejected.

Basically, the people who voted no on the amendment that eventually passed wanted legislation that would go beyond giving mere lip service to ethics and lobbying reform. I applaud them for standing up for what is right.