Senate fails miserably to clean up the culture of corruption in Washington

[flpoljunkie]

(Until we have public financing of campaigns, this corrupt system will continue unabated with lobbyists and those they represent feeding at the public trough--a government of, by and for the special interests--not the public interest.)

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/31/opinion/31fri1.html?hp=&pagewanted=print

March 31, 2006
Editorial
Lobby Reform Lite

With the ghost of Jack Abramoff, the recently sentenced rogue lobbyist, wafting above the debate, the Senate has voted for a halfhearted package of reforms that would come nowhere near curing the easy money, quid pro quo culture that now bedevils the Capitol.

<>The Senate bill would make it harder — but by no means impossible — for members to quietly "earmark" pork projects in the budget at the behest of lobbyists. But even such an obvious reform as banning meals and gifts from lobbyists came equipped with a gaping loophole so the corporate employers of lobbyists could still pick up those checks.

The unfinished ethics agenda begins with the most critical issue of all: an end to the pervasive role of lobbyists as campaign finance brokers and money bundlers for incumbent politicians. It's reached the point where the people's representatives blatantly designate lobbyists to head their fund-raising teams. This moneyed back-scratching is the seedbed for scandal, but neither house shows any appetite to confront it.

Also ignored was a ban on lawmakers' junketeering at the expense of special-interest check writers. The Senate chose instead to require prior approval of private trips by its spineless ethics committee, a step that would hardly mitigate the cheesiness. Taxpayers, not corporate sponsors, should pay for global fact-finding.

For all its shortcomings, the Senate is a light-year ahead of the House. There, reform proposals have been parceled out to committees for indefinite marination as Republican leaders face rebellious members who want no part of real reform. The chances seem slim for two-house action that truly dents the clout of the booming lobbying industry.

[AndyA]

1. Let's hope Americans remember this when they head to the polls

in November. Having elected representatives bristle at the thought of having to pay for their own lunches shows just how out of touch they are with reality. It's rare that I get a free lunch, so why should Congress EXPECT it?

It's time for them to come down to Earth.

Let's remind them of that in November.

[Mass]

2. The problem is that all but 5 Democratic Senators voted for the bill.

Nothing to be proud of.

[AndyA]

3. Exactly.

And is that the reason the Dems aren't screaming bloody murder about the crap the Republicans are force feeding America? Is it because they are just as guilty? If that's the case, THEY ALL NEED TO GO.

I realize that is not likely to happen anytime soon, but we must take steps in that direction in November.

[ShortnFiery]

7. Here's a possible effective response - VOID!

http://www.voidnow.org/2006/02/20/who_and_what_is_void.php

Vote Out Incumbents for Democracy, or VOID, is a group of volunteers from all the major political perspectives from conservative to liberal, who believe our political system is corrupted far beyond what parties were intended to be, and their corruption has in turn made our government corrupt, eroding the democratic republic principles which founded our nation.

[AndyA]

9. Thanks - I'll check them out. n/m

[flpoljunkie]

4. Only 3 Dems-Feingold, Kerry and Obama voted against this weak reform bill.

A sorry state of affaris, indeed. Harry Reid kept saying it wasn't a "perfect" bill--an understatement if there ever was one. It was mostly a sham bill--looks good on the surface, but essentially keeps the legalized bribery system we have in the country intact.

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

The other NO votes were Republican.

[Mass]

5. I was giving Byrd and Rockefeller the benefit of the doubt

as they did not vote for obvious reasons (Rockefeller had back surgery during the recess).

[flpoljunkie]

6. I would not necessarily think they would vote against this bill, but like

you, hope they would.

[leftyladyfrommo]

8. Why Would They Want to Clean It Up?

It is all to their advantage.

Their best bet is to just stretch it out until people forget.