Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 18th Feb 2013 22:28 UTC, submitted by bowkota
In the News "The last time we looked at Silicon Valley's lobbying efforts, Google was the big spender and Apple the piker. That hasn't changed much in the past nine months. In fact, Google increased its political spending in 2012 - a Presidential election year - by nearly 90%, while Apple reduced its by 13%." Anti-SOPA or no, that's a hell of a lot of money. This should be illegal - it's thinly veiled corruption.
Permalink for comment 552933
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
People don't realize it...
by Novan_Leon on Tue 19th Feb 2013 16:50 UTC
Member since:

Money follows power. The power exists in Washington, so that's where the money will run. If you want to remove the money from Washington, you need to remove the power and return it to the states like the founders intended.

The founders never intended the federal government to be anywhere near as powerful as it is today. They intended the majority of the governing powers to be held at the state level. This did several things:

* It created competition between the states, meaning good government policy would rise to the top and eventually be adopted by other states.

* It encouraged experimentation, giving states the leeway to implement policies that are progressive or unconventional, while insulating the effects of these policies from the rest of the country (unless they are deemed a success and subsequently adopted by other states).

* It allowed for policy differences based on subtle (or not so subtle) cultural differences between regions in the country, and it enabled people who didn't agree with the policies of one state to flee to another state.

* Last, but most relevant to this discussion, it greatly diminished the influence and power of groups such as corporate lobbies, special interests and/or rich individuals by forcing them to distribute their influence over 50+ states to get the same results as they would otherwise by lobbying the federal government in DC. A million dollars for lobbying efforts in Washington DC is much MUCH more influential than $20,000 in each state intended to achieve the same results. In a strong federal government there is "one throat to choke", so to speak, instead of 50 or so "throats to choke" in a distributed, federalist system.

So, long story short, if you want remove the effect of corporate lobbies, special interests and "big money" in Washington, decrease the size of the federal government and return the power to the states. As it currently stands, the money will eventually find it's way to Washington no matter what rules or limitations we try to come up to prevent it... for no other reason than that is where the power is.

Edited 2013-02-19 16:51 UTC

Reply Score: 1