+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: Coffee house loophole (/showthread.php?tid=139645)
Re: Coffee house loophole - August West - 08-04-2012
You're such a Tea Party type, August.
Clearly, you are filled with insight. One is amazed.
Re: Coffee house loophole - Mac-A-Matic - 08-04-2012
August West wrote:
Clearly, you are filled with insight. One is amazed.
As you should be.
Re: Coffee house loophole - Mac-A-Matic - 08-04-2012
I thought I wrote a post about this last night, but maybe I didn't hit send...
Anyway, I happened to go out to dinner last night with a friend who's been a Hill Staffer for twenty some years and we got to chatting about just this topic - actually, I brought it up because of this thread.
The Congressional rules started changing in 1996 and were not fully codified until 2003, but no lobbyist may pay for any meal or gift to a member of Congress or staffer. Gone were the big parties and lavish dinners. In the early 90s, my friend worked for a D in Texas and had continuous stories about lavish parties and events being thrown by lobbyists, it was they heyday of American politics. Then some scandal came about and Congress started getting tight on oversight.
Today, a member or staffer can go out to dinner or have a coffee with a lobbyist but it must be registered and that member or staffer must pay for their own items - they cannot accept a "gift" of any sort.
And while I'm not sure how this might apply to White House staffers, though I am presuming that the rules are very similar, it's not improper for staffers to meet lobbyists at Caribou and discuss policy, it would be a violation however, if that staffer did not pay for his own items during that meal.
Re: Coffee house loophole - Mac-A-Matic - 08-04-2012
Lemon Drop wrote:
Enlighten us on "coffeegate." I don't know much about it other than what's in the links above. How did lobbying go in the Bush White House? All transparent and on the record?
Jack Abramoff anyone? John Schmitz and the Medicare drug bill? (he worked for the defense industry too)
When I think lobbyists and Bush, that's what comes to mind.
Lobbying should be on the up and up, if the meetings are outside the rules, then expose it. Those rules were not in effect durign the Bush adminstration, they arose because of abuses during his terms I believe.
If they are not being followed then I'm all for blowing the whistle on that. This came out two years ago, is there more since? If so, what?
Again, if this had been GWBush's administration, people like you would be jumping up and down and demanding to know the details - just look at the vehemency of your Abramoff, Schmitz, etc mentions.
Those rules were indeed in effect during the Bush administration (they started up in 1996) and they arose because of abuses during Democrat rule (though not limited to Dem abuse).
Seems to me that there's a certain lack of vehemency regarding breaking the rules during Bush term vs. Obama term. Or a lackadaisical approach because violations were also done during the Bush era.
Re: Coffee house loophole - August West - 08-04-2012
people like you would be jumping up and down and demanding to know the details
Set up strawman.
Seems to me that there's a certain lack of vehemency regarding breaking the rules during Bush term vs. Obama term.
Knock down strawman.
Insight, he's full of it.
Re: Coffee house loophole - $tevie - 08-04-2012
Well, why didn't the Republican-majority House investigate it then? It seems it would be right up their alley to do so. Their lack of "jumping up and down" about this is a clue to me that the story isn't any bigger of a deal than it was two years ago before its freshness date ran out.
Re: Coffee house loophole - Lemon Drop - 08-04-2012
$tevie wrote:
Well, why didn't the Republican-majority House investigate it then? It seems it would be right up their alley to do so. Their lack of "jumping up and down" about this is a clue to me that the story isn't any bigger of a deal than it was two years ago before its freshness date ran out.
Daryl Issa would investigate how many armpit hairs the President has if Repubs wanted him to, so I'm guessing they didn't investigate 2 years ago because they were too obsessed with ACORN.
The person who breathed life back into this story is Romney's campaign guy:
"Eric Fehrnstrom, a senior adviser to the Romney campaign, told reporters on a conference call this morning that Obama campaign manager Jim Messina "appears" to have broken the law, based off a series of emails Messina sent from his personal account as White House deputy chief of staff."
Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/eric-fehrnstrom-jim-messina-obama-romney-emails-obamacare-2012-8#ixzz22b13QsrP
I'm expecting Jim Messina to get hauled before Congress between now and November. We'll find out that Big Pharma and Big Insurance helped write the health reform law. Because we didn't know that before.
Also, Jim Messina's wiki page has been hacked and is somewhat hilarious right now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Messina_%28political_staffer%29
I'll say (again) all lobbying meetings should be on the up and up and rule breakers should be exposed. I don't think anybody has a problem with that. But unless we find out that Messina took cash from these lobbyists in exchange for the deals, the only thing different about these meetings is going to be that they should have been on the White House log with the thousands of others.
Re: Coffee house loophole - OWC Jamie - 08-04-2012
Dennis S wrote:
"Had this been the administration of GW Bush, most of you would be going ballistic."
Back during the administration of GW Bush most of us had plenty more important things to occupy our outrage.
You shared most of those here, too.
Re: Coffee house loophole - $tevie - 08-04-2012
Lemon Drop wrote: I'll say (again) all lobbying meetings should be on the up and up and rule breakers should be exposed. I don't think anybody has a problem with that. But unless we find out that Messina took cash from these lobbyists in exchange for the deals, the only thing different about these meetings is going to be that they should have been on the White House log with the thousands of others.
That's right! Because we all know that lobbyist checks should be passed out on the floor of the House of Representatives and not in coffee shops.
http://www.zimbio.com/John+Boehner/articles/0cA4itXxoCh/Own+Words+John+Boehner+Handed+Out+Tobacco
Re: Coffee house loophole - Lemon Drop - 08-04-2012
$tevie wrote:
[quote=Lemon Drop]I'll say (again) all lobbying meetings should be on the up and up and rule breakers should be exposed. I don't think anybody has a problem with that. But unless we find out that Messina took cash from these lobbyists in exchange for the deals, the only thing different about these meetings is going to be that they should have been on the White House log with the thousands of others.
That's right! Because we all know that lobbyist checks should be passed out on the floor of the House of Representatives and not in coffee shops.
http://www.zimbio.com/John+Boehner/articles/0cA4itXxoCh/Own+Words+John+Boehner+Handed+Out+Tobacco
Forgot about that goodie.
These are some pretty pricey lattes right here:
http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/industries.php?cycle=2012&cid=N00003675&type=C#ind