| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |
| Under scrutiny, Google spends record amount on lobbying |
| By Thom Holwerda on 2012-04-23 22:40:08 |
| "The increase is a sign that the search engine can no longer afford to operate in a Silicon Valley vacuum. For years, Google had a reputation for indifference inside the Beltway. It took Google until May 2005 to set up a presence in Washington and even then, its headquarters consisted of a one-man lobbying shop in suburban Maryland." Do the Americans among you just accept this? Is this normal? Why aren't you guys turning to the streets when your country is quite clearly being bought left and right? I mean, I'm sure this happens everywhere, but on this scale? Gives me the creeps. |
|
| RE: Comment by jigzat |
| By Fergy on 2012-04-24 05:24:48 |
|
> That is not just American politicians, every politician around the world works the same way. You have experience with all politicians around the world? |
 - Score: 2 |
| RE: It's very simple |
| By l3v1 on 2012-04-24 06:17:46 |
|
> think that politicians are caring people who love their country and want what is best for their fellow countrymen Caring? Some might care for one thing or the other, if at least one of those makes him happier. Love their country? I suppose that could be accepted. Best for their fellow countrymen? I suppose it could be true, as long as countrymen's definition is me, me, and oh, I. I have yet to see a politician that would by both action and words adhere to all the above at the same time. And yet they still get elected. I suppose people have by now realized that whatever government is still better in general, than no government. But sometimes it's really peculiar, to say the least, when these elected politicians act as they would've got their powers from [whichever] God to do whatever they see fit the crowds of mere mortals. |
| - Score: 2 |
| Hate to break this |
| By lucas_maximus on 2012-04-24 08:51:24 |
|
How is Google lobbying any different than someone independent calling or emailing their representative? Please explain? PS: Lobbying via joining consumer groups is fast becoming the only way for the average Joe to influence politicians ... since Politics is pretty much a career. Edited 2012-04-24 08:52 UTC |
| - Score: 1 |
| RE[2]: Comment by jigzat |
| By AWdrius on 2012-04-24 09:01:40 |
|
Well, I do know that that is exactly how it works in my country (Lithuania) and other countries around it (Poland, Latvia, Russia?). It always fascinates me when people think that politicians are all about love and ponies. And that is especially true the poorer the country is. My sister lives in US and we had a huge argument when she was trying to convince me that in US politicians are going to a "power" because they love their country (btw I call this "western fever") and that money mean little to them cause they already have money. Well hell yeah, the rule I learnt is that you do not have rolls or cash rolling around just by being nice (-. |
| - Score: 2 |
| It is not any different in Europe, at the EU level |
| By cyrilleberger on 2012-04-24 09:56:06 |
|
"Currently around 15,000 Brussels-based lobbyists (consultants, lawyers, associations, corporations, NGOs etc.) seek to influence the EU’s legislative process." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lob... The main difference is that street protest is much more commonly accepted and practised in Europe than in the US. And it does act as an efficient balancing of powers, see how ACTA was almost shot down by protests. While in the US, protests are perceived negatively, see the reaction to the "occupy wall-street" movement. And there is effectively no balance. An other difference, and problem, is the lack of political offer. US is essentially a two-party systems, and often, the laws are supported and opposed by people in different party. EU is a multi party system, increasing the competition, meaning that MP are careful to not vote anything that would displease voters. Also, at the European State level, even in countries dominated by two parties (such as France, UK or Spain), the smaller party get enough vote to influence the main parties. All in all, it contributes to reduce the influence of lobbying organisations. Also, in Europe, since lobbying is often not strictly legalized (like in France), it is also not done as openly. Not counting that there is limited coverage of what happen at the EU-level, hence we hear little of the lobbying activities. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: ... |
| By OSbunny on 2012-04-24 10:01:00 |
| Legalized corruption. |
| - Score: 2 |
| RE[2]: Comment by Flatland_Spider |
| By Drumhellar on 2012-04-24 10:03:52 |
| It isn't weird at all. The actual vote is only one way of many to participate in the democratic process, and only gives an affirmative or negative on an elected official's whole platform. Since you will never find a politician who's platform is both all encompassing and 100% identical to your platform, you have to be active in helping to shape what your representative does. |
| - Score: 3 |
| RE: libertie$ |
| By flynn on 2012-04-24 13:05:50 |
|
> And how does this lobbying compare to say tobacco. Ars has comparisons to other lobbies in their article: > From January to March of this year, Google spent over $5 million on lobbying, nearly matching its entire 2010 lobbying budget of $5.2 million. If the company maintains this pace, it will likely earn itself a spot as one of the top ten spending entities for the year as logged by Open Secrets. Comparing this same rate with 2011 figures, Google would outspend the entire tobacco industry ($17.07 million), the combined spending of JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and Citigroup ($18.67 million), but would be just barely behind the combined budgets of pharmaceutical giants Pfizer and Merck ($20.685 million). For comparison, Apple spent only $500,000 for the same 2012 quarter; Microsoft spent $1.79 million. |
| - Score: 4 |
| RE[2]: America isn't all roses... |
| By Bill Shooter of Bul on 2012-04-24 13:33:53 |
|
I hate to be a pessimist, but I don't think that will end up making it as an amendment. Amending the constitution is a long process. There are only two ways: 1) 2/3 majority passage in both congressional bodies AND 3/4 2/3 state governments to ratify it 2) 2/3 state governments demand it AND a Constitutional Convention confirms it. I don't think anyone has tried the second method, as no one knows the how to run a constitutional convention anymore. |
| - Score: 3 |
| Misleading article title |
| By anevilyak on 2012-04-24 14:07:40 |
| While I hate lobbying as much as anyone else, it should be pointed out that a huge chunk of the spending by Google highlighted in that article was actually spent on anti-SOPA efforts, and thus had nothing to do with DOJ scrutiny. |
| - Score: 5 |
| News | Features | Interviews |
| Blog | Contact | Editorials |