Skip to main content

View Diary: Chris Dodd threatens politicans who aren't corrupt enough to stay bought. (193 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The allure of money and celebrity (23+ / 0-)

    Dodd as Chairman of MPAA

    Just one year ago, Dodd downplayed speculation he would take on a lobbying position after stepping down as one of the Senate’s longest-serving members.

    “No lobbying, no lobbying,” Dodd told CTMirror.com at the time.

    While it isn’t uncommon for former lawmakers to take positions as Washington lobbyists upon retirement, Dodd’s comments make his decision curious, The Hill notes.

        Former lawmakers are legally prohibited from registering as a federal lobbyist for two years after leaving office, but they can join firms without directly lobbying member of Congress.

        Dodd retired from the Senate in January after spending three decades in the nation’s capital. The former senator’s hiring had been rumored for weeks.

        He will reportedly collect a $1.2 million salary.

    •  They need to change that law (8+ / 0-)

      to include a 2 yr ban on working for any lobbying firm.

      And regardless of what Dodd claims, his comments in the media are lobbying.

      "I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one."

      by Betty Pinson on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 05:05:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Never mind a two year ban (28+ / 0-)

        make them forfeit every penny of their Congressional pensions for taking so much as one penny of lobbying pay.

        Meanwhile, we need serious campaign finance reform. Ban contributions from outside reps' districts and senators' home states. Strict conflict-of-interest bans to bar politicians from writing and/or voting on laws that directly benefit big donors. But mostly, we need to increase the size of the House to reflect the increase of population since the 1920's when membership was artificially capped at 435. 1 rep per 700k citizens is not democracy, nor is it representative in any true sense of the word.

        Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

        by drewfromct on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 05:28:21 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Can't do that (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Persiflage, G2geek, Dave925

          to be fair, elected officials, like government workers, contribute their own money to pension funds.  

          But they can probably find a  penalty that will work as well.

          "I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one."

          by Betty Pinson on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 05:31:28 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, they contribute, but not very much. (6+ / 0-)

            I think it's about 5%.  And they get a very nice return.

            The longer I live, the clearer I perceive how unmatchable a compliment one pays when he says of a man "he has the courage to utter his convictions." Mark Twain

            by Persiflage on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 05:37:56 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  I call B.S. (5+ / 0-)
            elected officials, like government workers, contribute their own money to pension funds.  
            Ordinary working folks are subject to "Substantial penalties for early withdrawals" from 401ks, are we not? Also, lobbyists and other "legal " bribers contribute far more to politicians' pensions than they themselves do, when all is said and done. The whole goddamn system is rotten, stinking, and corrupt to the core. Radical reform is not just in order, but long since overdue.

            Please do not say "To be fair" in reference to those who shape and take a nauseatingly unfair advantage of a nauseatingly unfair system.

            Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

            by drewfromct on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 06:09:31 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  I'm confused (0+ / 0-)
              Ordinary working folks are subject to "Substantial penalties for early withdrawals" from 401ks, are we not?

              No one said anything about Dodd withdrawing funds early from his pension.

              Sorry, but I find this discussion confusing and somewhat irrelevant.  Yes, Dodd is behaving badly.  Not sure what his pension has to do with that.

              "I'll believe corporations are people when Texas executes one."

              by Betty Pinson on Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 04:12:12 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I see it this way: (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                OleHippieChick, drewfromct

                Congress paychecks are taxpayer money. At the same time, congress can vote themselves a pay raise. What a sweet deal! No other government workers can do that.

                Because of this, congress should be prohibited from conducting any lobbying or work for any lobby firm forever. And yes, the pensions and any of their wealth should be fair game for penalties. That's our money! I would also make every congress person and senator submit to a drug test each day, until they stop harassing our less fortunate citizens.

                Things are more the way they are today than they ever were before. -Jimmy Flynn

                by onionjim on Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 05:18:58 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  IMHO we should also (0+ / 0-)

                  tax for-profit lobbying out of existence. It's one thing to exercise our rights to "Petition the government for redress of grievances", and quite another to use one's personal connections to be a conduit for bribes by and for the benefit of the ultra-rich elite.

                  We should also make it a rule that campaign spending should not exceed Congressional salaries. How can we trust anybody who spends millions or even tens of millions trying to convince people to hire them for a job that pays a "mere" $174k?

                  Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

                  by drewfromct on Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 10:35:11 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

              •  What was said (0+ / 0-)

                was that Congressional pensions should be made conditional in regard to the behavior of Congresspeople, just as ordinary pensions are held hostage to the behavior of ordinary workers. Those who make the law should be not only required to adhere to it, but should be held to even higher standards, due to the grave responsibilities that they voluntarily take on.

                Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

                by drewfromct on Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 10:29:38 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

      •  Lifetime ban. (10+ / 0-)

        Either they're interested in government and public service, or they're not.

         I have little doubt that such a law would see the vast majority of Congress return to the private sector almost immediately (not that they would ever pass it).

        We need laws that make serving in office entirely unattractive to those who have an overriding interest in accruing personal fortune. Crap pay... Decent benefits...And an eternal game of whack-a-mole with every conceivable method of monetizing time spent in public office.

         Public service should be just that... Public Service.

        Money speaks for money, the devil for his own... Who comes to speak for the skin and the bone?

        by LeftOverAmerica on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 07:14:09 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Des that include a ban (0+ / 0-)

          on lobbying causes you might support? Environmental groups, civil rights groups, and even government entities have lobbyists.

          Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

          by Simplify on Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 01:01:01 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Yes, absolutely. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mmacdDE, sagesource

            First off, that's the only way that any kind of Beltway reform is ever going to take place -- if it closes the usual career revolving doors for both Republican and Democratic politicians.

            It's true that Republicans have managed to blur the lines of who gets to be called "special interests": that sneer is as often applied to NARAL or the ACLU these days as it is to financial lobbyists with clout several orders of magnitude greater than NARAL. That is indeed a ridiculous situation, and there's no way that you're going to convince me that a lobbyist for tougher environmental laws or greater protection for reproductive freedoms is as dastardly as any emissary from Goldman Sachs.

            But the fact remains that reform will only get passed if it is seen as scrupulously fair and even-handed. That means that Republicans are going to insist that a liberal Senator with a strongly feminist voting record not be allowed to go to work, post-Congress, for NOW or NARAL or what have you.

            But in any case, is that so bad? Politicians are put in office, in theory, to represent their constituents, and that commitment gets diluted any time a potential conflict of interest comes up. I would sooner ensure that all politicians are cut off from potential sources of corrupting interest than worry about what that might mean for some liberal ones.

            Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of non-thought. -- Milan Kundera

            by Dale on Sun Jan 22, 2012 at 04:31:23 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  What about a petition? (9+ / 0-)

      "Investigate Chris Dodd and the MPAA for bribery after he publicly admited to bribing politicans to pass legislation."

      https://wwws.whitehouse.gov/petition-tool/petition/investigate-chris-dodd-and-mpaa-bribery-after-he-publicly-admited-bribing-politicans-pass/DffX0YQv

      I'll give it a shot.

      "They only call it class war when we fight back!"

      by ToeJamFootball on Sat Jan 21, 2012 at 05:18:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site