schederlobbying



Lobbying has been part of our government since the creation of our constitution. Though it wasn’t until Ulysses S. Grant took office that more intense lobbying began. Since then it has been a sustainability matrix problem (Transcontinental). From the first large lobbying groups much of the lobbying focus has been on industrial interests. From railroad subsidies in the 1870s to military and agricultural interests today.

There are three main types of lobbying groups. There are public interest groups, which are not-for-profit, and rely on the public and grants for support. Science oriented organizations which aim to advance science, usually with regard to issues with the environment or sustainability. And then there are Industries and their trade associates. These last groups operate motivated by profit and tend to work against changes that would benefit the environment. These Industry organizations also have the greatest influences in the government. This is because they are able to afford the most and the best lobbyists (Chepesiuk). Last year Exxon Mobil spent $27,430,000 dollars lobbying our government while Greenpeace, one of the larger environmental lobbying groups only could afford to spend $38,082 on lobbying (OpenSecrets). Environmental lobbying groups are also disadvantages because they are funded in part by the general public. They are subject to “issue attention cycles” and therefore their support from the public can come and go very quickly (Coen). Environmental groups also are limited in their spectrum of directorates that they can be part of. Corporations have enough money and breadth to be part of a wide range of directorates making it possible for them to influence the government as well as the general population from a wide range of angles.

Take for example when Obama had proposed his climate change strategy. Not only did oil and gas companies, like BP, spend over $38 million dollars lobbying against it in 2009, but they also organized 20 rallies across 20 states to make it seem as though there was public opposition towards Obama’s bill (OpenSecrets, Goldenberg). This October twelve leading scientists accused two international think-tanks, World Growth International (WGI) and International Trade Strategies (ITS) of releasing false information about the impact of logging on rainforests. The scientists then go on to show evidence that the think-tanks are “closely allied with” as well as “frequently funded by” multinational corporations logging that they lobby for. The corporations that they are funded by are also some of the largest palm oil and pulp-plantations companies. Not only this, but WGI has also launched aggressive attacks against Greenpeace, Rainforest Action and WWF including accusing them of publishing false data. Although this is not the first time think-tanks have been attacked by environmental groups this is one of the rare occasions that scientist decide to enter the debate (Vidal).

The decisions that our policy makers make due to the information given to them by the lobbyists affects all of us. Their decisions can change how many harmful pollutants and untested chemicals are released into the atmosphere. Luckily the government has taken steps to make the lobbying process more transparent. In 1995 the Lobbying Disclosure act was passed and later amended by the 1998 Lobbying Disclosure Technical Amendments Act which made it necessary for lobbyists to report who they spent money on as well as on how much. Since then there have been three other acts passed in congress which have helped the lobbying process become more transparent so that any illegal activities by lobbyists can be uncovered more easily. Steps like this as well as people donating towards Environmental lobbying groups can help make the whole Lobbying process more sustainable (United).

Links: *[|http://e360.yale.edu/feature/an_army_of_lobbyists_readies__for_battle_on_the_climate_bill / 2131/] *[] *[] *[]

Chepesiuk, R. "The Environmental Lobbying Games: Who Plays It on Capitol Hill and How." Editorial. //Environews// Aug. 1994: 640-42.//Environmental Health Perspectives//. Web. 31 Oct. 2010. .

Coen, David. //Environmental and Business Lobbying Alliances in Europe Learning from Washington?// Harvard. Web. 31 Oct. 2010. .

Goldenberg, Suzanne. "Oil Lobby to Fund Campaign against Obama's Climate Change Strategy | Environment | Guardian.co.uk." //The Guardian//. 14 Aug. 2009. Web. 01 Nov. 2010. .

Kreighbaum, Andrew. "Obama on Gulf Cleanup, a Tea Party Democrat and More in Capital Eye Opener." //OpenSecrets//. 16 June 2010. Web. 01 Nov. 2010. .

//OpenSecrets.org: Money in Politics -- See Who's Giving & Who's Getting //. Web. 01 Nov. 2010. .

Peterson, Eric R. "Lobbying Reform: Background and Legislative Proposals, 109th Congress." //CRS Report for Congress//. 23 Mar. 2006. Web. 31 Oct. 2010. .

"Transcontinental Railroad Timeline of Important Dates." // Shmoop: Study Guides & Teacher Resources //. Web. 01 Nov. 2010. .

<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">United States. Congress. Web. 1 Nov. 2010. <http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-985>.

<span style="color: black; font-family: 'Times New Roman',serif; font-size: 12pt;">Vidal, John. "Leading Scientists Accuse Thinktanks of Being Logging Lobbyists." //The Guardian//. 26 Oct. 2010. Web. 01 Nov. 2010. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/oct/26/scientists-open-letter-logging>.