Move along

[XMan]

You guys are correct. I have seen the light and am suitably chastened.

 

[DaveSimmons]

First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists
... To that end, comments (unless initiated by an agency official) must be in writing and will be posted on the Internet for every American to see.

Forcing people lobbying for and against projects to put their concerns in writing so everyone can see them -- the horror!

Bush allow things to be put in writing? Only if he can classify it or "accidentally" delete the emails from the server.

 

[IronWing]

The Obama admin is making sure all pressure on contracting personnel is documented for all the world to read in order to protect the integrity of the process. So when Senator Padmyass calls a contracting official directly looking to arm-twist, the conversation will be documented. Nothing to see here.

 

[Atreus21]

Originally posted by: ironwing
The Obama admin is making sure all pressure on contracting personnel is documented for all the world to read in order to protect the integrity of the process. So when Senator Padmyass calls a contracting official directly looking to arm-twist, the conversation will be documented. Nothing to see here.

Woah woah wait just a goddamned second.

Who the hell is Senator Padmyass?

 

[IronWing]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: ironwing
The Obama admin is making sure all pressure on contracting personnel is documented for all the world to read in order to protect the integrity of the process. So when Senator Padmyass calls a contracting official directly looking to arm-twist, the conversation will be documented. Nothing to see here.

Woah woah wait just a goddamned second.

Who the hell is Senator Padmyass?

He's a colleague of Senator Butsnorkle.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: XMan

Most transparent admin evah! Who knew you had to have a registration for the first amendment to qualify, eh?

Can I at least get a little intellectual honesty from my friends on the left side of the aisle? Admit it, if Bush had done something like this you guys would have gone ape.

It was so kewl of you not to quote either the exculpatory quotes in the blog at your link or any from the original blog (linked in the article at your link) that shows that the purpose of the announced restrictions is to reduce the influence of paid lobbiests that would otherwise remain unknown, that they apply specifically to all oral communications between lobbyists and government officials, and that they require "immediate internet disclosure of all other communications with registered lobbyists."

Friday, May 29th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Update on Recovery Act Lobbying Rules: New Limits on Special Interest Influence

Another update from Norm Eisen, special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, in the spirit of transparency as always:

I am writing with an update on the President?s March 20, 2009 Memorandum on Ensuring Responsible Spending of Recovery Act Funds. Section 3 of the Memorandum required all oral communications between federally registered lobbyists and government officials concerning Recovery Act policy to be disclosed on the Internet; barred registered lobbyists from having oral communications with government officials about specific Recovery Act projects or applications and instead required those communications to be in writing; and also required those written communications to be posted on the Internet. That Memorandum instructed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review the initial 60 days of implementation of the stimulus lobbying restrictions, to evaluate the data, and to recommend modifications.

Following OMB?s review, the Administration has decided to make a number of changes to the rules that we think make them even tougher on special interests and more focused on merits-based decision making.

First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program.

Second, we will focus the restriction on oral communications to target the scenario where concerns about merit-based decision-making are greatest ?after competitive grant applications are submitted and before awards are made. Once such applications are on file, the competition should be strictly on the merits. To that end, comments (unless initiated by an agency official) must be in writing and will be posted on the Internet for every American to see.

Third, we will continue to require immediate internet disclosure of all other communications with registered lobbyists. If registered lobbyists have conversations or meetings before an application is filed, a form must be completed and posted to each agency?s website documenting the contact.

OMB will be consulting with agencies, outside experts and others about these principles and will publish detailed guidance, but we wanted to update interested parties on the outcome of the initial review. We consulted very broadly both within and outside of government (including as reflected in previous posts on the White House blog) and we are grateful to all those who participated in the process.

You migh get a little "intellectual honesty" from your friends on the left if you showed any, yourself. :roll:

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: Atreus21

Originally posted by: ironwing
The Obama admin is making sure all pressure on contracting personnel is documented for all the world to read in order to protect the integrity of the process. So when Senator Padmyass calls a contracting official directly looking to arm-twist, the conversation will be documented. Nothing to see here.

Woah woah wait just a goddamned second.

Who the hell is Senator Padmyass?

I hope it's not "" W-I-D-E Stance "" :shocked:

And the guy who wrote the OP's opinion article is a dumb ass.

 

[JKing106]

Muahhahahhhaaaa! No no bid contracts for joo!

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: XMan

Most transparent admin evah! Who knew you had to have a registration for the first amendment to qualify, eh?

Can I at least get a little intellectual honesty from my friends on the left side of the aisle? Admit it, if Bush had done something like this you guys would have gone ape.

It was so kewl of you not to quote either the exculpatory quotes in the blog at your link or any from the original blog (linked in the article at your link) that shows that the purpose of the announced restrictions is to reduce the influence of paid lobbiests that would otherwise remain unknown, that they apply specifically to all oral communications between lobbyists and government officials, and that they require "immediate internet disclosure of all other communications with registered lobbyists."

Friday, May 29th, 2009 at 5:35 pm
Update on Recovery Act Lobbying Rules: New Limits on Special Interest Influence

Another update from Norm Eisen, special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, in the spirit of transparency as always:

I am writing with an update on the President?s March 20, 2009 Memorandum on Ensuring Responsible Spending of Recovery Act Funds. Section 3 of the Memorandum required all oral communications between federally registered lobbyists and government officials concerning Recovery Act policy to be disclosed on the Internet; barred registered lobbyists from having oral communications with government officials about specific Recovery Act projects or applications and instead required those communications to be in writing; and also required those written communications to be posted on the Internet. That Memorandum instructed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to review the initial 60 days of implementation of the stimulus lobbying restrictions, to evaluate the data, and to recommend modifications.

Following OMB?s review, the Administration has decided to make a number of changes to the rules that we think make them even tougher on special interests and more focused on merits-based decision making.

First, we will expand the restriction on oral communications to cover all persons, not just federally registered lobbyists. For the first time, we will reach contacts not only by registered lobbyists but also by unregistered ones, as well as anyone else exerting influence on the process. We concluded this was necessary under the unique circumstances of the stimulus program.

Second, we will focus the restriction on oral communications to target the scenario where concerns about merit-based decision-making are greatest ?after competitive grant applications are submitted and before awards are made. Once such applications are on file, the competition should be strictly on the merits. To that end, comments (unless initiated by an agency official) must be in writing and will be posted on the Internet for every American to see.

Third, we will continue to require immediate internet disclosure of all other communications with registered lobbyists. If registered lobbyists have conversations or meetings before an application is filed, a form must be completed and posted to each agency?s website documenting the contact.

OMB will be consulting with agencies, outside experts and others about these principles and will publish detailed guidance, but we wanted to update interested parties on the outcome of the initial review. We consulted very broadly both within and outside of government (including as reflected in previous posts on the White House blog) and we are grateful to all those who participated in the process.

You migh get a little "intellectual honesty" from your friends on the left if you showed any, yourself. :roll:

Intent doesn't matter. "Congress shall make no law", remember? Not to mention the fact that the White House is attempting to control the contact between lobbyists and members of the legislative branch.

What part of,

The President shall be Commander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the Militia of the several States, when called into the actual Service of the United States; he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices, and he shall have Power to Grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.

He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.

grants the White House the authority to dictate to the Congress how they speak to private citizens, lobbyists or not?

 

[DaveSimmons]

The right to free speech is not the same as the right to private, oral, undocumented and unrecorded conversations with government officials to lobby for or against funding of a stimulus project.

Most transparent admin evah! Who knew you had to have a registration for the first amendment to qualify, eh?

Since this rule enforces transparency, you should just admit that you read the blog post too quickly and uncritically. And fix your thread title since this in no way restricts open, transparent criticism in writing.

 

[XMan]

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
The right to free speech is not the same as the right to private, oral, undocumented and unrecorded conversations with government officials to lobby for or against funding of a stimulus project.

Most transparent admin evah! Who knew you had to have a registration for the first amendment to qualify, eh?

Since this rule enforces transparency, you should just admit that you read the blog post too quickly and uncritically. And fix your thread title since this in no way restricts open, transparent criticism in writing.

Title comes from the source, not me.

 

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: XMan

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
The right to free speech is not the same as the right to private, oral, undocumented and unrecorded conversations with government officials to lobby for or against funding of a stimulus project.

Most transparent admin evah! Who knew you had to have a registration for the first amendment to qualify, eh?

Since this rule enforces transparency, you should just admit that you read the blog post too quickly and uncritically. And fix your thread title since this in no way restricts open, transparent criticism in writing.

Title comes from the source, not me.

That doesn't make it any less inaccurate.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: XMan

Intent doesn't matter. "Congress shall make no law", remember?

[/quote]

I can play your bullshit deceptive game. If I take your post verbatim without considering the context, you just posited that Congress cannot fulfill its mandate to legislate. After all, you just said, "CONGRESS SHALL MAKE NO LAW." :roll:

Not to mention the fact that the White House is attempting to control the contact between lobbyists and members of the legislative branch.

Not to mention that the actual blog (not, your bullshit right wingnut rag) says no such thing. It just mandates that all VERBAL communications must be documented and reported. It does so to avoid undocumented attempts by anyone to influence the legislation.

 

[UberNeuman]

Ahhh.... the collection of Xman panic/misinformation threads grows to two...

Everytime he gets ascared, an angel gets its wings...

/ha, haha....

 

[Craig234]

Democrats stand up against excessive lobbyist influence, right-wing is critical and misrepresents it, big surprise.

 

[Harvey]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Democrats stand up against excessive lobbyist influence, right-wing is critical and misrepresents it, big surprise.

But... but... but... They whined up a storm because Democratic pseudo Senator Roland Burris is guilty of pay for play with Blago. It only interests them when a Democrat does it. :roll:

What's that you say? Tom DeLay didn't take bribes? Randy "Duke" Cunningham didn't take bribes? The whole "K Street Project wasn't an attempt to set up a permanent Republican ruling majority through bribery and corruption? :shocked:

The K Street Project is an effort by the Republican Party (GOP) to pressure Washington lobbying firms to hire Republicans in top positions, and to reward loyal GOP lobbyists with access to influential officials. It was launched in 1995 by Republican strategist Grover Norquist and then-House majority whip Tom DeLay. It has been criticized as being part of a "coziness" between the GOP and large corporations which has allegedly allowed business to rewrite government regulations affecting their own industries in some cases (see Dick Cheney energy task force).

Shortly after the 1994 elections which gave a majority of seats to Republican candidates, DeLay called prominent Washington lobbyists into his office. He had pulled the public records of political contributions that they made to Democrats and Republicans. According to Texans for Public Justice, "he reminded them that Republicans were in charge and their political giving had better reflect that?or else. The "or else" was a threat to cut off access to the Republican House leadership."
.
.
(continues)

 

[bamacre]

edit: nvm

Sorry, Craig, I was taking your comment out of context.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: XMan
http://www.washingtonexaminer....rojects--46540777.html

Most transparent admin evah! Who knew you had to have a registration for the first amendment to qualify, eh?

Can I at least get a little intellectual honesty from my friends on the left side of the aisle? Admit it, if Bush had done something like this you guys would have gone ape.

Wat'cha smoking XMan? All this does is make lobbyist communications public.

 

[techs]

HaHa. the Washington Examiner?
I guess when people have preconceived notions and overriding hatreds they can always find a website that will support their beliefs.

 

[OrByte]

GODDAMM OP!

Talk about intellectual dishonesty :roll:

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: Harvey

Originally posted by: Craig234

Democrats stand up against excessive lobbyist influence, right-wing is critical and misrepresents it, big surprise.

But... but... but... They whined up a storm because Democratic pseudo Senator Roland Burris is guilty of pay for play with Blago. It only interests them when a Democrat does it. :roll:

Well, I guess that's someone to counter your "only when a Republican does it". :roll:

 

[JEDIYoda]

Originally posted by: XMan
http://www.washingtonexaminer....rojects--46540777.html

Most transparent admin evah! Who knew you had to have a registration for the first amendment to qualify, eh?

Can I at least get a little intellectual honesty from my friends on the left side of the aisle? Admit it, if Bush had done something like this you guys would have gone ape.

You have no clue what this article is about or pertaining to....

You misqouted the -- Congress shall make no law......

Your credibility went out the window when you sheepishly posted the blog without understanding what was being said....rofl