One has to go back to the Gilded Age to find business in such a dominant political position in American politics. While it is true that even in the more pluralist 1950s and 1960s, political representation tilted towards the well-off, lobbying was almost balanced by today's standards. Labor unions were much more important, and the public-interest groups of the 1960s were much more significant actors. And very few companies had their own Washington lobbyists prior to the 1970s. To the extent that businesses did lobby in the 1950s and 1960s (typically through associations), they were clumsy and ineffective. “When we look at the typical lobby,” concluded three leading political scientists in their 1963 study, American Business and Public Policy, “we find its opportunities to maneuver are sharply limited, its staff mediocre, and its typical problem not the influencing of Congressional votes but finding the clients and contributors to enable it to survive at all.”
Read more at:
How Corporate Lobbyists Conquered American Democracy - The Atlantic
Showing posts with label Lobby. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lobby. Show all posts
8/3/21
U.S. Oil and Gas Doubles Down On Anti-Climate Reporting Lobbying - by Charles Kennedy
U.S. oil and gas lobbying groups have doubled down on efforts to negotiate laxer climate reporting rules with an administration bent on tightening these rules considerably, the Financial Times reports, citing lobbying disclosures from the Senate.
"When it comes to climate risk disclosures, investors are raising their hands and asking regulators for more," Gary Gensler, the new head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, said recently, as quoted by the FT. "I think we can bring greater clarity to climate risk disclosures."
Read more at: U.S. Oil and Gas Doubles Down On Anti-Climate Reporting Lobbying | OilPrice.com
"When it comes to climate risk disclosures, investors are raising their hands and asking regulators for more," Gary Gensler, the new head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, said recently, as quoted by the FT. "I think we can bring greater clarity to climate risk disclosures."
Read more at: U.S. Oil and Gas Doubles Down On Anti-Climate Reporting Lobbying | OilPrice.com
8/8/14
Israel: Ebbing support for Israel among key groups stirring alarm
If the results of a recent focus group and polls are any indication, the gap is growing between Congress and young Americans when it comes to support for Israel.
Polls conducted in late July by Gallup and the Pew Research Center found that support for Israel is weaker among younger Americans and Democrats than among Americans generally. Add to that the results of a recent focus group culled from 12 congressional staffers — a small but very influential cohort — and pro-Israel activists are worried about the long-term sustainability of broad U.S. support for Israel in Congress.
Last Friday, a select group of Jewish institutions was sent a confidential summary of the staffers discussing the recent Gaza conflict. The tone of the summary, which was obtained by JTA, was one of alarm.
“Congress is supposed to be our fortress,” wrote authors Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi and Meagan Buren, the founder and a former top aide, respectively, at The Israel Project. “While Israel faces Hamas tunnels, it appears that the negativity and lack of support among young people is tunneling its way into congressional offices, even while the congressmen and senators remain steadfast on the surface.” Mizrahi and Buren left The Israel Project in 2012.
Among the statements the dozen congressional staffers agreed on: “Israel attacked Gaza in a wild overreaction.” “It’s Groundhog Day every 18 months, perennial conflict, doesn’t seem like anyone wants peace anymore.” [The Israeli government is] “not peace loving.”
Several JTA interviews with staffers for pro-Israel lawmakers suggested that the Mizrahi report’s conclusion is on target.
“On the Hill and with some people with whom I have spoken who are robust Israel supporters, people are concerned if not angry,” one of the staffers, a Democrat, told JTA. All the staffers spoke to JTA on condition of anonymity to freely discuss the sensitive subject.
They cited a combination of factors alienating the once solid pro-Israel base among Democrats, including the distance from Israel’s era of crises in the 1960s and 1970s, anger at how the Netanyahu government has handled its relationship with the Obama administration, weariness of a decade of U.S. involvement in wars and the plain orneriness of younger people.
Polls conducted in late July by Gallup and the Pew Research Center found that support for Israel is weaker among younger Americans and Democrats than among Americans generally. Add to that the results of a recent focus group culled from 12 congressional staffers — a small but very influential cohort — and pro-Israel activists are worried about the long-term sustainability of broad U.S. support for Israel in Congress.
Last Friday, a select group of Jewish institutions was sent a confidential summary of the staffers discussing the recent Gaza conflict. The tone of the summary, which was obtained by JTA, was one of alarm.
“Congress is supposed to be our fortress,” wrote authors Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi and Meagan Buren, the founder and a former top aide, respectively, at The Israel Project. “While Israel faces Hamas tunnels, it appears that the negativity and lack of support among young people is tunneling its way into congressional offices, even while the congressmen and senators remain steadfast on the surface.” Mizrahi and Buren left The Israel Project in 2012.
Among the statements the dozen congressional staffers agreed on: “Israel attacked Gaza in a wild overreaction.” “It’s Groundhog Day every 18 months, perennial conflict, doesn’t seem like anyone wants peace anymore.” [The Israeli government is] “not peace loving.”
Several JTA interviews with staffers for pro-Israel lawmakers suggested that the Mizrahi report’s conclusion is on target.
“On the Hill and with some people with whom I have spoken who are robust Israel supporters, people are concerned if not angry,” one of the staffers, a Democrat, told JTA. All the staffers spoke to JTA on condition of anonymity to freely discuss the sensitive subject.
They cited a combination of factors alienating the once solid pro-Israel base among Democrats, including the distance from Israel’s era of crises in the 1960s and 1970s, anger at how the Netanyahu government has handled its relationship with the Obama administration, weariness of a decade of U.S. involvement in wars and the plain orneriness of younger people.
5/20/14
Chemical Cartel: Six multinational companies dominate the agricultural input market
Six multinational companies dominate the agricultural input market, and they’re in cahoots.
When a handful of corporations own the world’s seed, pesticide and biotech industries, they control the fate of food and farming. Between them, Monsanto, Dow, BASF, Bayer, Syngenta and DuPont control the global seed, pesticide and agricultural biotechnology markets. This kind of historically unprecedented power over world agriculture enables them to:
According to the UN, corporate concentration of the agricultural input market “has far-reaching implications for global food security, as the privatization and patenting of agricultural innovation (gene traits, transformation technologies and seed germplasm) has been supplanting traditional agricultural understandings of seed, farmers' rights, and breeders' rights.”
Read more: Chemical Cartel | Pesticide Action Network
When a handful of corporations own the world’s seed, pesticide and biotech industries, they control the fate of food and farming. Between them, Monsanto, Dow, BASF, Bayer, Syngenta and DuPont control the global seed, pesticide and agricultural biotechnology markets. This kind of historically unprecedented power over world agriculture enables them to:
- control the agricultural research agenda;
- dictate trade agreements & agricultural policies;
- position their technologies as the “science-based” solution to increase crop yields, feed the hungry and save the planet;
- escape democratic & regulatory controls;
- subvert competitive markets;
According to the UN, corporate concentration of the agricultural input market “has far-reaching implications for global food security, as the privatization and patenting of agricultural innovation (gene traits, transformation technologies and seed germplasm) has been supplanting traditional agricultural understandings of seed, farmers' rights, and breeders' rights.”
Read more: Chemical Cartel | Pesticide Action Network
1/5/14
Air Pollution - Britain: London Told to Cut Air Pollution by 2020 or Face Fines - by John Vida
London and other European cities which are defying European law by illegally polluting the air will have to dramatically reduce their vehicle emissions by 2020, the European commission has said.
In a signal that Europe is running out of patience with countries that consistently fail to meet air pollution targets, environment commissioner Janez Potonik served notice that the EC would start fining countries from 2020.
“Poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents. It is an 'invisible killer' and it prevents many people from living a fully active life,” he said.
Potonik said air pollution already costs Europe euro 335.100 billion ($242 1,285 billion) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year.
Large cities like London have claimed to be unable to meet NO2 targets set in 1999 until 2025 at the earliest. They have argued for extensions but the new initiative is expected to force them to take traffic off the road using charges, and stricter low emission zones.
Potonik proposed a package of measures aimed to avoid 58,000 premature deaths a year by 2030. The benefits, he claimed, would be about $55 billion a year, or more than 12 times the costs of pollution abatement needed, estimated to reach $4.65 billion a year in 2030.
The proposals, which will have to be studied by countries, included setting stricter emission ceilings by 2030 for six major pollutants, including particulate matter (PM) or the fine dust emitted by vehicles and shipping, sulphur dioxide which contributes to acid rain and soil acidification, and nitrogen oxides emitted by road vehicles.
He also plans to reduce pollution from large buildings, tighten up existing targets and fund cities to reduce pollution.
But environment groups said they were disappointed that Europe was not insisting on earlier targets. “We're encouraged that they recognize the scale of the problem, but disappointed they've bowed to pressure from industry and countries like the UK to put off taking action until 2030,” said Alan Andrews, a lawyer with ClientEarth.
Read more: London Told to Cut Air Pollution by 2020 or Face Fines » Kitsap Sun
In a signal that Europe is running out of patience with countries that consistently fail to meet air pollution targets, environment commissioner Janez Potonik served notice that the EC would start fining countries from 2020.
“Poor air quality is the number one environmental cause of premature death in the EU with a toll that outstrips road traffic accidents. It is an 'invisible killer' and it prevents many people from living a fully active life,” he said.
Potonik said air pollution already costs Europe euro 335.100 billion ($242 1,285 billion) a year in extra health costs and prematurely killed over 100,000 people a year.
Large cities like London have claimed to be unable to meet NO2 targets set in 1999 until 2025 at the earliest. They have argued for extensions but the new initiative is expected to force them to take traffic off the road using charges, and stricter low emission zones.
Potonik proposed a package of measures aimed to avoid 58,000 premature deaths a year by 2030. The benefits, he claimed, would be about $55 billion a year, or more than 12 times the costs of pollution abatement needed, estimated to reach $4.65 billion a year in 2030.
The proposals, which will have to be studied by countries, included setting stricter emission ceilings by 2030 for six major pollutants, including particulate matter (PM) or the fine dust emitted by vehicles and shipping, sulphur dioxide which contributes to acid rain and soil acidification, and nitrogen oxides emitted by road vehicles.
He also plans to reduce pollution from large buildings, tighten up existing targets and fund cities to reduce pollution.
But environment groups said they were disappointed that Europe was not insisting on earlier targets. “We're encouraged that they recognize the scale of the problem, but disappointed they've bowed to pressure from industry and countries like the UK to put off taking action until 2030,” said Alan Andrews, a lawyer with ClientEarth.
Read more: London Told to Cut Air Pollution by 2020 or Face Fines » Kitsap Sun
8/3/13
France: Hollande vows to uphold ban on Monsanto GM
French President François Hollande said Friday the country will maintain its current ban on growing genetically modified (GM) corn sold by US agriculture industry giant Monsanto, despite a court’s decision to lift the moratorium.
“The moratorium will be prolonged,” Hollande said during a visit to a farm in the southwestern region of Dordogne, adding the ruling would have to be reviewed at the national and European level.
“Why did we impose a moratorium on GM? Not because we are against progress, but for the sake of progress,” the president said. “We cannot allow one crop –corn– to have a negative effect on other crops.”
A ban on MON810 corn – one of two kinds of GM food crops whose cultivation is approved by the European Union – has been in place in France since February 2008 and extended in 2012.
Note EU-Digest: Good decision by President Hollande. GM foods must not find their way into the European food chain.
Read more: Hollande vows to uphold ban on Monsanto GM corn - FRANCE - FRANCE 24
“The moratorium will be prolonged,” Hollande said during a visit to a farm in the southwestern region of Dordogne, adding the ruling would have to be reviewed at the national and European level.
“Why did we impose a moratorium on GM? Not because we are against progress, but for the sake of progress,” the president said. “We cannot allow one crop –corn– to have a negative effect on other crops.”
A ban on MON810 corn – one of two kinds of GM food crops whose cultivation is approved by the European Union – has been in place in France since February 2008 and extended in 2012.
Note EU-Digest: Good decision by President Hollande. GM foods must not find their way into the European food chain.
Read more: Hollande vows to uphold ban on Monsanto GM corn - FRANCE - FRANCE 24
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)