Money In Politics

Does Money Corrupt Politics?

Published on May 23, 2008 By Scotteh In Politics

Democracy in its very nature is designed to give people as a whole the ability and opportunities to dictate whom they want to govern them and most importantly of all, what interests that government will pursue for them.

We, as in western society, boastfully parade around with exponentially large banners reading ‘WE ARE A DEMOCRACY’. This attitude even empowers us in some scenarios to go into other countries and impose our social structure upon them.

Whether that is right or not, is for another discussion entirely. What I’ve recently become more and more concerned of, and interested in looking into more. Is the issue of money and its influence within the democracies in the western world.

Exactly how much influence does a company, corporation or indeed an organisation representing a collection of these (usually known as a lobby) have over politicians?

Should I be worried that say a lobby working on behalf of a collection of oil companies, be capable influencing a government in a democracy of not passing a bill that would support up and coming business’s looking at developing alternative (and renewable) fuel sources? Is this possible even in a legitimate sense?

Here in the UK, there is a publicised list of companies and organisations that have donated to the major political parties’ campaign funds. How much weight would the decision have of one of these companies to pull the plug on future campaign funding carry over to decisions on the day to day running of that country?

How does a man like George Bush, whom while being charismatic has the intellectual properties of Chuck Norris, gain residency within the white house? Was it thanks to him and his families’ connections to wealthy industries such as oil and energy? I’d like to lay into Bush more, but this isn’t an anti bush rant and nor should it be. So forgive me for going off the beaten path there slightly.

These are genuine questions, and I’d look for people to shed light on these on both thelegislation in place to tackle such measures, and indeed whether or not they actually are enforced, bypassed or strictly adhered to.

I’d like to think that it’s all just a big conspiracy theory, and that the decisions made on behalf of the people, are actually decisions the people wanted, but now and again I get an inkling that the Michael Moores of this world may be onto something.

Thanks for reading the article and please get back to me and others with information you may have on the subject (even if it’s just to highlight to everyone how irresponsible I am to pass judgement on to one as so loveable as George W. Bush).

Regards

Scotteh

Comments

Dr Guy

on May 23, 2008

Try a rant on George Bush in its own blog. I will avoid that discussion now.

To your point. No, you should not be worried unless lobbiests are outlawed. Under current law (here and I suspect in the UK) anyone can form a group and lobby. The amount of power they possess is proportional to the votes they can deliver and the money they can deliver. But anyone can create one. SO you get them on all issues and all sides representing all ways of thinking.

But take that out of the equation, and you must use some sort of regulation. Regulation run by people. People prone to prejudies and biases (we all are). And then instead of all points of view being lobbied (or at least the potential for it), you will only get one side. The side that "is not really lobbying" according to whom?

According to the biases and prejudices of the ones enforcing (not even necessarily making) the rules.

cactoblasta

on May 23, 2008

Corporate lobbying is effective, sure, but it can be countermanded. It's easier in smaller democracies than larger ones, but it's surprising how effective a letter campaign can be in moderating potential change. While politicians don't read them, they do maintain a tally of what they're sent and whether or not it's a form letter. If you barrage a local member with, say, 1000 different letters all saying much the same thing from 1000 different local voters, you will have an effect on their views.

They might not breach party lines, but they will bring up the political danger with their colleagues or even their whip if they're really concerned.

A steady and consistent campaign over time will have a positive effect.

Regulation, however, doesn't seem to work. Every time reforms are introduced they simply alter the shape of the lobbying, not the significance. This is because politicians get more than money and perks from lobbyists - they get ideas and policy too. Welfare groups give insight into the nitty gritty of the streets, business groups give local business a voice and larger companies tend to put everything into their own larger, international perspective.

I'm not especially familiar with the UK system - I did Canada, the US and Australia when I studied lobbying at uni - you can probably come across some good articles with a quick search on google scholar.

Dr Guy

on May 24, 2008

Regulation, however, doesn't seem to work. Every time reforms are introduced they simply alter the shape of the lobbying, not the significance.

Exactly!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!