Slashdot Mirror
Did Internet Sales Tax Backers Bribe Congress? (Video)
This may be a coincidence, but according to MapLight, Senators who voted last week for the bill allowing states to directly collect taxes on sales via the Internet, AKA The Marketplace Fairness Act of 2013, received 40 times as much campaign donation money (yes, that's four-oh, not just four) from businesses in favor of the bill as those who voted against it received from businesses that were against Internet sales taxes. Was this bribery? Of course not! We're not some piddly fifth-world country. But it's a prime example of how money influences politics here in the good old USA, and it's far from the only one we've seen lately. In this video, MapLight Program Director Jay Costa shares a bunch more with us, along with tips on how to spot this sort of thing and some steps we voters can take to fight against both direct and indirect influence-buying. Note that all this is totally non-partisan; the politicians with the most influence -- whether local, state or federal -- get most of the available special interest money no matter what other agenda(s) they may have. And for those who want to learn more about who is spending their dollars to influence your representatives, Jay also suggests a look at these two money-in-politics resources: FollowTheMoney.org and OpenSecrets.org.
I'm not sure this is the best example, because congresspeople would have another incentive to support the measure: all of their home town local shops will have also been calling them up (and directing their customers to do so as well) in support of it, at least I'd guess so. I've been to enough town meeting type things where there was a lot of talk about "buy local!" and such because the local businesses were being so undercut by the big internet giants (who also weren't paying sales tax). It's the kind of thing that riles up city councils everywhere.
Proof: The bill got passed with bipartisan support.
I am officially gone from
No term limits. No incumbents. No exceptions.
You can hold public office as many times as you can get elected, but never twice in a row, not even to step in for an incapacitated officeholder (e.g. the VP when the POTUS is no longer capable of carrying out his duties. If the VP was the previous POTUS, he can't be POTUS again until the end of the current term. Succession goes to the next in line until someone is found to be eligible.).
That puts a serious crimp in cronyism, and would constantly open the door to competitors.
Kind of hard for consumer groups to get up in arms either - after all you're already legally required to pay sales tax on everything you buy online, it's just that nobody actually does so. What would the consumer groups lobby on - the ability of citizens to break the law on a regular basis with impunity? In principle this legislation is simply moving responsibility for paying sales tax from the private citizens who aren't living up to their legal responsibility to the businesses which are profitting from their customer's illegal behavior.
--- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
only allow individual human beings to donate to campaigns, and then only in campaigns they can vote in. Bam, money out of politics instantly.
There are the minor constitutional problems of freedom of speech and freedom of association. "In union there is strength." A concept foreign to the geek. Which is why he is on the outside looking in. Organization and a common purpose wins elections.
Enormous sums of money can raised and spent outside the campaign itself. The NRA has this down to a science.