Lobbyists

[Mr. Heinerichs]

There are over 12,000 lobbyists in Washington D.C........do we need
this many? What do they accomplish?

[mattie merlino]

I think that there are way too many lobbyists in Washington D.C. !
It's crazy that there are this many people all with the same purpose;
to get money from the government. I think that lobbyists are
necessary, but just not so many for each project.

[Chris Hochstuhl]

I think lobbyist are not really needed because they are to much of the
congressman decision.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Natalie Giallombarod]

I feel that there are too many lobbyist. Yes, they have alot of
advertisements, but there doesn't need to be that many in Washington
D.C.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[David Jankauskas]

i feel that 12,000 lobbyists are too many in washington..i mean who is
really proposing bills in washington. is it the senators or is it the
12,000 lobbyists?

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Derrick]

I believe that in order for companies to get the money that they need
in order to generate products for the benefit of the nation, lobbyists
need to be used. They are essential to all different industries.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Jesi Nicholas]

I think lobbyists are necessary. That's a lot of lobbyists, sure, but
they are also campaigning for things that a lot of people want.
Lobbyists have a lot of influence, so they're just trying to help out
common interests.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[sarah greco]

I think that lobbyist are needed, just not to the extent that there
are in Washington now

On Mar 2, 10:41 am, David Jankauskas <davidjankauska...@gmail.com>
wrote:

[Jenny Leach]

I think we do need some lobbyists, but the amount there are in
Washington is a little extreme. I think some people are just taking
advantage of it. There are way too many that are unnecessary.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Loretta Freda]

I don't think we need 12,000 lobbyists because that takes away from
crucial national issues that should be confronted first. I feel that
many lobbyists who accomplish anything are from big corporations and
industries who don't need to bring their own special interests to the
government. Lobbyists for gun control and gay rights usually are no
better off than before because those issues are usually touchy in
washington and do not move in a direction.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Chris Colahan]

I think we do and we don't need lobbyists. We need them because
without them there are some things that would never even be looked at
if we didn't have people pushing for them. Like Gun Control. However,
we don't always need them or want them for that matter, because they
act as a bribe system it seems. The lobbyists would just push even
harder and promise things if the things they wanted were achieved like
rewards if the goal is realized. Just this alone could make someone
give them what they want and that doesn't always seem fair.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[dylan]

yes, i think we need some lobbyists but not 12,000. i think that they
accomplish making money for the company and for the government.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Craig Bremner]

12,000 is alot of lobbyists that many is to much however it does help
alot of companies because there is only a little bit of senators and
representatives compared to the amount of lobbyists when the senators
and representatives are supposed to be the people making the laws

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Daniel Nelson-Webber]

Lobbyists seem like corrupt and manipulative puppets for big business

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Andrew Melinchuk]

I agree that there are too many lobbyists and that the bad/corrupt
ones shouldn't be in Washington. but it would be difficult to
distinguish who is bad/corrupt and who isnt. I don't think there
should be so much money coming from the government that could be spent
on more important issues going to some of the companies or unnecessary
projects that its going to.

[Megan Farrell]

I feel that there are too many lobbyist in Washington DC. I think that
they have bigger part in making decisions then congress.

[amber davis]

I think Lobbyist are important and we need them. Personally i feel
that certain projects may have to many lobbyist. 12,000 lobbyists in
just Washington D.C. seems to be to much. I think certain projects are
clearly just taking advantage to get money from the government. A lot
are just unnecessary!

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[becca]

I think lobbyist are needed but 12,000 for one state is a bit too
much.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Chris Colahan]

I think we do and we don't need lobbyists. We need them because
without them there are some things that would never even be looked at
if we didn't have people pushing for them. Like Gun Control. However,
we don't always need them or want them for that matter, because they
act as a bribe system it seems. The lobbyists would just push even
harder and promise things if the things they wanted were achieved like
rewards if the goal is realized. Just this alone could make someone
give them what they want and that doesn't always seem fair.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Shawn Sullivan]

The American Medical Association is one of the top spenders, spending
over 200 million dollars. These lobbists work very hard for something
that is very important for the country.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[kean lindauer]

I think 12,000 is a lot of lobbyists but seeing how many different
organizations and companies have lobbyists, it does not seem too
ridiculous. Some bigger companies have too many lobbyists however.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Senior Seminar]

Lobbyist all people who are paid to defend a certain group or company.
I think we should have a lot of lobbyist, but 12,000 is to much.
Instead of having a lobbyist for every single company, we could have a
lobbyist for groups of companies like one lobbyist for all food
companies, and one lobbyist for all cell phone companies, ect. New
companies form all the time and expand into big companies who will end
up needing a lobbyist, and if this continues, then almost all of
Washington will be lobbyists.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Senior Seminar]

Kevin Ward

[TJ H]

At first, 12,000 lobbyists sounds like much more than is realistically
necessary. I think it is much more than is realistically necessary.
But I suppose there is a good reason why there are 12,000 lobbyists,
else there wouldn't be that many. It seems they accomplish much; these
lobbyists seem to have a ton of influence on the lawmakers. Money
talks, yo. The lobbyists are needed for special interests groups to
get the laws they want passed, passed.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Joe Stackhouse]

I don't think lobbyist are necessary in alot of cases, 12,000 is to
much no matter how you look at it. It's crazy to have that many, it
shouldn't take that many to think of bills.

On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:

[shane_b...@yahoo.com]

I think 12000 lobbyists is way too many because there is too many
people doing the same job and just collecting money. They put out
advertisements and help out a lot of companies but there are just too
many of them.

[matt pangborn]

12,000 lobbyists seems like a lot, but when you think about it, there
are so many companies that are trying to get the government to give
them money. But, that many isn't needed. They make up too much of the
government's decisions so there really shouldn't be that many.

[26ho...@live.com]

I don't think that 12,000 of them are necessarily needed, I think that
a lot of these are the lobbyist who are in the same group as other
ones which is kind of pointless. I fell that there are 10 or so for
each one and they all are just getting paid a lot of money for no
reason.

[Tre Avila]

I think its craxy that theres so many, but it surprises me that there
arnt more. I say this because it seems that the strongest companys in
America are the ones with the most lobbyist. With that being so it
surprises me that every company doesnt have a thousand of them there.
They are definatly needed in a company to compete with others, but if
no one was allowed to have them that would work to since there would
be no pressure on the legislators to push for certain companys they
would all be fair. They get laws passed that help there company/party.

[Kyle O'Brien]

i think that lobbyist are defintely necessary i mean 12,000 compared
to the rest of the amount of people in the country isn't much and
these people all are supporting and trying to get things done that
will benefit the country and its economy in general most of the things
they lobby for is money that will create jobs and that is exactly what
the country is looking for right now and when things are really
important it sometimes takes large numbers of people to get a message
accross look at egypt

[cfri...@aol.com]

I don't think we need that many lobbyists because some of the lobbys
don't even seem neccessary to have people fighting for. It seems like
all they do is try to play people and use dirtier politics then the
actual senators can use to get the job done.

[eric streicher]

I think we need them but we could get rid of some of them, for 12,000
is kind of ridiculous. They help with advertisement's and company's
which helps the economy.

[TJ Monaghan]

I think that lobbyist are required in Washington because they help
companies generate the money to help make the products. I do think
that 12,000 lobbyist is way too much for Washington D.C. but they do
help.

[Dylan Hatala]

I read about the Red Cross and how much they spent on medical funding.
It is a great amount being funded for them. This is great because this
money could be used for future medical problems that should arise.

[Eddie Donovan]

no i don't think we need that many lobbyists in washington D.C. I mean
there should be a good amount there but i think 12,000 lobbyists is a
little extreme. Lobbyists are basically paid to go around and almost
bribe people to vote for whatever it is they want them to. They'll
take you out to nice places so you will do what they say.

[Dylan Hatala]

I believe lobbysists are necessary, but I think there should also be a
limit to how many there are. 12,000 is alot and I think that is just
too much money.

[mike driadon]

I don't think that washington needs 12,000 lobbyists. We need
lobbyists because they help create laws to help us but 12,000 is out
of control. You don't need to pay all of these lobbyists to get them
to vote for your material. I think that about 1,000 lobbyists would be
a good amount.

[mike driadon]

I think that the senators should make the bills, but who knows in
todays world. People are getting paid to make up bills which probably
don't even get looked at.

On Mar 2, 10:41 am, David Jankauskas <davidjankauska...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> i feel that 12,000 lobbyists are too many in washington..i mean who is
> really proposing bills in washington. is it the senators or is it the
> 12,000 lobbyists?
>

[TJ Monaghan]

The lobbyist that I chose was Microsoft corporation. They lobbied
over 3 million dollars in 2010. They were also the main lobbyist for
the computers and internet interest group. They help the government
because they supply them with all of the microsoft tools.

[Christian]

I did the Comcast Cable company who helped with the Music/Movies/ and
Television lobby. They spent 3 million dollars last year to make
sure that people cant purchase individual channels and they have to
purchase the entire cable service. This keeps their company on top
and making money.

[Christian]

I agree because the government needs the Microsoft tools and computers
that microsoft gets them and they get for helping the Microsoft
Company out.

[Mr. Heinerichs]

that was Ben on Mr. H

[Mr. Heinerichs]

I agree, there are too many lobbyist, i can understand there being
some, but so many for such a large amount of money that is wasted in
some cases is just plain ridiculous

On Mar 2, 6:45 pm, Joe Stackhouse <jstac...@gmail.com> wrote:

[mike dolan]

I think that 12,000 lobbyists is way to many to decide on a bill. But
i still think we need them just not that many. People are taking
advantage of the number of lobbyists in Washington and they all don't
even have a say in the bill.

[TJ Monaghan]

I agree with this that Comcast is definitely on top of the cable
service. They lobby about the same amount as microsoft who is also on
top of the interest interest group.

[Tre Avila]

I think there necassary because they are what makes companys suceed

[Mr. Heinerichs]

What lobbyist did you research last night Mike?

[Hoesch]

I believe that what they do is crazy on how to stay on top.

On Mar 3, 11:19 am, Christian <cfries...@aol.com> wrote:

[mike driadon]

Gun control Lobbyists have cooled down over the years. It was at a
maximum in 2001 when they made over $2 million a year. Now they make
about $250,000 per year. Even though the Lobbyist salary has
decreased, the gun violence has increased.

[Kyle O'Brien]

i did the NRA lobbyists they are the lobbyists for the national rifle
association this group spent about 1.2 to 2.7 million dollars on
lobbying from 2001 t0 2010. they protect the right to bear arms in
every way possible they oppose almost every gun control law. in 2001
after the 9/11 attacks they lobbied for airline pilots to carry a
sidearm on the plane at all times. and now the activity rose with the
shooting of the the representative in arizona in the past couple
months now with bills being written for congress to carry a gun on
themselves as well which the NRA definitely will support. what do you
think of the things the NRA is doing? i think it is very productive
and a well needed breath of fresh air.

[britt cappella]

Each lobbyist helps create laws, so without all of them each company
would have trouble setting their own laws. I do not think that there
are too many lobbyists because even though there are 12,000 lobbyist
they all work for different companies.

[Hoesch]

David Cohen is the uber-lobbyist to Comcast Corp. His role is to make
sure no other cable companies become competition. Not only do they
pay a lot of money to stay on top but they also spend a lot money just
so video or online competitors wont emerge and take away from their
subscriptions and ad dollars. Comcast is terrified of the open
internet, if people get free open internet then they don't need any
cable television providers.

[TJ H]

@ Chris Colahan

I agree with what you're saying. The system of lobbying seems to be a
not-so-well-disguised system of bribery. Money talks, trips around the
world talks. Lobbyists's wallets are the ones who write the laws.

[Natalie Giallombarod]

Lobbyists are good for some things, just not all things. I feel that
maybe they should cut down on the number because it can cause some
problems between them and it can turn into a competition.

On Mar 2, 10:47 am, Chris Colahan <ckmeis...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we do and we don't need lobbyists. We need them because
> without them there are some things that would never even be looked at
> if we didn't have people pushing for them. Like Gun Control. However,
> we don't always need them or want them for that matter, because they
> act as a bribe system it seems. The lobbyists would just push even
> harder and promise things if the things they wanted were achieved like
> rewards if the goal is realized. Just this alone could make someone
> give them what they want and that doesn't always seem fair.

>
> On Mar 1, 11:34 pm, "Mr. Heinerichs" <kh5...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > There are over 12,000 lobbyists in Washington D.C........do we need

> > this many? What do they accomplish?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

[mike driadon]

I think you could be right because there are a lot of businesses out
there, but all the bigger ones are taking advantage of the smaller
companies because they have more money to pay their lobbyists.
On Mar 2, 10:47 am, kean lindauer <keanka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think 12,000 is a lot of lobbyists but seeing how many different
> organizations and companies have lobbyists, it does not seem too
> ridiculous. Some bigger companies have too many lobbyists however.