Crushing failure for lobbyists

[Robbien]

The House’s rejection of the Treasury’s Wall Street rescue plan was a defeat not only for the congressional leaders who backed it but also for the business groups that had urged Congress to act.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and National Association of Manufacturers warned lawmakers over the weekend that it would “score” the vote, meaning a “no” vote would affect the ratings these groups give to lawmakers at the end of each legislative session.

. . .

It was a tough sell: lobbying against provisions that appear to be consumer-friendly, like empowering judges to rewrite mortgage terms, but for an overall bill that seems like a bailout of rich Wall Street executives who made bets on bad debts.

. . .

After the House vote, the warnings from business groups seemed to become more explicit.

http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/crushing-failure-for-lobbyists-2008-09-29.html

Aw. The CofC and NAM are unhappy.

[Robbien]

1. Follow the money: Is there a connection to how House members voted on bailout?

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives voting in favor of the Wall Street bailout on Monday got average of $231,877 in campaign contributions from banks and securities firms over the past five years, according to a Berkeley organization that tracks campaign contributions and how elected officials vote.

Representative voting against the bailout had received an average of $150,982 from banks and securities firms over the past five years, says MapLight.org.

http://www.centralvalleybusinesstimes.com/stories/001/?ID=9951

[angstlessk]

2. yeah, it happens every two years for the house, but only for controversial

bills. Had the public been this against the war in Iraq we would be 1 trillion dollars ahead todsy (that is if boosh had not given it, to, to the richest of the rich! :grr: