Ahmunna let Arvin take ova, cuz ah ain't had no breahfiss and he already done et. Bai, now.
Idiot.
Hello. This is Arvin Wakeman, coming to you live from the basement apartment of Eddie Grossnuckle (illiterate), whom you have just met. I apologize for that. A necessary evil - until such time as hardware design accomodates man's best friend. Thank God for speech recognition. Woof!
Turning to a NY Times article, dated 04/01/2012, it seems those with the financial resources to purchase access to elected officials are up in arms over a proposal they believe would eliminate one of their avenues of access - government workers.
The proposal, if passed, would extend to government workers restrictions that now apply only to political appointees. Oversight and Accountability groups say the proposal specifically targets the cozy relationship between federal regulators and the industries they regulate, and differentiates between activities considered "educational" and activities thought to cause "ethical harm".
The Frozen Food Institute, the Hospital Association and the Electric Institute all claim to engage in both educational activities and "lobbying", suggesting that some in Washington may still be capable of making the distinction.
Nevertheless, lobbyists and lobbying organizations argue that not being able to provide government workers with free tickets to receptions and other gatherings held by lobbyists will limit their ability to foster a social bond. Not surprisingly, lobbyists have their own lobby, the American League of Lobbyists, which is lobbying on their behalf.
A former President of the National Association of Realtors claims the proposal would isolate regulators from the industry they regulate. Evidently, because the only way regulators can observe the industries they regulate is if lobbyists give them free tickets to lobby-sponsored events.
The USA Rice Federation lobby calls the proposal an insult which, if passed, might lead to a decline in attendance at popular rice seminars.
The Obama Administration, on the other hand, sees the proposal as a way to curb influence accorded special interest groups - auto makers, brokerage firms, mortgage lenders, insurance, pharmaceutical, oil, and weapons industries, as well as those responsible for environmental pollution, etc., the list is endless.
Mr. Obama is of the opinion that industry should not be provided a means denied ordinary people to influence government decisions on public policy.
Industry lobbyists, having spent trillions of dollars getting laws passed just the way they want, are understandably miffed at the President's careless attempt to muck everything up. Obama, to his credit, has not let his personal beliefs deter him from accepting millions of dollars in campaign contributions from political action committees (PACs).
The Consumer Electronics Association, which holds a giant trade show every year, is concerned that not being allowed to give housemaids and errand boys free tickets would lead to an ill-informed government.
The National Shooting Sports Foundation feels that denying government workers free tickets to lobby-sponsored events would impede constructive and mutually beneficial dialog between its members and federal regulators. The only connection I can make here is that errand boys make good federal regulators.
I really don't understand why the PACs are so upset, since the proposal addresses trade associations' attempts to influence only government workers (janitors, interns, parking lot attendants, food court personnel, receptionists, and the like) who serve elected officials, and would not apply to the elected officials themselves, who would still be available, for a price.
This is Arvin (Lucky) Wakeman. Always have, always will.
