Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 09:18:01 -0700 From: B&D <NO_SPAMnopsamCOM> Subject: Re: Why aren't gas prices dropping?
On 6/29/03 1:49 AM, in article bdm9bi$p6g$1nopsam3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl, "MH" <nomailnopsamhere.no> wrote: >> I think politicians are pretty cheap - if our Governor Grey Davis is an >> example - a few kilo-bucks is all that would be required! :-P > > The higher up the more they require. Your president takes most. True, the higher the more campaign donations are required for access, but the ROI (Return on Investment) is rather large, even with that factor. The governor of California is probably 3rd in power next to the President (1+ President, 2= Speaker of the House, 3= Governor of California). For example, he has accepted donations to his reelection fund in the US$10-15,000 range, and according to the papers, had changed certain regulations that would favor the donators - though no one but the papers said it was somehow linked. I think Gov. Davis returned some of the money due to the scandal. The president of the US, in the Clinton era, looks like you had to donate US$100k or more to get any special perk or access, and I think the higher the amount of money, the better the perks and access. The papers lambasted the Clintons for using the Lincoln bedroom as an expensive B&B, and for a few of his strange pardons and shady donations. Seems that "W" is more discreet about donations, so we don't know as much about them directly. Congress seems to require a lot of donation money spread around to get your agenda heard - so Lobbyists tend to handle them, and since there is so much, it is hard to track. Now, these aren't bribes, and the donations give you access to these politicians so you can plead their case. If there is promise of future donations, I am sure the politician, given the nature of elections here and their expense, would give special consideration to someone who donates money regularly, and whose agenda lines up with the politician's, it certainly seems to be borderline corrupt to most people.