resolved : that organized political lobbying in the united states does more harm than good

According to Daniel Mitchel "O be sure, lobbyists aren't the easiest group of people to defend. Many are for sale to the highest bidder -- willing to advocate a certain position one year, then urging the opposite position the following year simply because a client with more money comes along. And there surely is a conflict-of-interest -- or at least something unseemly -- when a government official oversees the implementation of a complicated regulation before taking a high-paying job to "help" the private sector comply with it." Because I agree with this I affirm the stated resolution. Resolved: In the United States, organized political lobbying does more harm than good. To better understand let us clarify the following definition: Lobbying-to conduct activities aimed at influencing public officials and especially members of a legislative body on legislation Contention 1: Political lobbying contributes to the breakdown of our political system. The denotation of a representative democracy is a type of democracy in which the citizens delegate authority to elected representatives, but lobbyists push their own interest without consideration for the majority's opinion. According to John Stuart Mill, the freedom of a few does not outweigh the freedom of the majority. In this case, special interests groups and lobbyists have a much greater influence than the general population, which is clearly inequitable and a blatant undermining of, in which the minority has more influence than the majority, the fundamental ideals of a representative democracy. According to Lee Hamilton "We depend on the idea that we, the people, can be heard in the halls of power, and that the interests of every side will be fairly weighed as legislation and regulations are crafted; yet if polls are to be believed, large numbers of Americans now believe they don't stand a chance against wealthy special interests." We have been given the right to speak out, but if we spoke out against special interest groups, it would ultimately be pointless. This could lead to negative outcome for the general public for the benefit of one special interest group and whoever they represent. Contention 2: Lobbyist use unethical and immoral methods to fill their requirements. Lobbyist can fill their client's requirements by utilizing a variety of unethical methods, bribing or threatening the politician. According to Julie Norwell "Tactics also include using networking and contacts to make political threats or promises and to provide entertainment or favors." Lobbyist push political candidates, elected officials, and people in positions of authority to support matters that are beneficial to achieving their ends or the others they represent in doing so. Political lobbying is also similar to the old mafia phrase "Make them an offer they can't refuse." This phrase conveys a more concealed and malicious meaning inferring if the decision makers did not cooperate, then something bad would happen to them. In our society today, especially in our turbulent political system today, many forms of vengeance can occur such as smear campaigns, scandals, and in the worst form, assassination. Also, let us examine the word corruption. The definition of corruption is, according to Princeton wordnetweb, is: "inducement by improper means (as bribery) to violate duty" and the definition of bribery is: "the practice of offering something (usually money) in order to gain an illicit advantage. Let's compare these terms to lobbying. A lobbyist, as brought up earlier, is a person who conducts activities aimed at influencing public officials and especially members of a legislative body. Now, we can surely question the ulterior motives of the lobbyist. Why would a person in his right mind go through so much trouble? The answer is because he is receiving proper compensation or receive some benefits. Since lobbyists have clear opportunities to meet with political officials and perhaps influence them, many affluent and powerful corporations fear that a politician's political agenda does will be detrimental to their well being, will pay the lobbyists to rally support for their company's cause and try to convince these politicians to uphold plans that will result in their immediate benefit. Thus, we can conclude that organized political lobbying is often used to gain an illicit advantage, and exploits a weakness of the American political system that has so far been failed to be addressed, in which bribery is indirect. Contention 3: Since lobbyists advocate only one group's special interests, legislation that they help pass may negatively affect others. Actions of lobbyists could financially improve an industry but at the expense of another class of people. This could harm another group of people. Tom Hamburger states ""As a candidate for president, Barack Obama lambasted drug companies and the influence they wielded in Washington… Tauzin played in preventing Medicare from negotiating for lower drug prices… There, he says, he eventually secured an agreement that the administration wouldn't try to overturn the very Medicare drug policy that Obama had criticized on the campaign trail." If pharmaceuticals companies increase their prices then health care be less affordable. In conclusion, since lobbying contributes to the breakdown of our democratic system and is a medium for corrupt behavior to exist in our political system, I ask you to affirm the stated resolution: that in the United States, organized political lobbying does more harm than good,