Maine Doesn't Want Lobbyists To Pressure Politicians While They're Voting

from the as-if-that-makes-a-difference dept

We’ve seen plenty of governments ban the use of laptops or email devices during governing sessions — though, the usual reason is to keep politicians from goofing off when they should be paying attention. However, up in Maine, they’ve come up with a different reason: to keep lobbyists from pressuring politicians as they make their votes. This is interesting, because it shows just how far some lobbyists tend to go in pushing their viewpoints on politicians — but a bigger question is whether or not this even makes any sense? It seems highly unlikely that a last minute email from a lobbyist is going to convince a politician one way or the other. And, if it does, then that should say a lot more about the politician in question than it does about the fact that politicians are allowed to check email while debating and voting on bills.

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Maine Doesn't Want Lobbyists To Pressure Politicians While They're Voting”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
ScytheNoire (profile) says:

one email to change it all

i’m sure some lobbyists send some emails that change the outcome of the vote. you know, something along the lines of “$50K”.

they just need to ban lobbyists altogether, since the public doesn’t have lobbyists, it doesn’t serve the public interest, but just private corporations with the money and power to sway votes.

but then the political system in most countries, especially the USA, is just corrupt as hell and broken.

James Saxon (user link) says:

The Affects of Publicly Funded Elections?

Readers may not know but Maine is one of three states with Full Public Financing of Election Campaigns (Accurately called “Clean Money”). Arizona and Connecticut, along with cities Portland OR and Albuquerque NM have Clean Money laws working.

80% of Maine’s house were “Clean Candidates” representatives who took no money when they ran for office but rather received a fixed competitive amount from the state. If a challenger spent more, they received matching funds.

The voters like Clean Candidates.

Perhaps lobbyists finding out that their money isn’t working so well anymore are looking for new avenues to sneak in an opinion and “Clean” headed representatives aren’t pleased about it.

Is this the next evolution of a state that goes “Clean”?

To find out about movements to get Clean Money in states and federal government. Check out: (States) (Federal) (California)

Here’s an interesting analysis tool that shows winners and losers and the money they had. Compare Arizona and Maine to other states. (Connecticut has not had a Clean Election yet).

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...