[mulmen]

Donation caps and transparency aren’t bans. Our system is based on representatives acting on behalf of constituents. When a constituent contacts their representative that’s lobbying. Lobbying is the system. So you can’t ban it.

[spicebox]

The issue is that lobbying has two different meanings. The literal meaning is trying to influence politicians but the common usage refers to when companies and special interest groups spend hundreds of millions of dollars on donations and advertising to get politicians to pass laws that benefit them. The first meaning, which is what you’re talking about, is fine. But the second meaning, which is what people mean when they talk about banning lobbying, is the opposite of democracy.

[wredue]

Hundreds of millions?

In most cases, a vote that ends regulatory bodies and enables businesses to dump toxic sludge in your drinking water costs a couple grand.

It’s actually embarrassing how cheap votes are.

[NickC25]

Yes, I've seen this firsthand. In some cases, you can buy a Federal Senator's vote for as little as $10k. Using this number on a larger scale, corporations can buy the entire senate for as little as $1 million. The ROI potential on a $1 million investment that nets you complete legislative control in your desired area is just insane.

Granted, these deals are often backended and include a job promise down the road or some similar under-the-table stuff (jobs for relatives, etc), but I'm continually shocked by how cheap our legislators are. You'd think if a legislator knows a corporation is poised to make several billion dollars if a piece of legislation is passed, the legislator should demand a lot higher than $10k.