As we have seen, many of our reps and senators have accepted large donations in one form or another from healthcare insurers, private healthcare organizations and pacs unalterably opposed to any sort of public plan, to say nothing of single payer.
We the People are unable to provide sufficient or equal bribes to match these corporate donations. Further, we shouldn't have to resort to such in order to get our leaders to vote correctly on the issues.
As usual, I have a proposal.
When a judge finds that he's presiding over a case where he is familiar with one of the parties involved, he recuses himself, as that is a conflict of interest. Were one of the parties to approach said judge offering compensation for undue consideration, that party would be jailed.
I believe this framework should be adopted by Congress. Those that have received corporate largesse mustn't be allowed to vote in any matter that the donor might have potential involvement in. It is an obvious conflict of interest. We'll never stop lobbying in Washington, but we can control it.
Many times I hear members of Congress acknowleging the fact that they've received donations from this group or that, but that it had "no influence on how I voted". That being the case, then the Recusal bill that I propose should sail through both Houses unopposed on a straight voice vote.
I used healthcare as a good example of the graft and corruption currently ongoing to hijack the public option with Baucus as the poster child- receiving an average of $1500 per diem from pacs and insurers. Why is this man guiding the committee?
Under the Congressional Recusal Bill we'd have a better chance of a level playing field.
For more grins please read my proposal posted Sunday in re suspending Congressional healthcare benefits. (shameless plug!)