Did you know dog meat is served in restaurants in South Korea? I didn't. In the United States and most western countries, Fido is a family companion and while it's not ethical to judge another culture by our standards, anyone who doesn't at least (humanely) butcher the animal first is acting without proper care. South Korea relies on western consumerism for their economy and needs to be aware that we do not accept the practice of skinning and boiling dogs alive. Originally shared by April Benney Over 6,000 restaurants in South Korea are still serving dog meat even though it is now illegal. In many Asian countries dogs are boiled alive or skinned alive when slaughtered. It's an unbelievably horrendous & torturous way to die. I know a lot of you hate seeing this kind of posts on G+, but the Asian industry slaughtering dogs & cats is how I first got involved in animal rights & it will always be my main animal welfare concern. It's intolerable what is happen...
Comments
Most critics of ALEC are either idiots who have no idea how modern governance works, or cynics who believe some people don't deserve a seat at the table.
ALEC's interests happen to be contrary to most Americans.
Now, if our legislators were out there creating legislation instead of schmoozing donors then maybe lobbyists and special interests wouldn't have such a hold on legislative bills.
Government officials aren't selected on the basis of knowledge, but of ability to speak, network, and demagogue. That's what they're good at. That's how they win elections and appointments. They usually don't have the expertise to write legislation on complex subjects.
You mention interest, and of course that's a big part of it. That's why lobbyists and advocates develop expertise: interest. Google, Apple, Microsoft, et. al., gain deep knowledge of the computing and technology sectors; Exxon, British Petroleum, Chevron, et. al., gain deep knowledge of the oil industry; etc., etc., because their business survival depends on such knowledge. Greenpeace, the Sierra Club, et. al., gain deep knowledge of environmental issues because that's what they care about and spend all their time on.
As for ALEC, there's no basis at all for declaring them "contrary to most Americans." On the national level, Americans are evenly divided politically, as shown in elections and surveys. And ALEC's goals are no different from those of the many conservatives and libertarians who are part of that divided electorate.
If ALEC actually did advocate ideas "contrary to most Americans," it'd have little influence among politicians who care first and foremost about getting re-elected.
So the issue here isn't that ALEC has somehow gained outsized influence, but that some alleged progressives are capitalizing on the Trayvon Martin tragedy to demonize people who disagree with them.
Does it happen? Of course it happens, but that's a problem of the system not something to be rewarded. If the people whose job it is to write the bills actually wrote those bills then there'd be a lot less idiotic legislation getting submitted.
And yes, legislators have aides and there is an office (I can't think of the name of it right off hand) that has lawyers who actually do nothing more than write legislation all day long for (drum roll, please) legislators. They're the ones who put all the legal mumbo-jumbo in there to make a 3 page bill into a 900 page monstrosity.
I've studied it too.
As for staffers writing some legislation (most is written by lobbyists): Many of them used to be lobbyists / advocates or are tight with people who are.
There's no getting around interest group influence on legislation; the only way to curtail it is reduce the scope of legislation in the first place, to reduce opportunity and motive for lobbying (official or clandestine).
I didn't go into that because it had nothing to do with my point, which is that ALEC's activities are nothing unusual or improper in the current paradigm. To seek ALEC's downfall in particular is thuggery in action, a mean-spirited attempt to deny political opponents a seat at the table.
One of the perils of living and working in DC is that these arguments are not abstract, involving distant bogeymen. They sometimes target people I know and like, such as current and former ALEC staffers.
I take personal offense when people in my network are maligned. They're not trying to deny anyone's vote or get people killed. They're just idealists doing what they think is right for most people.
Over and out.