Just browsing around today and came across this. It is pretty telling, 78% of Orrin Hatch’s campaign contributions are from out of state.
http://influenceexplorer.com/
politician/orrin-g-hatch/ e5aa63ec4a0746fbb9961b325ddb36 27
He also is the only republican in the top 10 recipients from MPAA.
So, Orrin Hatch receives 78% of his political contributions from people and companies that are outside the State of Utah. That leaves only 22% of his funding coming from his constituents. This begs 2 questions.
1. If he is that much more popular outside Utah than in, maybe he should leave Utah and represent them?
2. If he is receiving over 3/4 of his salary from people and companies outside Utah, where does his loyalties and allegiance lie, that is if he wants to keep his job? At least he says he wants to keep his job.
Regarding the MPAA or Motion Picture Association of America, these statistics are very interesting. Here is the list of the top 10 Congress people who have received contributions over the time the records were kept.
1. Max Baucus (D-NT) - $27,151
2. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) - $25,466
3. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) - $23,800
4. Howard Berman (D-CA) - $22,300
5. Harry Reid (D-NV) - $22,300
6. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) -$22,140
7. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) - $21,900
8. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) - 20,900
9. Jane Harman (D-CA) - $20,788
10. Gray Davis (D-CA) - $20,500
Now, if your remove those from California, which the MPAA should be giving money to, and consider those outside of California, Orrin is the 4th largest recipient of MPAA funds, ever. That is 4th place out of 485 Representatives and Senators in the entire Congress.
Normally I would consider 4th out of nearly 500 to be a commendable showing, but when it is being influenced to sponsor and support such bills as SOPA and PIPA, this puts Orrin Hatch on my naughty list. I already expounded my apprehension, no, it's not apprehension, it is simply fear of this legislation.
I have called his office and voiced my opinion about him as well as these bills. I was assured by a kind staffer, that he is not supporting PIPA in its present form and asked that it not be debated or voted on yet. Unfortunately, he was one of the original sponsors and didn't change his position until popular opinion overwhelmed his switchboard.
Too bad he didn't think to stop it before it was written, I might have supported him then.
Photo courtesy of Reddogreport.com
5 comments:
I don't believe the MPAA should be contributing money to any candidates, even those in its own state. The entire idea that big business can now monetarily influence congress makes me shiver. I feel that there should be a clear distinction between business and state, almost as clear as the lines drawn between religion and state at present. If laws are going to be passed which harm a particular business, then shouldn't the consumers of that business spring to action and support their producer? If the consumers do not feel this strongly about the business they patronize, then maybe the business isn't necessary at all.
I think a lot of people have been in office too long. I can't believe that senators can have terms that last so long. I think that refreshing the group with new people may prevent senators from getting in too deep with lobbyists and special interest groups. I'll be voting him out of office come election time without any hesitation. I'm done with incumbents.
Great thought about the consumer springing to action and supporting industries rather than the government.
The founding fathers gave Senators 6 years to help supply some continuity to government and the Representatives only 2 years to keep them responsive to the people. But, 6 years is a long way from the 32 that Hatch has been in office.
The problem is definitely with the seniority systems that they have put in place to reward you for sending an incumbent back to Washington. Chances of your noob sitting on a critical committee are nil. Hence the reason we need term limits in place, particularly in the senate. That will level the playing field for all and remove any excuse for sending someone back so far past their prime. Its not like they don't have a guaranteed job once they are out, just ask Newt, Dodd, or any of the many previous congressman who now work as lobbyists, I mean historians.
Post a Comment