Manufacturers Campaign for Conservative Court

[varwoche]

For crying out loud, as if the plunge into Jesusland isn't severe enough without the goddamn manufacturers of America weighing in with the dark side. A powerful business lobby is preparing a multimillion-dollar campaign to aid the White House in its quest to win approval for conservative judges, a move that could transform the ideological battles over the federal judiciary and the Supreme Court.
...
The shift puts the business lobby on the same side as social conservatives. The corporate world long has shied away from such controversial issues as abortion but eagerly supports the White House efforts to rein in what it calls frivolous lawsuits against businesses and physicians.

The engineer is longtime Bush friend and former Michigan Gov. John Engler article (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/politics/2002146093_judges09.html)

Add: I'm very interested in not buying the products produced by
these companies (http://www.nam.org/s_nam/sec.asp?TRACKID=&CID=201846&DID=230841), nor the products of their major customers.

[Grammatron]

I am shocked, a lobby group is going to influence decisions, in Washington no less! What's next, their support when campaigning?!!!

[DialecticMaterialist]

I myself am sickened by these business's supporting reactionary movements just so that they can make some profit.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Grammatron
I am shocked, a lobby group is going to influence decisions, in Washington no less! What's next, their support when campaigning?!!!

The whole point of lobby groups is to circumvent the democratic process. To a considerable degree, they succeed.

[varwoche]

Originally posted by Grammatron
I am shocked, a lobby group is going to influence decisions, in Washington no less! What's next, their support when campaigning?!!! This is different than normal. But it doesn't matter anyway -- I don't care if this sort of activity is commonplace.

These manufacturers might have a different take on things if the power of the non-religous consumer were focused on their consumer brand names, or the brand names of their largest customers. I intend to learn more about the membership of the National Association of Manufacturers. Stay tuned.

[Tmy]

Our Libertarian friends love to rail against the govt interfereing with business. What do they think about business interfereing with government?

[Grammatron]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The whole point of lobby groups is to circumvent the democratic process. To a considerable degree, they succeed.

Wrong!

You can try again, you still have 2 chances to get it right.

[varwoche]

Of the members listed here (http://www.nam.org/s_nam/sec.asp?TRACKID=&CID=201846&DID=230841) , the most noticable consumer name brand is The Gillette Company (http://www.gillette.com/products/productsoverview.asp), owner of Duracell and Braun.

The Gillette Company
Prudential Tower
Boston, MA 02199-8004
1-800-GILLETTE
617-421-7000

Duracell
Berkshire Corporate Park
Bethel, CT 06801 U.S.A.
800-551-2355

Braun
1 Gillette Park 4K-16
Boston, MA 02127-1096
800-272-8611

[Charlie Monoxide]

Hmmm, some large manufacturing firms are lobbying the current Republican government (which seems kinda redundant).

Are these lobbying manufacturing breaking the law? Probably not.

Should this be allowed in a true democratic society? Heck no.

Does this little rant of message have any affect on the business/lobby/government way of doing business. Heck no ...

Charlie (knowingly insignificant in the scheme of things) Monoxide

[varwoche]

Another article (http://www.freep.com/money/business/engler13e_20050113.htm) about the "organized lobbying effort on behalf of conservative judges nominated by President George W. Bush".

[varwoche]

Dear Gillette:

As a consumer of your products, I am greatly concerned by recent news concerning the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), and your prominent membership in same.

It's one thing to lobby for specific policies that are favorable to the interests of manufacturers. It's quite another to lobby in support of conservative judicial appointments, which have a far-reaching impact on this country.

Assuming that your customer base reflects the opinions of the US public in general, a majority of your customers support a woman's right to terminate pregnancy. That NAM, with Gillette's support, is exerting it's considerable influence in a way to effect this, and other social policies unrelated to the business interests of manufacturers, is unacceptable.

I will no longer buy Gillette products, including Duracell and Braun, until NAM ceases its campaign, or until Gillette quits the association. I am actively encouraging others to follow suit.

Sincerely,

A former customer

[Regnad Kcin]

Originally posted by varwoche
...the goddamn manufacturers of America...America still manufactures things?

[varwoche]

Procter & Gamble is buying Gillette (for a mere $48 billion) forming the world's largest consumer products company.

Here's an online feedback form (http://pg.custhelp.com/cgi-bin/pg.cfg/php/enduser/ask.php?p_sid=CeX6ccxh&p_lva=2726&p_sp=cF9zcmNoPSZwX2dyaWRzb3J0PSZwX3Jvd19jbnQ9MTA2J nBfcHJvZF9sdmwxPTcyJnBfY2F0X2x2bDE9fmFueX4mcF9wYWd lPTE*&p_li=) at P&G's site.

[DavidJames]

Originally posted by varwoche
Procter & Gamble is buying Gillette (for a mere $48 billion) forming the world's largest consumer products company.
P&G eh, will they need to get satan's (http://www.snopes.com/business/alliance/procter.asp) approval prior to the sale :)

[varwoche]

Originally posted by DavidJames
P&G eh, will they need to get satan's (http://www.snopes.com/business/alliance/procter.asp) approval prior to the sale :) Thanks, I had meant to wisecrack about P&G's demonic past but forgot.

[Beerina]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The whole point of lobby groups is to circumvent the democratic process. To a considerable degree, they succeed.

The whole point of the democratic process is to circumvent inalienable rights and freedoms.

Ask Senator Byrd sometime what he thinks about the Constitution standing in the way of the "will of the People", i.e. his source of power.

[Beerina]

Originally posted by Charlie Monoxide
Hmmm, some large manufacturing firms are lobbying the current Republican government (which seems kinda redundant).

Are these lobbying manufacturing breaking the law? Probably not.

Should [free people freely assembling to earn their livelyhood in pursuit of happiness, and trying to prevent people in government who got into power by promising to konk them on the head, from konking them on the head even harder] be allowed in a true democratic society? Heck no.



Uhhh, whatever dude.

The important aspect of modern society is freedom, not democracy. Few people know the difference, and how they relate. A "true democratic society" sounds pretty god damned miserable to me.Hello

[Brown]

So these businessmen want conservative judges (whatever that means) on the bench. If these businessmen think that they will be better of if judges are selected on the basis of ideology, they have really missed the boat.

First of all, one of the reasons that there are so many pending suits against businesses is that too few judges are "activist," in the sense of getting involved in the cases early on and trying to resolve them. Judges who take an active role in their cases have smoother dockets and fewer wild verdicts. Businesses should favor selection of judges who will take a more active role, but perish the thought that these guys would want more "activist" judges. After all, "activist" judges are all dreaded liberals, aren't they? No, they aren't. Activist judges can hold virtually any political ideology, but listening to little Bush, you would never know that.

Second, businesses ought to be advocating that there be more judges, with far less concern about the judges' political leanings. One of the reasons that judges don't get involved in their cases early on is that they don't have the time to do so. If there were more judicial positions opened, with more concern about competence and less concern about ideology, the judicial branch would have the resources to head off wild suits early. But that would require (gasp!) raising taxes, and by golly, we sure don't want to do that.