Political Contributions

[Eddie Haskell]

Many times on this board it has been claimed by the right wing radicals the disparity of political contributions made by lawyers. It has been implied that lawyers are contributing to the Kerry/Edwards and other federal candidates campaigns as a ploy to curb tort reform aka personal rights destruction.

While doing some research I came across an interesting statistic. For the 2004 presidential and federal candidates campaigns, lawyers PAC's have contributed only $7,666,591.00 to federal candidates. A far cry from the implied buying of the election by the right.

Eddie

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

I'd liketo know where you got those #'s Edwards

"Tort reform

"For example, NRCA strongly supports tort reform to curb frivolous lawsuits that needlessly drive up insurance costs. President Bush signed tort reform legislation into law as governor of Texas and, as president, repeatedly has urged Congress to pass tort reform legislation addressing such issues as class-action lawsuits, medical malpractice litigation and asbestos litigation.

Kerry has not supported tort reform legislation. The Washington Times reports lawyers and law firms contributed twice as much to Kerry's campaign than any other interest group and contributed almost 12 times as much as the next largest group of contributors to Edwards' campaign. During his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, Kerry made no mention of lawsuit abuse as being a problem in the United States."

 

[Eddie Haskell]

I'd like to know where you got your quote.

Ed

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

Capitol Hill
Comparing presidential issues
by Craig S. Brightup
As mentioned in previous columns this year, NRCA's political action committee, ROOFPAC, has given to President Bush's campaign by contributing $5,000, the maximum amount permitted under campaign finance law. Although there are many reasons to support candidates, the decision to support the Bush-Cheney campaign rather than Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts and vice presidential nominee Sen. John Edwards of North Carolina was based on the administration's positions on issues important to NRCA.

Tort reform

For example, NRCA strongly supports tort reform to curb frivolous lawsuits that needlessly drive up insurance costs. President Bush signed tort reform legislation into law as governor of Texas and, as president, repeatedly has urged Congress to pass tort reform legislation addressing such issues as class-action lawsuits, medical malpractice litigation and asbestos litigation.

Kerry has not supported tort reform legislation. The Washington Times reports lawyers and law firms contributed twice as much to Kerry's campaign than any other interest group and contributed almost 12 times as much as the next largest group of contributors to Edwards' campaign. During his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention, Kerry made no mention of lawsuit abuse as being a problem in the United States.

http://www.professionalroofing.net/article.aspx?A_ID=511

however I think this tells better picture--
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1213321/posts

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

more pearls of wisdom

"The report by Amnesty International USA also said that use of race- and religion-based investigative tactics by local, state and federal law enforcement has increased since 9/11, with focuses on Arabs and Muslims"

no shit when 99% of terrorist acts world wide are committed by Muslims why on earth would it be prudent to check them more closely.

and from post in general forum---

per Edward
1) ban all lawsuits against doctors and other health care providers so that they are not responsible for their negligence;

"Bill Ezzell (Deloitte & Touche LLP): Some people say all it takes is an allegation, $100, and a contingency-fee attorney to sue a U.S. company for millions or even billions of dollars. It's been estimated that more than $300 billion is spent annually on litigation involving environmental claims, product liability, class-action securities suits, medical malpractice, and Americans with Disabilities cases"

and you think the war on Iraq is expensive or cost of 3 hurricanes a disaster---we spend an equall amount on projected Hurricane cost in just medical waste and fraud within the legal system.

"We also need to link health-care waste and fraud to the pain and suffering regime that drives today's tort law. Pain and suffering recoveries are cash awards calculated at three times medical costs, thereby motivating claimants to radically and often fraudulently build up their medical claims. As Hank Greenberg's company pays claimants' medical bills - just like we all do through higher premiums - the perverse incentives of today's tort law generate medical waste and fraud estimated at close to $20 billion per year."

http://www.findarticles.com/p/artic...100/ai_16637004

 

[Eddie Haskell]

Hmmmm. National Roofing Contractors Association. Do you think they have an interest Wayneo. I certainly do. You see all these "associations" are nothing but the pr wing of lobbyist groups. They have an agenda. I would think roofers and most other members of corporate america are pretty much pro-Bush.

Did you get your article from New Nazi Times? Once again, Wayne, you post links to some of the most radical, right wing crap on the internet. As has been stated many times on these boards, you can find anything on the internet that you want to support any position that you want. Please stop. It's getting very old.

But back to the original topic of this thread, I got my numbers from a web site called opensecrets.org. Kind of a neat site which shows political contributions to parties and candidates. I believe both sides can get some fodder for their respective positions from this site. Below find the link.

How do you explain Wayne, that of the nearly 8 million contributed by lawyers and groups representing lawyers, 46% went to republicans? Hmmmmm. Based on your prior posts, all lawyers do is give to Kerry/Edwards. Are we spinning again Wayne.

Actually, I believe that the 46% that are giving to republicans are out of their minds. Just goes to show you that their are a lot of stupid lawyers also. Can hardly wait for your spin on this one.

Eddie

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/sector.asp?txt=K01&cycle=2004

 

[DOGS THAT BARK]

the key to your #'s Edward is--- what is a PAC.
PAC's make up a very small % of contibutions.

--and I never said all no attorneys give to GOP but I will say 90% + of PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEYS are pro Kerry

What Is a PAC?
Political Action Committee (PAC) ? A popular term for a political committee organized for the purpose of raising and spending money to elect and defeat candidates. Most PACs represent business, labor or ideological interests. PACs can give $5,000 to a candidate committee per election (primary, general or special). They can also give up to $15,000 annually to any national party committee, and $5,000 annually to any other PAC. PACs may receive up to $5,000 from any one individual, PAC or party committee per calendar year. A PAC must register with the FEC within 10 days of its formation, providing name and address for the PAC, its treasurer and any connected organizations. Affiliated PACs are treated as one donor for the purpose of contribution limits.

PACs have been around since 1944, when the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) formed the first one to raise money for the re-election of President Franklin D. Roosevelt. The PAC's money came from voluntary contributions from union members rather than union treasuries, so it did not violate the Smith Connally Act of 1943, which forbade unions from contributing to federal candidates. Although commonly called PACs, federal election law refers to these accounts as "separate segregated funds" because money contributed to a PAC is kept in a bank account separate from the general corporate or union treasury.

Many politicians also form Leadership PACs, which are not technically affiliated with the candidate, as a way of raising money to help fund other candidates' campaigns. Leadership PACs are often indicative of a politician's aspirations for leadership positions in Congress or for higher office. (A breakdown of spending by Leadership PACs is available on this web site.) Further background on Leadership PACs is online in the Center's 1996 publication, "A Bag of Tricks."

For more information on PACs, check out the FEC's "Campaign Guide for Corporations and Labor Organizations" and the "Campaign Guide for Nonconnected Committees" (both available in PDF format). For an alphabetical list of PAC acronyms, abbreviations, initials, and common names, see the FEC's list of PACRONYMS. A chart showing the rise and fall in the number of PACs over the years is also available on the FEC's web site.

in laymens terms----whos doing the spinning huh Edward

""ASIDE""" from individual contributions, many US law firms have in place a political action committee (PAC), which has the role of collecting funds and assessing which campaigns to donate to.

the tale of the tape
http://www.legalweek.net/ViewItem.asp?id=21020

P.S. Edward I was born at night but not last night--your going to have to do much better in defending your undefendable position.

 

[djv]

Half the Reb's in congress are lawyers. And same with Dem's. I think that is why both get money from there friends.