<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: House Bans Spouse Campaign Pay</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/house_bans_spouse_campaign_pay/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/house_bans_spouse_campaign_pay/</link>
	<description>Online Journal of Politics and Foreign Affairs</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 26 Nov 2009 15:49:13 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: yetanotherjohn</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/house_bans_spouse_campaign_pay/comment-page-1/#comment-139756</link>
		<dc:creator>yetanotherjohn</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 17:32:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/07/house_bans_spouse_campaign_pay/#comment-139756</guid>
		<description>One of the problems here is you are essentially legislating morality. What should be a no brainer seems to require a law to make this happen. So acknowledging that an ethics law won&#039;t change the underlying morals of the people involved, lets think about how this is likely to play out.

Candidates spouses resign from campaigns en-mass. No problem so far. Those that were really providing a value will either provide it to other campaigns or as a volunteer.

Candidates spouses form consulting firms that provide consultations on how to pitch issues to congress critters. Not lobbying, but more &#039;how to more effectively employ your first amendment rights to petition the government for a redress of grievances&#039;. What could be more American than that? Depending on the exchange rate for the congress critter, the spouses charge from $100 to $10,000 per hour for their consultancy. Businesses now get to write off the &#039;consulting fee&#039; as a business fee (as opposed to the straight political donation). Every contributor who &#039;wants something&#039; would be encouraged to hire the congress critters spouse consulting firm to make sure that they can effectively present their issue.

And the problem continues dressed in a different set of clothes.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the problems here is you are essentially legislating morality. What should be a no brainer seems to require a law to make this happen. So acknowledging that an ethics law won't change the underlying morals of the people involved, lets think about how this is likely to play out.</p>
<p>Candidates spouses resign from campaigns en-mass. No problem so far. Those that were really providing a value will either provide it to other campaigns or as a volunteer.</p>
<p>Candidates spouses form consulting firms that provide consultations on how to pitch issues to congress critters. Not lobbying, but more 'how to more effectively employ your first amendment rights to petition the government for a redress of grievances'. What could be more American than that? Depending on the exchange rate for the congress critter, the spouses charge from $100 to $10,000 per hour for their consultancy. Businesses now get to write off the 'consulting fee' as a business fee (as opposed to the straight political donation). Every contributor who 'wants something' would be encouraged to hire the congress critters spouse consulting firm to make sure that they can effectively present their issue.</p>
<p>And the problem continues dressed in a different set of clothes.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: markm</title>
		<link>http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/house_bans_spouse_campaign_pay/comment-page-1/#comment-139740</link>
		<dc:creator>markm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 16:47:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/07/house_bans_spouse_campaign_pay/#comment-139740</guid>
		<description>&quot;Still, this seems like a no brainer.&quot;

That was my exact thoughts on the matter...but watching the news last night, &quot;people in the know&quot; said it will not pass the senate. Hmmph!.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>"Still, this seems like a no brainer."</p>
<p>That was my exact thoughts on the matter...but watching the news last night, "people in the know" said it will not pass the senate. Hmmph!.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
