Saturday, June 18, 2016

Is Trump's Announcement a Way for Him to Seek NRA Contributions?

   Wish stories about campaign endorsements came equipped with mention about whether the endorsers had contributed to the candidates.
   Take the National Rifle Association's endorsement of Donald Trump last month. Trump had previously been self-funding his campaign and had just recently shifted to taking outside contributions. The timing of the NRA endorsement makes one wonder if it was accompanied by a campaign contribution.
   If our public disclosure laws are to have any effect, the news media has got to question what money is coming from organizations each time they are involved in the candidates' campaigns.
   Take Trump's announcement this week about meeting with the NRA. "I will be meeting with the NRA, who has endorsed me, about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list, or the no fly list, to buy guns."
   When the news of Trump's proposed meeting with the NRA broke, my mind immediately flew to the situation in Utah, Utah Gov. Gary Herbert having gotten in trouble for indicating he would meet with lobbyists in exchange for their contributing to his campaign.
   Now, with Trump announcing he would meet with the NRA, I wondered if this is standard operating procedure for political candidates: Tell potential donors you want to meet with them to discuss public policy, then wait for the money to come in. Whether you ask for a contribution at the same time or not, it is understood between you, the contributor, and the candidate that you are seeking that money. Sometimes, the contribution might be hidden, somewhat, by it going to a PAC or such, thus making it harder for the public to make the connection.
  I just wonder about all this. After all, Trump has not been the kind of guy who has sought advice from others on public policy. Before he was accepting contributions, would he have sought input from the NRA?  Why does he care what the NRA feels about keeping those on the no-fly list from having guns? It is his own feelings on the issue that matters, not the NRA's.
   So, since when does Trump see the need to seek out advice on matters like this? It does not go unnoticed on me that he sought the advice from a lobbyist -- someone in position to give him money -- rather than from someone who wouldn't be giving him money. It is not like he tweeted out, "I will be meeting with Paul Ryan and other Republican leaders about not allowing people on the terrorist watch list, or the no watch list, to buy guns." It seems is would be more logical to craft policy with them than with lobbyists. For that matter, it would be more logical to meet with the leaders of both parties, of Congress, in general, than with lobbyists. Why can't we create public policy the right way, instead of feeding money into the equation? Craft your policy with those in position to craft public policy (RE: lawmakers), not with those in position to give you money.

No comments:

Post a Comment