Home Builders Halt Campaign Funds After Setback

National Association of Home Builders, one of the top 10 corporate donors to politicians, has stopped contributing to congressional candidates after it failed to get what it wanted in recent anti-recession legislation....Election experts said the lobby's move illustrated how closely interest groups tie their donations to the decisions they hope lawmakers will take on their behalf -- a connection that usually goes unspoken.

"This demonstrates in a ... Full Story »

Posted by Beth Wellington

Reviews

Show All | Notes | Comments | Quotes | Links
Beth Wellington
4.3
by Beth Wellington - Oct. 1, 2008

The reporter brings to light the announced withdrawal of campaign contributions after the homebuilders' PAC desired tax breaks were cut from the economic stimulus package. He outlines the breaks sought, then gets quotes from attorneys, other lobbyists both pro and con the move, and tried to get a comment from the PAC, who declined to elaborate on a written statement. He also sets the background of whawt's happening in the housing market. I would have liked a bit of background on who the PAC supported and how they voted and what was included in the stimulus package in lieu of the homebuiders' favored incentives.

(comment refers to full article) More »

See Full Review » (14 answers)
Rory O'Connor
3.8
by Rory O'Connor - Oct. 1, 2008

Campaign contributions from "interest groups" are tied to the decisions they hope lawmakers will take on their behalf? AS Louie put it in Casablanca, "I'm shocked!" Still, as this piece points out, the "connection that usually goes unspoken." This time it's explicit...

See Full Review » (11 answers)
Dwight Rousu
4.1
by Dwight Rousu - Oct. 1, 2008

It is strange that when the politician-owning lobbyists leave their droopers down long enough to see the outlines of the quid-pro-quo, it makes the news. Indirectly, this story is news that should promote voter owned publicly financed elections.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Jim Lang
4.1
by Jim Lang - Oct. 1, 2008

Evenhanded, informative story relying on quotes from "authorities" on both sides of the issue.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
James Jackson
3.9
by James Jackson - Oct. 1, 2008

I would be genuinely surprised if the world didn't work this way. If I make an investment, I expect a return on investment.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Ben Ross
3.2
by Ben Ross - Oct. 1, 2008

Interesting report does not mention present or past reform to lobbying and pac's.

See Full Review » (7 answers)
Dan Gillmor
4.0
by Dan Gillmor - Oct. 1, 2008

This story is one data point, and doesn't provide absolute proof of what readers already suspect. But the data point is highly revealing nonetheless, and the supporting comments from other lobbyists tell more of the story.

See Full Review » (13 answers)
Justin Michels
4.1
by Justin Michels - Oct. 1, 2008

This article exposes an important question: should our government really be run by lobbyists? Investors(or in this particular case, union members) are the primary concern of corporations(or unions) and we don't want them not to get their money's worth right? It's obvious that our politicians don't hold themselves accountable to the voters that elect them, maybe it is in all our best interest that at least someone is trying to hold them accountable. In my opinion this article is the epitome of good reporting, because it encourages us to ask real questions and illustrates an important topic. well worth the read.

See Full Review » (7 answers)

Comments on this story Help (BETA)

NT Rating | My Rating

Ratings

3.9

Good
from 12 reviews (50% confidence)
Quality
3.9
Facts
4.0
Fairness
3.7
Information
4.0
Sourcing
4.0
Style
3.6
Accuracy
4.2
Balance
4.0
Context
4.0
Popularity
4.0
Recommendation
4.2
Credibility
3.9
# Reviews
5.0
# Views
5.0
# Likes
1.0
# Emails
1.0
More
How our ratings work »
(See these related stories.)

Links Help

No links yet. Please review this story to add some!