Adam Sandlin
Dr. Bailie
Eng. 1001
"Lobbying Database." Open Secrets. The Center for Responsive Politics. Web. 2 Oct.
2015. <http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/incdec.php>.
This whole website is dedicated to reporting lobbying statistics. This specific page
displays totals throughout the years and the biggest spenders in each sector and industry. In
2014, there were 11,179 lobbyists spending a total of $1,642,652,543. The largest sectors of
lobbying were the health and defense sectors with $120,012,747 and $31,153,803 to each
respectively in the second quarter of 2014. The largest industries in lobbying are pharmaceuticals
and business associations with $54,973,254 and $38,197,788 to each respectively still in the
second quarter of 2014. The article doesn’t try to argue one way or the other on the issue of
lobbying, it merely presents the facts and allows the reader to interpret it how they want.
This article presents the facts about lobbying without bias. The whole website is only
statistics and no bias about lobbying. It is a useful source, it is created and maintained by an
independent, nonpartisan, and nonprofit organization dedicated to releasing these statistics. It
gives hard numbers that supplement other sources, or expose lies created by other sources, such
as the National Rifle Association’s mission statement. Other sources in my bibliography are
much less statistic-based, and this serves more as a backup to help the others get their point
across better, and be quoted outright when appropriate. It would help Szper’s claim that lobbying
had a direct relation to healthcare legislation, I could go to this source and say that the health
sector had lobbied a combined $120,012,747 in the second quarter of 2014.
This source is a central point in my argument. These concrete numbers allow me to see
how much each sector or industry has spent each quarter between 1998 and now. It supports my
thesis relating to lobbying and money in politics. Like the other paragraph said above, I can use
Adam Sandlin
Dr. Bailie
Eng. 1001
this source to back up or disprove other sources with rigid statistics from a nonbiased
organization.
Cox, Chris. "About PVF." NRA-PVF. National Rifle Association. Web. 7 Oct. 2015.
<https://www.nrapvf.org/about-pvf/>.
The National Rifle Association was created to arm citizens and keep the second
amendment safe from congress. As the issue of gun control gain more and more attention, the
political action committee is dedicated to blocking any legislation and educate the voters on the
issue and that all of these actions are schemes and infringements on the second amendment.
This source is here to be a counterpoint and is involved in a central point at this time,
which is gun control and gun violence. The NRA lobbied about $3 million in 2014 to keep gun
control from passing. I personally do believe that some sort of legislation is needed to control
firearms. The second amendment even states “well regulated militia…”. If I were to take that
literally, there is room for regulation and control to make sure there is less reckless gun violence.
Anyway, that’s a tangent that’s probably not supposed to be part of this bibliography. This
source is one that is easy to expose the other side that tries to pardon the massive amounts of
money going through our government, and with other sources, disprove their stance and prove it
a position that ultimately cannot be supported.
This source is useful, only because it is biased and completely for an opposing point of
view that tries to defend lobbying. In any other condition, this source would not be included in
the finished essay. But to round out the argument as a whole, I need a counter point that would
be brought up regarding a relevant issue to many Americans and disprove it and the argument it
presents itself through facts and evidence from other sources.