http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/ten-miles-square/2013/01/do_politicians_need_to_be_frie042624.php
this has been and continues to be the second stupidest idea i've ever heard, they are supposed to be there to caucus with both parties, debate the best things for "we the people" and country, and defend the constitution, reasonable sincere bent of advancing the country and it's people, ok on the real tip where did i lose you, was it at "i ever hard?
President Obama recently spoke about the value of developing personal relationships in politics, something that a bunch of political scientists have been writing about recently (examples below).Jonathan Bernstein wrote about this in his blog and backed up the President by arguing that scholars of the presidency “have been telling us for decades that schmoozing just isn’t all that important.” However, other recent political science research has investigated the value of social networks among political actors and draws some conclusions that contradict the President, sort of.Mr. Obama’s argument is not wrong, but it is incomplete. He argues that deals get worked out (or not) in Washington not because of who knows whom, or who likes whom, but because of ideology and policy preferences. This is true. An examination of roll call votes in Congress would reveal that political party, our best and simplest way of measuring a legislator’s ideology, explains more than 90 percent of the variance across all votes. But how do we know that one’s party (or ideology or policy preference) has not been informed by social interactions? And what about the remaining 10% of votes that aren’t explained by these primary factors?
if we are to except the buddy thing then they are kids you need to promise them they can go the Chuckie Cheese after they do their jobs to play in the ball pit, yea!!
Politicians’ personal social networks inform their thinking, and their voting. Research shows that legislators’ personal friendships with one another can affect their voting patterns, or at least that legislators develop strategic relationshipswith one another for the purposes of forging future coalitions or, in the least, to have a sounding board against which to “check” one’s preferences. Other scholars (and here) have argued that by examining patterns of cosponsorship in the U.S.
Congress we observe the effects of consequential social networks that ultimately affect legislative voting.
if any vote other then their mindset and go along to get along they should be fired and exposed so as not to be able to perpetrate such a fraud on the public again, there goes the right wing, sorry couldn't resist.
