Nice strawman, like the hat.
I specifically defined what the proper criteria for a legitimate advocacy group would be: an anonymous one-man-one-vote democratic agreement on every issue it lobbies for.
I never said the votes had to be unanimous - but at least it must be decided democratically.
>Corporations are run democratically.
One share one vote is not democracy - it's the very definition of plutocracy. But I suppose considering the side you take, I shouldn't be surprized that you don't know the difference. I specifically stated that for a corporation to have a legitimate lobby right it needs a one-man-one-vote election on the issue, with votes for workers.
> Why you feel it should be an equal vote for everyone I can't imagine though
Because that's how democracy works and this is not a vote specific to the company. This is a vote about lobbying the government to pass laws and policies that will affect all of society. You can't pretend those are similar situations. You are not voting on corporate management issues, you are not busy safeguarding your investment. While you may be doing all that as well - you are now doing it in a way that forces all the rest of society to, including the non-shareholding employees of your company to help you do so. That's an entirely different kettle of fish. That requires a democratic process.
>I don't have as much of a stake in the company as the larger shareholders, they have much more invested than I do.
And when it's a vote about matters internal to the company there is some logic to that (cooperations are still a far more democratic setup, and as a result consistently better managed and because the people who actually do the work get all the profit - they actually raise quality of life far better for workers. The world's largest cooperation now has over 80-thousand worker-owners running businesses in some 40 different industries and is the single largest employer in Spain, and in Argentina cooperations are the largest employers as well collectively, there are over 20-thousand, mostly formed when the economy collapsed in 2007. The workers just kept showing up running the abandoned businesses which corporate owners could not keep afloat themselves. In the same economic situation where the corporations failed - they succeeded, and because they all paid well they all had a steady supply of customers from each other).
But that is a lesser matter because either way it's about how the company is governed internally which is not something anybody outside has a stake in. The moment the company gets political however they give everybody a stake because immediately they are affecting everybody. The most directly and immediately affected are the employees. They are the ones who get screwed if companies lobby governments to ban union shops. They are the ones who die if companies lobby for reductions in health and safety standards. They deserve an equal say in that decision.