The New Politics
Apr 15th, 2008 at 8:41 pm by Susie
Obama has a new ad up attacking Clinton for ties to lobbyists.
This is the way the Obama ad tells it: Step one: “Lobbyists donate to politicians” – asserting that Clinton has taken more money from lobbyists than any other candidate – Republican or Democrat. Step two: “Politicians defend lobbyists” – reminding viewers of Clinton’s own words, with a video clip of Clinton at a candidate forum saying she will accept campaign contributions from lobbyists because: “You know a lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans.”
Step three: “Americans pay the price” – showing gasoline approaching $4 per gallon, “skyrocketing insurance and drug prices, and trade deals and bankruptcy laws that betray working families.” The closing screens conclude in silent script: “”We can’t end the Washington game…until we change the players.”
The Obama campaign asserts that Clinton has accepted more than $800,000 from lobbyists, more than any other candidate of either party — $130,000 from energy lobbyists, $130,000 from drug company lobbyists, $125,000 from health care and insurance lobbyists — citing the independent Center for Responsive Politics as source.
His own lobbyist ties are much more discreet. It turns out he refuses money from them so that he can still tap into their networks but they’re not all over his FEC reports, where everyone can see. It seems Clinton is the one adhering to the principle of transparency:
Obama’s spokesman Bill Burton said the senator knows that it is impossible to completely escape the influence of Washington’s establishment, but that rejecting lobbyists’ money is an important gesture.
“Senator Obama said when he set out this policy that it doesn’t solve the problem of money in politics but it is a sign and symbolic step in the right direction,” said Burton. “It’s not going to stop the sway that money has over policies or that special interests have over legislation, but it indicates the type of administration Obama would have if elected.”
Other K Street players working to build momentum for Obama are former Sen. Tom Daschle (D-S.D.), a consultant for Alston & Bird; Broderick Johnson, president of Bryan Cave Strategies LLC; Mark Keam, the lead Democratic lobbyist at Verizon; Jimmy Williams, vice president of government affairs for the Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of America; Thomas Walls, vice president of federal public affairs at McGuireWoods Consulting; and Francis Grab, senior manager at Washington Council Ernst & Young.
Lobbyists tend to be cautious creatures. Evidence that they are flocking to Obama’s camp shows that his campaign has gained substantial momentum among the politically sophisticated.
Some of Obama’s K Street boosters keep their support a secret to uphold Obama’s image as a Washington outsider untainted by D.C.’s influence business.
When Obama declared his presidential candidacy in February, he said he would re-engage Americans disenchanted with business-as-usual in Washington who had turned away from politics.
“And as people have looked away in disillusionment and frustration, we know what’s filled the void,” said Obama. “The cynics, and the lobbyists, and the special interests who’ve turned our government into a game only they can afford to play. They write the checks and you get stuck with the bills, they get the access while you get to write a letter; they think they own this government, but we’re here today to take it back. The time for that politics is over. It’s time to turn the page.”
In a fundraising e-mail distributed yesterday, Obama emphasized his stance against taking money from lobbyists and PACs.
Two lobbyists who are supporting another candidate and spoke to The Hill on condition of anonymity said that Obama’s campaign contacted them asking to be put in touch with their networks of business clients and acquaintances.
One of the lobbyists, who supports Clinton, said that Shomik Dutta, a fundraiser for Obama’s campaign, called to ask if the lobbyist’s wife would be interested in making a political contribution.
“I was quite taken aback,” he said. “He was very direct in saying that you’re a lobbyist and we don’t want contributions from lobbyists. But your wife can contribute and we like your network.”
Dutta declined to discuss his work.
Williams, of Credit Suisse, said that asking for access to lobbyists’ networks is not the same as asking lobbyists to raise money for Obama.
“When they say, ‘Give us access to your network,’ it’s not so we can raise money from them; it’s so we can have conversations with them and see whether [members of the networks] are interested in what we’re saying,” he said. “They may decide they are not interested.”


“The presidential candidate who has raised the most money from Washington lobbyists is not a Republican. It’s a Democrat. The candidate who has raised the most money from the health industry—insurance companies and drug companies—is not a Republican. It is a Democrat…. And the candidate who has raised the most money from the defense industry, is not a Republican. It is a Democrat. And all those descriptions fit the same candidate. They’re all Senator Clinton.”
–John Edwards
Holy crap, Batman. Obama refuses lobbyists money, so he’s evil? It’s all a cunning plan? The Hillary bitter-enders are really starting to reach.
just stay optimistic!!!
“It seems Clinton is the one adhering to the principle of transparency:”
By taking donations from lobbyists? Are you serious? You prefer Clinton taking more money from defense contractors than any candidate in history to Obama not taking the money but still talking to the people?
Seriously Susie, what happened to you? I mean, I get upset when my candidate loses, but I don’t throw my convictions out the window when it happens. This is all so sad. You used to adhere to great principles regardless of the cost; now you defend Clinton regardless of the cost.