Have a question or issue in campaign law? Contact us and we'll try to answer you. Enter your e-mail below:
Learn more about...
Interested in a specific subject? Click here to browse our blog by subject area.
Blog Roll
AFJ Nonprofit Advocacy Blog
Beltway Blogroll
Campaign Legal Center blog
Cato Unbound
Common Cause Blog
Division of Labour
First Amendment Center
Going to the Mat
Instapundit.com
The Lonely Centrist
Michael Barone
More Soft Money Hard Law (Bob Bauer)
Political Activity Law
Public Citizen WatchdogBlog
RedState
Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog
Sabato's Crystal Ball
The Volokh Conspiracy
Votelaw
|
|
Obama softens stance on lobbyists
Published on August 15, 2007
by Michael Schrimpf
File Under: Faulty Assumptions, Lobbying Regulation
Last week CCP weighed in (HERE and HERE) on the Democratic candidates' debate over lobbyists. On Monday, the Wall Street Journal joined in and today the Washington Post reports that Senator Barack Obama has now "softened his attack on Washington lobbyists."
Dan Balz reports that "During the interview, Obama softened his attacks on Washington lobbyists. He and former senator John Edwards (N.C.) take no money from Washington lobbyists, while Clinton does, and both have sharply criticized the power of lobbyists in shaping policies harmful to average Americans.
'The insurance and drug companies can have a seat at the table in our health-care debate; they just can't buy all the chairs,' he said. 'My argument is not that they are the source of all evil. My argument is that things are out of balance in Washington and that their influence is disproportionate.'"
While Obama is still playing a game of semantics, he comes tantalizingly close to admitting that, in the words of Hillary Clinton, lobbyists represent "real interests" and "real Americans." Of course, this is hard to deny after all the candidates spent an informative evening discussing policy on national television with a registered lobbyist.
