Woot! He's going through with it

OrByte

Diamond Member
Jul 21, 2000
9,303
144
106
Originally posted by: palehorse
:thumbsup: I just hope he sticks to it...

and I hope we get more than one blog source to confirm this.

and I hope this is the start of meaningful reform.

wouldn't that be nice...

 

RichardE

Banned
Dec 31, 2005
10,246
2
0
Originally posted by: OrByte
Originally posted by: palehorse
:thumbsup: I just hope he sticks to it...

and I hope we get more than one blog source to confirm this.

and I hope this is the start of meaningful reform.

wouldn't that be nice...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/200..._el_pr/democrats_money

WASHINGTON - Acting swiftly as his party's presumed presidential nominee, Barack Obama is keeping Howard Dean at the helm of the Democratic National Committee, while bringing in one of his top strategists to oversee the party's operations.
ADVERTISEMENT

The campaign also announced that the DNC will no longer accept donations from lobbyists and political action committees, to comply with Obama's campaign policy. Party officials say they expect the DNC's staff to quickly expand to run an aggressive general election campaign.

Campaign adviser Paul Tewes was dispatched to help lead the changes Thursday.

"Senator Obama appreciates the hard work that Chairman Dean has done to grow our party at the grass-roots level and looks forward to working with him as the chairman of the Democratic Party as we go forward," Obama spokesman Bill Burton said.

By keeping Dean as party chairman, Obama ended up taking sides in a long-running dispute between Washington-based Democratic Party leaders and state party officials. Although Obama campaign officials have expressed concern in the past that the party did not have enough money, Obama shares Dean's goal of building the party from the ground up, even in states where Republicans dominate.

Dean welcomed Tewes to the DNC, saying he would help the party transition to the general election.

"Over the last three years, the DNC staff has worked tirelessly to ensure that the Democratic Party is strong in all 50 states and that we communicate our values to Americans across the country," Dean said in a statement. "The DNC and the Obama campaign are now working together to continue this effort."

"We know that we have a lot of work ahead of us. On everything from the war in Iraq, to privatizing Social Security, to making the disastrous Bush tax cuts permanent, (Republican nominee-in-waiting) John McCain has made it clear that he is more interested in continuing the policies of the past rather than facing America's future."

The fundraising changes will make the party and the candidate have a consistent position. Obama often says banning the donations is one way to help keep him free of the influence of Washington insiders.

"Today as the Democratic nominee for president, I am announcing that going forward, the Democratic national Committee will uphold the same standard ? we will not take a dime from Washington lobbyists," Obama said at a town hall meeting in Bristol, Va.

"We are going to change how Washington works. They will not run our party. They will not run our White House. They will not drown out the views of the American people."

Obama is pressing his case that McCain is under the influence of special interests because of his advisers' lobbying ties.

McCain's senior advisers are former lobbyists, including campaign manager Rick Davis. McCain was stung last month by the disclosure that two advisers worked for a firm that had represented the military junta in Myanmar, also known as Burma, which has restricted foreign assistance for cyclone victims.

The Arizona senator instituted a new lobbying policy that says no campaign staffer can be a registered lobbyist, resulting in three more departures from his campaign, including a top fundraiser, former Texas Rep. Tom Loeffler.

Obama's ban on lobbyists money is not ironclad. He does accept money from lobbyists who do not do business with the federal government and he also accepts money from spouses and family members of lobbyists. He has had unpaid advisers with federal lobbying clients, and some campaign officials also previously had lobbying jobs.

The new fundraising policy is not expected to hurt the party's fundraising ability because lobbyists and PACs do not constitute a major source of money.

DNC officials said Thursday committee had raised $4.7 million in May, bringing the total raised this election cycle to $82.3 million. According to its latest report with the Federal Election Commission, the DNC had raised $2 million came from PACs over the past 16 months. And according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, the DNC raised a mere $53,360 from executives or associates in lobbying firms so far this election cycle. That total, however, includes employees of lobbying firms who are not registered lobbyists.

Compared to its Republican counterpart, the DNC has been at a disadvantage.

The RNC on Thursday said it had raised a total of $166 million so far this cycle and had $53.6 million in the bank at the end of May.

The DNC reported having $4 million in the bank at the end of May.

Obama, however, has had a clear fundraising advantage over McCain. The Obama campaign has not released its May fundraising; as of the end of April, he had raised $264 million since the start of 2007.

McCain raised $21.5 million in May and entered June with $31.5 million cash on hand, campaign officials said Thursday. McCain has raised nearly $115 million since the beginning of 2007, with $77 million this year alone.

As DNC chairman, Dean set up a joint fundraising committee earlier to amass money for the eventual nominee. Acceding to Obama's wishes, that committee already was not accepting money from federal lobbyists.
 

CaptainGoodnight

Golden Member
Oct 13, 2000
1,427
30
91
They will just tell the lobbyists to donate to some PAC on their behalf.

It's just a publicity stunt.

The money that is earmarked by the lobbyists to be spent in Washington is not going to simply go unspent. They will find a way to spend the money one way or another. Now they will direct the lobbyist to donate that money to a PAC. Then the PAC will spend that on behalf of the candiate.

I would rather the DNC take money from lobbyists because at least there it's documented. Goto fec.gov and you can see who donated to the candidates. I?d take openness and transparency over shadowy backroom dealing any day.
 

nageov3t

Lifer
Feb 18, 2004
42,808
83
91
would it even matter if he had the balls to stick to his promise of going the public financing route?
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,322
4
0
Looks like Obama has you folks fooled again.

Lobbyist money and the fine line

Significantly, the Center?s lobbyist sector excludes in-house lobbyists who work solely for one company, union, trade association, or other group. These people may lobby, but their contributions are grouped in the totals for the various industries they represent, along with contributions from other employees in the sector, their relatives, whatever PAC money has been raised, and donations from trade and professional associations which, of course, carry lots of weight in the horse trading that occurs when legislation is drafted. (Corporations cannot contribute directly to candidates.)

Contributions made by the various industry sectors tell the real story in a presidential race. And Opensecrets.org shows that Obama is picking up gobs of money put on the table by these special interests?including those involved in health care, which will surely have a lot riding on the outcome of the election and will expect to be heard after the election is over.

Consider the sector called lawyers and law firms. Clearly, lawyers and law firms lobby on behalf of their own interests?like fighting malpractice reform, which could again surface as a thorny issue for the new administration. Clinton and Obama have raised similar amounts from lawyers and law firms?$11.8 and $9.5 million. McCain and Huckabee have taken far less. The health sector has also given to Obama, Clinton, and McCain. In the pharmaceutical and health product industries, contributions to Clinton total $349,000 and $338,000 to Obama. Again, McCain trails in donations at about $98,000, an indication that the sector sees the real action on the Democratic side of the ballot. Health professionals, which include doctors, nurses, and dentists, have given Clinton some $2.3 million and Obama $1.7 million.

Last August The Boston Globe, in a piece by Scott Helman, took a hard look at Obama?s contributions, noting that ?behind Obama?s campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth.? That truth revealed that as a state legislator in Illinois, a U.S. senator, and as a presidential aspirant, Obama had collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs. Helman quoted an Obama campaign spokeswoman saying that after he experienced firsthand the influence of Washington lobbyists, he was taking a different approach to fundraising than he had in the past, and that ?his leadership position on this issue is an evolving process.? If Obama?s leadership on campaign financing is indeed evolving, more news outlets should be following the evolution.



And for your viewing pleasure
 

MagicConch

Golden Member
Apr 7, 2005
1,239
1
0
if he is accepting money from the families/spouses of federal lobbyists, then this ban sounds easily bypassable unfortunately. but then everything has to start somewhere.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,386
6,668
126
Damn, Old Magic Touch isn't even Pres yet and the revolution is already under way.
 

lupi

Lifer
Apr 8, 2001
32,539
260
126
Originally posted by: CPA
Looks like Obama has you folks fooled again.

Lobbyist money and the fine line

Significantly, the Center?s lobbyist sector excludes in-house lobbyists who work solely for one company, union, trade association, or other group. These people may lobby, but their contributions are grouped in the totals for the various industries they represent, along with contributions from other employees in the sector, their relatives, whatever PAC money has been raised, and donations from trade and professional associations which, of course, carry lots of weight in the horse trading that occurs when legislation is drafted. (Corporations cannot contribute directly to candidates.)

Contributions made by the various industry sectors tell the real story in a presidential race. And Opensecrets.org shows that Obama is picking up gobs of money put on the table by these special interests?including those involved in health care, which will surely have a lot riding on the outcome of the election and will expect to be heard after the election is over.

Consider the sector called lawyers and law firms. Clearly, lawyers and law firms lobby on behalf of their own interests?like fighting malpractice reform, which could again surface as a thorny issue for the new administration. Clinton and Obama have raised similar amounts from lawyers and law firms?$11.8 and $9.5 million. McCain and Huckabee have taken far less. The health sector has also given to Obama, Clinton, and McCain. In the pharmaceutical and health product industries, contributions to Clinton total $349,000 and $338,000 to Obama. Again, McCain trails in donations at about $98,000, an indication that the sector sees the real action on the Democratic side of the ballot. Health professionals, which include doctors, nurses, and dentists, have given Clinton some $2.3 million and Obama $1.7 million.

Last August The Boston Globe, in a piece by Scott Helman, took a hard look at Obama?s contributions, noting that ?behind Obama?s campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth.? That truth revealed that as a state legislator in Illinois, a U.S. senator, and as a presidential aspirant, Obama had collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs. Helman quoted an Obama campaign spokeswoman saying that after he experienced firsthand the influence of Washington lobbyists, he was taking a different approach to fundraising than he had in the past, and that ?his leadership position on this issue is an evolving process.? If Obama?s leadership on campaign financing is indeed evolving, more news outlets should be following the evolution.



And for your viewing pleasure

change, change, change !
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,271
7
81
Originally posted by: lupi
Originally posted by: CPA
Looks like Obama has you folks fooled again.

Lobbyist money and the fine line

Significantly, the Center?s lobbyist sector excludes in-house lobbyists who work solely for one company, union, trade association, or other group. These people may lobby, but their contributions are grouped in the totals for the various industries they represent, along with contributions from other employees in the sector, their relatives, whatever PAC money has been raised, and donations from trade and professional associations which, of course, carry lots of weight in the horse trading that occurs when legislation is drafted. (Corporations cannot contribute directly to candidates.)

Contributions made by the various industry sectors tell the real story in a presidential race. And Opensecrets.org shows that Obama is picking up gobs of money put on the table by these special interests?including those involved in health care, which will surely have a lot riding on the outcome of the election and will expect to be heard after the election is over.

Consider the sector called lawyers and law firms. Clearly, lawyers and law firms lobby on behalf of their own interests?like fighting malpractice reform, which could again surface as a thorny issue for the new administration. Clinton and Obama have raised similar amounts from lawyers and law firms?$11.8 and $9.5 million. McCain and Huckabee have taken far less. The health sector has also given to Obama, Clinton, and McCain. In the pharmaceutical and health product industries, contributions to Clinton total $349,000 and $338,000 to Obama. Again, McCain trails in donations at about $98,000, an indication that the sector sees the real action on the Democratic side of the ballot. Health professionals, which include doctors, nurses, and dentists, have given Clinton some $2.3 million and Obama $1.7 million.

Last August The Boston Globe, in a piece by Scott Helman, took a hard look at Obama?s contributions, noting that ?behind Obama?s campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth.? That truth revealed that as a state legislator in Illinois, a U.S. senator, and as a presidential aspirant, Obama had collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs. Helman quoted an Obama campaign spokeswoman saying that after he experienced firsthand the influence of Washington lobbyists, he was taking a different approach to fundraising than he had in the past, and that ?his leadership position on this issue is an evolving process.? If Obama?s leadership on campaign financing is indeed evolving, more news outlets should be following the evolution.



And for your viewing pleasure

change, change, change !

hope!!!
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,596
8,126
136
Originally posted by: da loser
can someone breakdown the source of his money?

i'd be more interested to see a side by side comparison of campaign fund sources between mccain and obama.