More About the Hypocrisy & Misleading Claims from Obama’s Campaign
By Deb Cupples on May 25, 2008 at 10:40 PM in Barack Obama, Chicago politics, Exelon, Lobbyists
Barack Obama claimed he didn’t take oil-connected money, but he did (LA Times). He claimed he didn’t take lobbyist-connected money, but he did (USA Today , LA Times, SourceWatch and The Hill). He claimed he didn’t take corporate-connected cash, but he took more drug-company-connected cash than Hillary or McCain did (Newhouse News).
Both at No Quarter and Buck Naked Politics, I’ve repeatedly blogged about Obama’s hypocrisy and misleading claims. Some weeks ago, I submitted one in a series of such blog posts to NQ, and Susan said, "Deb, you really are a nag."
She was right. I nag, because many media outlets have simply ignored Obama’s hypocrisy regarding special-interest ties. Today, I found a Newsweek article ("Obama’s Lobbyist Connection") that covers a different example of the hypocrisy and misleading claims. In part, it states:
"When Illinois utility Commonwealth Edison wanted state lawmakers to back a hefty rate hike two years ago, it took a creative lobbying approach, concocting a new outfit that seemed devoted to the public interest: Consumers Organized for Reliable Electricity, or CORE. CORE ran TV ads warning of a "California-style energy crisis" if the rate increase wasn’t approved—but without disclosing the commercials were funded by Commonwealth Edison. The ad campaign provoked a brief uproar when its ties to the utility, which is owned by Exelon Corp., became known.
"It’s corporate money trying to hoodwink the public," the state’s Democratic Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn said. What got scant notice then—but may soon get more scrutiny—is that CORE was the brainchild of ASK Public Strategies, a consulting firm whose senior partner is David Axelrod, now chief strategist for Barack Obama." (Newsweek)
Keep in mind that Obama’s campaign has repeatedly slammed Hillary Clinton and John McCain for having ties to special interests — causing visions of pots and kettles to dance in my mind.
Mr. Axelrod denied any hypocrisy, stating that he and his ASK partners didn’t actually register as lobbyists for Commonwealth Edison. Axelrod also said that he has not lobbied government officials for corporate clients. Newsweek casts doubt on Axelrod’s claims:
"But the activities of ASK (located in the same office as Axelrod’s political firm) illustrate the difficulties in defining exactly who a lobbyist is. In 2004, Cablevision hired ASK to set up a group similar to CORE to block a new stadium for the New York Jets in Manhattan.
Unlike Illinois, New York disclosure laws do cover such work, and ASK’s $1.1 million fee was listed as the ‘largest lobbying contract’ of the year in the annual report of the state’s lobbying commission.
"ASK last year proposed a similar ‘political campaign style approach’ to help Illinois hospitals block a state proposal that would have forced them to provide more medical care to the indigent. One part of its plan: create a ‘grassroots’ group of medical experts ‘capable of contacting policymakers to advocate for our position,’ according to a copy of the proposal. (ASK didn’t get the contract.) Public-interest watchdogs say these grassroots campaigns are state of the art in the lobbying world.
"‘There’s no way with a straight face to say that’s not lobbying,’ says Ellen Miller, director of the Sunlight Foundation, which promotes government transparency." (Newsweek)
Newsweek isn’t the only one noticing Obama’s hypocrisy and misleading claims. Last week, the Republican National Committee put out a press release ("Obama’s Lobbyist Hypocrisy"), which makes detailed claims while listing names and sources. Below is a sampling of those claims:
- “Obama Has Former Federal Lobbyists Working For And Raising Money For His Campaign”
- “Obama Also Uses Bundlers Who Were Previously Registered As Federal Lobbyists”
- “Obama Currently Accepts Contributions From Spouses Of Lobbyists And Holds Fundraisers In Offices That Engage In Lobbying”
- “Obama Has Accepted Contributions From Law Firms That Engage In Lobbying”
- “Obama’s Fundraising Team Includes 38 Members Of Law Firms That Engage In Federal Lobbying”
- “Obama Accepted Contributions From Lobbyists And PACs While Running For The Senate And State Senate”
- “In Obama’s Eight Years In The Illinois Senate, From 1996 To 2004, Almost Two-Thirds Of The Money He Raised For His Campaigns – $296,000 Of $461,000 – Came From PACs, Corporate Contributions, Or Unions”
- “Obama Also Has Multiple Super Delegate Endorsements From Current Federal Lobbyists”
I have no love for the RNC, but I don’t doubt the veracity of the RNC’s claims, because I’ve seen similar information from reputable sources (like those linked in the first paragraph of this blog post).
So far, Obama-infatuated MSM outlets have successfully managed to keep Obama’s hypocrisy and misleading claims from becoming major news stories.
Something tells me that the RNC is not going to allow such stories to stay in the shadows for much longer. It would have been so much better for the Democratic party if this information had been given due attention earlier in the primaries. Oh well.
To be sure, most federal candidates have ties to special interests — and they will continue to until real campaign-finance reform is achieved.
So, why do Obama’s special-interest ties matter? They don’t.
What matter are his hypocrisy and misleading claims, because they completely undermine his campaign’s efforts to market him as new, clean, and eager to change Washington’s "politics as usual."
Memeorandum has commentary.


















Pingback: Mr. Obama and his Lobbyist Friends « Colbert U R Dead 2 Me