I pretty much agree with this entire analysis:
Let’s take these one by one. The party ban I don’t really care much about. If there’s any place in the world that lobbyists ought to be allowed to let the liquor flow, surely national conventions are the place. I mean, it’s not like they’re good for anything else these days.
The grassroots lobbying regulation is tricky. I sympathize with the idea, but I have to confess that conservative arguments over the past few years have persuaded me that First Amendment issues are more important than I’ve given them credit for in cases like this. I’m not entirely sure I support this provision at all.
The 2-year lobbying ban, according to CQ, is still around: “Democratic leaders have insisted on a two-year ban as part of their ethics overhaul push,” a recent article says, despite pushback from some backbenchers. Good for them.
So far, then, not really that bad. But that leaves us with the biggest provision of all: disclosure of bundling. The American League of Lobbyists is dead set against it, which is no surprise, since this is a prime loophole that allows special interests to funnel vast sums of money to politicians without ever being identified. Apparently, though, it’s become so radioactive that Dem leaders are planning to drop it entirely, promising that they’ll allow it to come up later as a separate bill. Sure they will.
Come on, folks: show some spine. If Democrats want people to believe that there’s really a difference between the two parties, then show them there’s a difference. Put the bundling provision back in and give it a vote. It’s the right thing to do.
Though he should show a greater level of disgust.
Others blogging:
Captains Ed who I also agree with though Kevin may part ways on the last part:
It’s simple: they like lobbyist money. All that blathering about Jack Abramoff was a smoke screen, and considering how Reid and other Democrats like Tom Harkin and Robert Kennedy were knee-deep in cash from Abramoff clients, a rather obnoxious smoke screen at that. The Democrats have just as much culpability in pork and lobbyist love as the Republicans — and to the extent that they are big-government expansionists, even more. Federal spending is what drives lobbyist cash to politicians, and the more government spending there is to exploit, the more money the lobbyists toss around.
The party that acts to reduce government and limit its powers will be the party of true lobbyist reform. Everything else amounts to snake oil. Unfortunately, snake oil has remained in style in Washington for decades.
