Hillary's Finest Hour

[question everything]

The Wall Street Journal

Hillary's Finest Hour
August 13, 2007; Page A14

Hillary Clinton has been catching heat for refusing to swear off campaign cash from lobbyists, with critics accusing her of being a stooge of corporate and special interests. We'd say she deserves some credit.

At last week's YearlyKos event, former Senator John Edwards stooped for an easy applause line by challenging his fellow candidates to refuse donations from "Washington lobbyists." Mrs. Clinton refused to take the sound-bite bait. When asked if she'd continue taking such cash, she replied: "Yes I will because, you know, a lot of those lobbyists, whether you like it or not, represent real Americans. They actually do. They represent nurses. They represent social workers. Yes, they represent corporations that employ a lot of people."

Her answer was met with jeers, but what Mrs. Clinton was daring to tell her left-wing audience is that lobbyists are an essential means by which average Americans transmit their political concerns to Washington, and in turn hold their elected Representatives accountable. Not everyone in America can afford to trek to D.C., or has the clout to demand an audience with a Senator. Lobbyists represent the collective voice of groups with shared ideals, whether they be gun owners, union workers, corporate employees or the pro-choice movement.

(snip)

Before Mrs. Clinton faints dead away at our editorial support, we should add that she also voted for the McCain-Feingold bill that has shown again how foolish it is to try to restrict money in politics. The underlying premise of all such reform is that money in politics corrupts absolutely, which may be why the New York Senator is now having to insist that she can accept lobbyist money and still be uncorrupted.

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118696597297895606.html (subscription)

[thereismore]

1. "lobbyists are an essential means by which average Americans transmit their political concerns"

Hurl. :puke:

[wyldwolf]

2. So, go ahead and tell the ACLU, Teachers Unions, and Labor Unions to give up their lobbyists

Don't "hurl" about it on a message board. Take action.

[RaleighNCDUer]

7. Membership organizations, such as ACLU and unions,

are a completely different critter than the pharmaceutical industry and the insurance industry which are trying to stave off a move to universal healthcare.

With membership organizations, the money actually does come from the people. With corporate lobbyists, the money is just another expense line on the annual budget, funds expended for the purchase of politicians.

If you can't see the difference, well, then it's no surprise that you're a Hillshill.

[wyldwolf]

8. of course there is a difference. But the point is people on the left make no such distinction

f you can't see the difference, well, then it's no surprise that you're a "proooogreeeeessssiiivee"

[RaleighNCDUer]

11. ???????????????

I just DID make that distinction. In the very post you answered. It is CORPORATE lobbyists that is the problem, not bundling, not membership organizations.

BTW, you are not supposed to dislike progressives - Hillary claims to be one. But of course, you know that. Do you think she's lying about it? If so, why are you supporting a liar? Or, if she's not lying, why don't you attack her for being a progressive?

[wyldwolf]

12. ??????

Go back to the debate where the issue was raised. Go back to any number of threads that were started as a result.

Even the first reply in THIS thread.

Most people on the left are absolutely clueless about lobbyists and merely repeat the KOSSACK talking points.

[groovedaddy]

3. When money is free speech

those with the most money speak the loudest.
Yes, any one should be allowed to lobby Congress. Unlimited cash to campaigns ALWAYS leads to a "quid quo pro" situation. It is pure bullshit to portray this as anything other than legalized corruption.

[question everything]

9. Right. Ever noticed the ads for the AARP?

(that is, if you watch TV...)

They show individuals who are supposedly "talk" to a Congressman, or a Senator, even the President who, in turn, "promises" to do something.

The conclusion, of course, is that one needs a lobbying organization, like the AARP to be heard.

[UnityDem]

4. The only solution is public campaign financing

Only way to take the money and undue influence out of the sytstem.
But, it's a tough, tough, sell with both parties and the general public.

[Captain Hilts]

5. She's right. Though I do believe in "NASCAR" reform where you should wear your sponsors....nt

[wordpix]

6. I just met a lobbyist for National Audubon. The difference between her & a BigOil lobbyist is

she is speaking for the wildlife that can't, whereas a BigOil lobbyist is speaking for his own profits, war profiteering and Big Money from retaining the status quo, old technology, old infrastructure and keeping conservation at bay.

[question everything]

10. They can always claim that they provide thousands of jobs

(they do) and contribute to the welfare of their communities.

[marmar]

13. Delete, I responded to the wrong post

Pls delete