The Dangers of Chummery February 22
The latest scandal is John McCain’s maybe/maybe not connection to lobbyist Vicki Iseman. Some allegations imply that John and Vicki’s relationship wasn’t limited to photo ops and rubber chicken fund raisers. I don’t personally care whether he lets Little John do all his thinking, but it’s a legitimate issue for some folks. On those grounds I think the question is legitimate, but it’s not worth making it the centerpiece unless there’s evidence of a roll in the hay pro quo. Absent that, it’s time to let this one go because it’ll distract from investigating the larger question.
That question is whether or not the relationship, which John describes as “just friends”, involved any sort of special favors. Let’s remember that John had these sorts of problems before. As one of the Keating Five, he was investigated for doing special favors for “just friends” on shaky ground. The investigations didn’t absolve him, even if it did determine his favors were small. However, John and pretty much every political figure down to dog catcher has a problems when friendly favors are involved.
Lobbyists? Who, Me?
When politicos face such charges they always play down the fact their Christmas card list is heavily weighted to lobbyists. With straight faces they claim hefty campaign contributions have absolutely nothing to do with votes favorable to the contributing lobbyists. It’s hard to believe them on this score because there isn’t a single legislator who doesn’t accept lobbyist money while donations by regular schmoes are far down the list, after lobbyists and CEOs. It’s hard to claim that lobbyists are so generous simply because they like to have nice 12-course, all expense paid dinners at the Tour d’Argent with their political friends who just happen to be working on legislation touching their businesses.
“Really, nothing to it. I’d never ignore my constituents’ problems, cross my heart and hope to die…as long as Halliburton pays the funeral expenses.”
I understand the need for lobbyists to make their point. However, I’m not so enamored of them jumping to the front of the line by paying for the privilege of making it. It’s a question of power. Why should a lobby have a bigger say in decisions than just plain Joes like me and you? In essence, lobbies get a 1000 vote head start before individuals even get to vote. As a result, we end up with legislation that benefits no one except the lobby that bought enough votes to push it into the win column.
The Dangers of Chummery
It’s also a question of appearances. If a person hangs out with gang members, people assume they’re gang members too, even if that isn’t the case. McCain may not be guilty of anything, but only a complete boob wouldn’t understand the implications of a powerful Senator and Presidential candidate being so chummy with a lobbyist. Apparently the appearance was enough to alarm his staff. Are we to believe that John never had an inkling that anyone perceived the relationship in that way? If he did, what does that say about his political acumen?
The only thing that ‘ll reduce these schools of stinky moneyfish is a complete overhaul of our electoral process. But as McCain and Finegold found, that’s a tough sell to those who benefit the most from the current money-soaked chaos. So John, Hillary, Barack, here’s some free advice.
Keep your hands out of the till, keep your genitalia in your pants (or pantsuit), and hang out with the Johnsons down the block instead of the chief lobbyist for telecom companies.
The Poobah is a featured contributor at Bring It On!
Sphere: Related Content
This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 3.0 United States License.
If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
distributorcap Feb 22
there has to be more than meets the eye to this — i find it hard to believe that Bill Keller would risk his career on the heels of Jayson Blair and Judy Miller over an innuendo an alleged sex story/ethics problem -
libhomo Feb 22
Sex or no sex, politicians should not socialize with corporate lobbyists.
daveawayfromhome Feb 22
The arguement could be made that lobbyists get a special place in line because the represent a mass of constituents. I’ll buy this arguement for lobbyists of citizens groups, even the ones I dont agree with, like the NRA (or at least the part of the NRA that isnt the Fancy Boy of the Gun Industry). But when it comes to corporations and their lobbyists, they need to wait in line just like everyone else. It wont change the fact that your congressman still wont listen to you unless you hand him a fat “campaign” check, but why make it easy for Big Money. The problem, as I see it, is in the confusion between Free Speech and Paid-for Speech: If I spend my own hard-earned money to go to Washington (or send a representative), that’s my right to do so, and I can see that as free speech. But when a Corporation spends “it’s” money, money which it figures into it’s expense budget, and which gets passed on to the consumer, then that strikes me as a whole ‘nother kettle of stinky fish. That aint “free” speech, that’s speech paid for by the consumer, even when the goal of that “speech” may not be in the interest of the consumer/customer. (Hey! There’s an idea: can we sue companies for spending money on lobbying for anti-consumer laws, when they pass the cost of that lobbying on to the consumer?)
FranIam Feb 23
This is about the stink of influence and power and it just happens to have sex attached to it.
After all- what else is sex about? Someone once told me it was romance but I rarely find that is true.
Daily Elephant Feb 26
The issue of lobbyists is one that effects both sides of the aisle–certainly there have been questions raised in regards to both the Democratic front-runners, and probably just about every other member of Congress in regards to lobbyists, special favors, and the influence of money.
The perception of corruption is easily as damaging as the real thing, and major steps need to be taken on a bi-partisan level to clean up politicians’ abuse of lobbying. I think the problem lies not with the lobbyists, who are merely doing their jobs, but with the politicians who allow it to persist.
It’s awfully hard to distinguish between “citizens’ groups” and “corporate lobbyists” as well, and quite easy for a so-called “citizens’ group” to receive funding, organization, etc. from corporations. The rules should be the same for all lobbyists, and they should be much, much more transparent and fair.
Part of fiscal discipline is knowing how to receive money honestly.