White House Meets With, Tells Off And Then Blogs About Lobbyists

Nicely done, but it won’t change a thing. Money is kinda like water, it will always find a way in.

“a fairer and more representative democracy if we limited their ability to do so from special positions of privileged access within the government.”

.
Hopefully when they are put on the same playing field as everyone else in America, they are not caught down on their knees.
.
We had more than enough of that from the Clinton Administration in the Oval Office.
.
Remember the Alamo. Remember the Blue Dress!!!

Michael Scherer:
.
Where’s the blog where the Obama White House posted a blow-by-blow of the deal with PhRMA?

I’m trying to decide what award Time is going for here: the “National Embarrassment Award”? Or, is it the “Speak Truth to Power like Pravda Did, Only Less Self-Aware Award”? Maybe Scherer can tell us which it is.
.
Meanwhile, here’s just one of the noxious lobbyist-type people who are already inside the BHO admin.

Agree. What stuart said.

Yes, I agree too. This is an example of what appears to be capricious transparency. The White House meets all the time with lobbyists, with CEOs and trade group chairmen. The existence of the meetings are not disclosed, in most cases, until we get the visitor logs (which the WH should be credited for releasing). The contents of the meetings are not disclosed at all. But then they are not meeting with Eisen.

My goodness! The White House sure is taking a hard line against the culture of lobbying. This is even more draconian than serving them water!

To be fair, I believe that there are elements within the White House who legitimately want to both increase transparency and decrease the corrupting influence of lobbyists on legislation and regulation. And I think that Eisen is one of those who is sincere in those efforts. IOW, we don’t have a White House that, top to bottom, embraces the revolving door of corruption.

Unfortunately, unless the administration enforces the spirit, and not just the letter, of the rules, corruption will result. This has been most egregious with the infiltration of the Treasury Dept. and the Fed by former Goldman Sachs employees. OOH the conflict waivers are unjustifiable. OTOH, does it even matter when Ben Bernanke is being reappointed as chairman?

One i saw the word ‘publicaly’, i knew there was only one thing to do. Scroll up and check the author. And it was indeed Michael Sherer. Not surprised.

Michael Scherer:
.
It’s particularly insulting and egregious In light of this (link to Obama’s Lobbying Reform Summit Speech):

TOPIC: Ethics & Lobbying Reform
.
January 26, 2006
.
Lobbying Reform Summit Lobbying Reform Summit
National Press Club Washington, DC
.
The American people are tired of a Washington that’s only open to those with the most cash and the right connections. They’re tired of a political process where the vote you cast isn’t as important as the favors you can do. And they’re tired of trusting us with their tax dollars when they see them spent on frivolous pet projects and corporate giveaways.
.
It’s not that the games that are played in this town are new or surprising to the public. People are not naive to the existence of corruption and they know it has worn the face of both Republicans and Democrats over the years.
.
Now, there’s an argument made that somehow this is a bipartisan scandal. And the defense here is that everybody does it. Well, not everybody does it. And people shouldn’t lump together those of us who have to raise funds to run campaigns but do so in a legal and ethical way with those who invite lobbyists in to write bad legislation. Those aren’t equivalent, and we’re not being partisan by pointing that out.
.
What’s truly offensive about these scandals is that they don’t just lead to morally offensive conduct on the part of politicians; they lead to morally offensive legislation that hurts hardworking Americans.
.
Because when big oil companies are invited into the White House for secret energy meetings, it’s no wonder they end up with billions in tax breaks while Americans still struggle to fill up their gas tanks and heat their homes.
.
When a Committee Chairman negotiates a Medicare bill at the same time he’s negotiating for a job as the drug industry’s lobbyist, it’s hardly a surprise when that industry gets taxpayer-funded giveaways in the same bill that forbids seniors from bargaining for better drug prices.
.
When the people running Washington are accountable only to the special interests that fund their campaigns, of course they’ll spend your tax dollars with reckless abandon; of course they’ll load up bills with pet projects and drive us into deficit with the hope that no one will notice.
.
In 2004, over $2.1 billion was spent lobbying Congress. That amounts to over $4.8 million per Member of Congress. $4.8 million per member so that oil companies can still run our energy policy and pharmaceutical companies can still raise our drug prices and special interests can still waste our tax dollars on pet projects.
.
This is the bigger story here, and this is why the recent scandals have shaken the American people’s faith in a government that will look out for their interests and uphold their values.
.
See, one of the reasons why lobbyists like Abramoff and their allies in Congress have been able to manipulate the system is because most of their backroom deals are done in secret. Just the other day, we heard that because of pressure from health care industry lobbyists, Republican negotiators met behind closed doors and changed a budget bill to provide a $22 billion giveaway to HMOs — $22 billion that would come right out of the pockets of American taxpayers. But of course, no one knew about the change until much later, and no lawmaker would admit to making it.
.
This is an outrage…

Yes, it certainly is “an outrage” when backroom deals are made at secret White House meetings in which billions of dollars are given away to industry.
.
Yes, it is.

Alas, too true. (Though you also misspelled my name.)

Eisen explains why he told the lobbyists to their face that they’re participation in appointed government
.
them lobbyists got served–publicly
.
And you get paid to put words on paper?

“…he told the lobbyists to their face that they’re participation in appointed government was bad for America.”

Care to rethink that contraction, MS? “ They are participation in appointed government was bad for America?” Really?

C-

Or the blog of the deal with the auto workers union or SEIU and its dozens of visits to the WH.

SZ: How many lobbyist were given an exemption to serve in the WH Admininistration?

Michael – thanks for bringing an interesting blog post to my attention. And thanks for taking the amateur grammarians in good sport.