NY Times: At Least 15 Obama Campaign Bundlers Have Active Ties To Lobbying…
You know it’s blatant when even the NYT is forced to acknowledge it’s an issue.
WASHINGTON (NY Times) — Despite a pledge not to take money from lobbyists,President Obama has relied on prominent supporters who are active in the lobbying industry to raise millions of dollars for his re-election bid.
At least 15 of Mr. Obama’s “bundlers” — supporters who contribute their own money to his campaign and solicit it from others — are involved in lobbying for Washington consulting shops or private companies. They have raised more than $5 million so far for the campaign.
Because the bundlers are not registered as lobbyists with the Senate, the Obama campaign has managed to avoid running afoul of its self-imposed ban on taking money from lobbyists.
But registered or not, the bundlers are in many ways indistinguishable from people who fit the technical definition of a lobbyist. They glide easily through the corridors of power in Washington, with a number of them hosting Mr. Obama at fund-raisers while also visiting the White House on policy matters and official business.
As both a candidate and as president, Mr. Obama has vowed to curb what he calls the corrupting influence of lobbyists, barring them not only from contributing to his campaign but also from holding jobs in his administration. While lobbyists grouse about the rules, ethics watchdogs credit the changes with raising ethical standards in Washington.
But the prevalence of major Obama fund-raisers who also work in the lobbying arena threatens to undercut the president’s ethics push, raising questions about whether the campaign’s policies square with its on-the-ground practices, some of those same watchdogs say.
“It’s a legitimate concern,” said Craig Holman, a registered lobbyist for Public Citizen, a nonpartisan ethics group in Washington. “The campaign has to draw the line somewhere, but the reality is that the president is still relying on wealthy special interests and embracing those people in his campaign.”
Take Sally Susman. An executive at the drug-maker Pfizer, she has raised more than $500,000 for the president’s re-election and helped organize a $35,800-a-ticket dinner that Mr. Obama attended in Manhattan in June. At the same time, she leads Pfizer’s powerful lobbying shop, and she has visited the White House four times since 2009 — twice on export issues.
But under the byzantine rules that govern federal lobbying, Ms. Susman has not registered with the Senate as a lobbyist.
Nor has David L. Cohen, who oversees lobbying at the Comcast Corporation and is also a member of Mr. Obama’s exclusive $500,000 bundling club.
At a June fund-raiser in the backyard of his Philadelphia home, Mr. Cohen hosted the president and some 120 guests who paid at least $10,000 each to attend; Mr. Obama called Mr. Cohen and his wife “great friends.”
As a matter of policy, Mr. Obama’s re-election campaign goes beyond what campaign law requires by refusing contributions from any “individual registered as a federal lobbyist.” Registered lobbyists are not even allowed inside his fund-raising events, and the campaign routinely returns checks from those trying to contribute.
Republican candidates, in contrast, have placed no restrictions at all on accepting lobbyists’ money. Mitt Romney had a closed-door fund-raiser just this week in Washington at the American Trucking Associations that was expected to include many K Street lobbyists.
Posted by ZIP on Thursday, October 27, 2011, at 10:59 pm | 
Tweet
Chicago way.
PIZZY, what’s blatant ?
As a matter of policy, Mr. Obama’s re-election campaign goes beyond what campaign law requires by refusing contributions from any “individual registered as a federal lobbyist.” Registered lobbyists are not even allowed inside his fund-raising events, and the campaign routinely returns checks from those trying to contribute.
Well surprise surprise surprise.
What’s that about transparency again? Kind of reminds me about the Billy Klinton line about having a clean (uncorrupted) administration. Liar, liar pants on fire.
Don’t pay it no mind! Drudge reporting that the “Pillsbury
Dough-Girl”, skank-haired Hillary, beats All pubs in poll!
Guess 2012 is over for us….. it’s either the Golden Child
or the Hag. Either will trounce any Rightie if Ron Paul
runs third-party………time to buy ammo while it’s “cheap”.
Monica Lewinsky MAY once again be a “playa” in WH
politics. Billy Jeff is drooling……….
Funny, I thought all of bs’s bundlers were czars or on the board of Solyndra or one of the other 4 failed green companies that filed bankruptcy this year.
fuster says:
October 27, 2011 at 11:38 pm
PIZZY, what’s blatant ?
As a matter of policy, Mr. Obama’s re-election campaign goes beyond what campaign law requires by refusing contributions from any “individual registered as a federal lobbyist.”
Interesting! Hmmm…..I wonder how they can screen so well for contributions from any “individual registered as a federal lobbyist” when his last campaign did not have the ability to screen contributions from Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck. For that matter, I don’t recall them refusing any of that money that came from overseas either.
Wow, Mr. Fuster,
Lots of inside information in that post. So just how long have you worked for them?
Lurve, ma cherie, the info in my post is taken straight from the NYT extract that ZIPPY put up on the board.
it’s a very good thing that you’re cultured and charming, ma petite.
a bientot.
They call the lobbyists “bundlers” now until they can come up with another name to try and bullshit people into believing that he doesn’t take contributions from anyone with an open wallet or unused credit on a card. Seems to me I recall during the campaign that so much money was coming in so fast that they either couldn’t or didn’t even try to keep track of where it came from.
Oh but it’s OK, right NYT? Because he’s just making up for lost time, engaging in “reparations” because THOSE guys who were president before he came along, got to do it in all those previous administrations before his– now he’s there, HE gets to do the same thing for HIS “peeps”……
“Registered lobbyists are not even allowed inside his fund-raising events, and the campaign routinely returns checks from those trying to contribute.”
And who is making these claims? Do we have any examples of these routinely returned checks? What about UNregistered lobbyists?
This administration is a greasy viscous slurry of lies, scumbaggery and graft as evidenced by everything from hidden transcripts to unchecked foreign contributions to arming drug cartels with assault rifles to the laughable “transparency” that is brought by DOJ rulings allowing the regime to lie about the existence of secret documents.
And now we’re supposed to believe that the mincing halfwit grifter from Chicago, who by the way is the largest recipient of Wall Street cash walking, doesn’t take lobbyist money?
Right.
Go home, SCOAMF. Nobody likes you. At all. You suck. You are near singlehandedly ruining one of the greatest countries in the history of mankind.
Ass.
The left used to have bumper stickers that said “Impeach Bush” (and worse). I suggest we get some that say, “Jail Obama”.
Wow, the NYT is catching up. Now only three years behind the news cycle.
This is a good thing. Obama is sucking out all liberals’ campaign contributions. Less to go around for the all the other Democrats to run on.
Brilliant,
let’s see, you’re NOT ‘Lobbyists’, wink, wink
you’re, you’re, oh how do they say it?
Friends? no, no one will buy that, I really despise you I just welcome your money,
Money Launderers?, oh, I think that’s illegal,
I KNOW!! laundry!! the dryer!! the clothes, they tumble, tumble, bumble, bundle
BUNDLERS!!!
yeah, No One is Smart enough to figure that out,
I LOVE changing words
Having railed against lobbyists before his election, now the Holy One is the
P O S T E R B O Y for special interests, and most of them fall into the
anti-US camp.
By the way, how much deficit was reduced by the Clinton encouraged “bake sales” in the 1990′s? The “Occupiers” might start baking to cut the deficit
and raise funds for BHO …. no self-starters in that bunch?
If MSM is starting to awaken there could finally be some serious HOPE and CHANGE in the future.
Lets pray that all who invest in Obama their money goes all up in smoke.
“That depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is.”
“The most ‘transparent’ administration in the history of American govt.”
“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it.”
The irrefutable logic and unadulterated honesty is winning me over.