How Obama Rid Washington of Special Interest Lobbyists, Except for All the Special Interest Lobbyists

President Barack Obama's weekly radio address over the weekend was an attack on the Supreme Court's 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. the FEC. The second paragraph alone is well worth the price of admission. Some lines, with additional annotations:

In my first year in office, we pushed back on that power by implementing historic reforms to get rid of the influence of those special interests.

Obama's lobbying reforms, combined with an activist year of federal lawmaking, helped produce a record year for lobbying. The only way that the phrase "to get rid of" here is not a lie is if you read it as an aspirational intent, and take the president at his word.

On my first day in office, we closed the revolving door between lobbying firms and the government so that no one in my administration would make decisions based on the interests of former or future employers.  

If that were true, former Raytheon lobbyist William J. Lynn wouldn't be deputy defense secretary, former National Partnership for Women and Families lobbyist Jocelyn Frye would not be director of policy and projects in the Office of the First Lady, former National Council of La Raza lobbyist Cecilia Muñoz wouild not be Obama's director of intergovernmental affairs, and former Goldman Sachs lobbyist Mark Patterson would not be Timothy Geithner's chief of staff, for starters. As the St. Petersburg Times' valuable PolitiFact.com puts it, "we have concluded that Obama has broken this promise."

We imposed tough restrictions to prevent funds for our recovery from lining the pockets of the well-connected, instead of creating jobs for Americans.

The biggest single national political donor in the country during the 2007-08 election cycle, according to OpenSecrets.org, was the overwhelmingly Democrat-supporting teachers union the National Education Association. What category of worker was the biggest single beneficiary of stimulus spending? Public school teachers. Who, according to Vice President Joe Biden, accounted for 325,000 of the first 640,000 jobs "created or saved." While it's true that teachers are Americans (even my brother), in the vast majority of these cases, the jobs in question weren't "created," just maintained, since it is nearly impossible to fire public school teachers.

As for other "well-connected" types, the stimulus was filled with what Pro Publica called "earmarks by any other name," what U.S. News termed as "pork," and which by any nomenclature involves legislators directing money toward favored projects based on the recommendations of people they know best. I don't think you saw many unused airports not named after 17-term congressmen receiving $800,000 in stimulus funds to pay for an alternate runway. And for what it's worth, the region-by-region correlation between stimulus spending and joblessness has been far weaker than the correlation between stimulus spending and voter enthusiasm for Barack Obama.

Beyond exaggerating the impact of his good-government reforms, the president cranked up the alarm-o-meter on the ruling itself to 11:

I can't think of anything more devastating to the public interest. [...]

A hundred years ago, one of the great Republican Presidents, Teddy Roosevelt, fought to limit special interest spending and influence over American political campaigns and warned of the impact of unbridled, corporate spending. His message rings as true as ever today, in this age of mass communications, when the decks are too often stacked against ordinary Americans.  And as long as I'm your President, I'll never stop fighting to make sure that the most powerful voice in Washington belongs to you.

Actually, in this age of niche communications, which has replaced Mass (thank God), it's never been more easy for millions of ordinary Americans to bundle their money together in enthusiastic swarms, creating enormous impact on the political process. Now those people will be legally cleared to communicate political messages during the run-up to elections, without having to negotiate a tangle of federal laws. Will they be drowned out by Big Corporate?

Well let me tell you a fable. Once upon a time, the biggest special interests of a certain hated industry worked for nearly a year in the shadowy back rooms of the Beltway, crafting an overhaul of their industry with the most powerful politicians on the planet. They flooded the political process with money, outspending opponents of their corporatist plan by 5 to 1. The party in power, for the first time since 1968, had a filibuster-proof majority in the U.S. Senate, and members who were itching to pass the legislation. Yet these special interests lost. Why? For one crucial reason: Ordinary Americans decided they didn't like it, and would punish those who did at the ballot box. Turns out that the people can only be drowned out for so long.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ed||

    Remember when calling the president a liar made the earth stand still, sheep spontaneously abort and frogs rain from the sky? Good times.

  • PIRS||

    I am actually very thankful to Rep. Joe Wilson. When he yelled "You lie" he only said what most Americans were already thinking. Having an elected official say it out loud helped others feel less afraid to say the same thing in public. It helped pop the bubble of official sanctimony.

  • ||

    amen.

  • ||

    It is interesting, is it not, that Congress chose to make calling the President a liar on the floor into a censurable offense, while it did not make actually lying into one.

  • PIRS||

    How could they effectively run for office if they did?

  • ||

    +1

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    Ordinary Americans decided they didn't like it, and would punish those who did at the ballot box.

    I hope you're not talking about that astroturf movement here, Matt. It was so fake, and as soon as the President of the United States mobilizes his grassroots organizers against them, we'll just see whose message prevails!

  • Barack Hussein Obama||

    This is also Bush's fault.

  • ||

    Great stuff, Matt. I reckon this is all objectively true, not that a dyed in the wool Dem won't gett shirty about it.

  • Atanarjuat||

    Oddly, they never show up on these kinds of posts.

  • Ian ||

    Mr. Welch,
    EXCELLENT post!!! The way obama is lying, pure out-and-out lying, is utterly disgusting. I think you just bitch-slapped the president.

  • Jeffersonian||

    If a banker or Wall Street grandee pumped out bullshit like this, Obama would be demanding he be put behind bars. But politics seems to be the only field where fraud is not only tolerated, but encouraged.

  • ||

    We could hope the FCC applied "truth in advertising" rules to politicos.
    But then I could hope for a pony, too.

  • Binky||

    And as long as I'm your President, I'll never stop fighting to make sure that the most powerful voice in Washington belongs to you.

    Wow, Mr. President -- to me?

  • PIRS||

    Can I sell my share of it?

  • ||

    I think he was addressing the UAW in that part.

  • PIRS||

    Or perhaps SEIU/ACORN. Union, certainly we can at least agree on that.

  • Chinny Chin Chin||

    Only if you're ordinary.

    If you're special in any way, you're screwed.

  • ||

    Matt Welch criticizes the Messiah! Matt Welch is Racist!

  • Jeffersonian||

    Nonsense. Everyone knows Matt simply adores articulate, light-skinned Negros who bathe regularly.

  • ||

    It took you long enough, Matt. What, after the twenty or thirtiest lie?

  • PIRS||

    After Brown won Chappaquiddick Ted’s former seat even the most diehard Obama worshipers began to question His saintliness.

  • ComradeZero||

    Fat chance, they're still pining for "Hang 'Em High" Cokely.

  • ||

    Hey, if you're going to lie, you may as well tell a bunch of them.

  • Bradley||

    This was a brilliant rant.

  • ¢||

    If a banker or Wall Street grandee pumped out bullshit like this, Obama would be demanding he be put behind bars.

    Then he'd wink and give him a billion dollars.

  • ||

    What I'm wondering is when Obama and his staff are going to realize that even his moronic "HOPE! CHANGE!" followers are starting to sour on him. What does he do then? Stop lying?

    I really, really didn't think Obama was going to be a contender for most inept President. But he is.

  • ||

    I have to admit that I'm surpirsed by just how fucking awful of a president he is.

    I thought, before the election, that he would possibly be at least a decent leader, never mind his nutty political ideas, but he might be a guy who could at least rouse some optimism in the public and demonstrate true honest-to-god leadership. Hell, he might even have some integrity.

    Dear GOD was I wrong.

  • EscapedWestOfTheBigMuddy||

    Epi, each and every one finds some way to be worse than the last one.

    I just don't get it. I don't see how it can be done nor understand how it can continue, but it's really dragging my natural optimism down.

  • ||

    It's not just that they're worse; they're, like, exponentially worse. It's insane. You'd think they'd get asymptotic because there is less and less worse to expand into, but they don't.

  • ||

    i broke my google key, what's asymptotic mean?

  • ||

    This.

  • ||

    ooh... you shoulda just said i was too dumb to understand. but i do get what you were saying now. thanks anyways!

    gotta go get another screwdriver...

  • ||

  • ||

    It would seemthat, to no surprise, the left wing radical DEM approved radio network is now belly-up in bankruptcy. I guess because the big corporations only sponsor the REP party. OR, mayb we are just tired of listening to them. Best move for Obama is to separate himself from the DEM and turn himself into an IND. Media can't ignore a seated PRES. It was the IND's that put him in there. Time to run with what got you there.

  • Bradley||

    WHAT

  • Silentz||

    rrriiiiigghhtt...because it's his title that we don't like, not his insane policies or anything...

  • Paco Nacho||

    DOES not COMPUTE.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement