Back in 2006, when Democrats won the majority in both Houses of Congress, they did so partly on the promise of ethics reform. They campaigned heavily on the theme that the Republican Congress was mired in a Culture of Corruption
After railing for months against Congressional corruption under Republican rule, Democrats on Capitol Hill are divided on how far their proposed ethics overhaul should go.
Democratic leaders in the House and the Senate, mindful that voters
in the midterm election cited corruption as a major concern, say they
are moving quickly to finalize a package of changes for consideration
as soon as the new Congress convenes in January.
Their initial
proposals, laid out earlier this year, would prohibit members from
accepting meals, gifts or travel from lobbyists, require lobbyists to
disclose all contacts with lawmakers and bar former
lawmakers-turned-lobbyists from entering the floor of the chambers or
Congressional gymnasiums.
But
None of the measures would overhaul campaign financing or create an
independent ethics watchdog to enforce the rules. Nor would they
significantly restrict earmarks, the pet projects lawmakers can
anonymously insert into spending bills, which have figured in several
recent corruption scandals and attracted criticism from members in both
parties. The proposals would require disclosure of the sponsors of some
earmarks, but not all.
Senator Barack Obama was tasked with spearheading the Democrats ethics proposals
“The dynamic is different now,” Mr. Obama said Friday. “We control
both chambers now, so it is difficult for us to have an excuse for not
doing anything.”
He is pushing to create an independent
Congressional ethics commission and advocates broader campaign-finance
changes as well. “We need to make sure that those of us who are elected
are not dependent on a narrow spectrum of individuals to finance our
campaigns,” he said.
In February of 2006, Senator John McCain sponsored a bill "that would require lobbyists to disclose more information on their
activities, including the gifts they give lawmakers, double to two
years the waiting period before a lawmaker can take a job as a lobbyist
and require members to pay charter rates when they travel on corporate
jets." Senator McCain included the freshman Senator from Illinois whose public statements indicated he would be good candidate to count on for the bipartisan reform package. And it is clear, McCain thought that he had private assurances from the Senator that he was indeed on board.
The problem is, the Democrats had no intention of passing such sweeping reform and when push came to shove, Obama bailed.
And Senator McCain got offended and he wrote the Senator from Illinois to tell him
"I would like to apologize to you for assuming that your private
assurances to me regarding your desire to cooperate in our efforts to
negotiate bipartisan lobbying reform were sincere," McCain writes.
Obama attended a meeting with McCain and senators committed to a
bipartisan task force on ethics reform. McCain left the meeting
convinced that Obama was open to working closely together, according to
an aide....
"When you approached me and insisted that despite your leadership's
preference to use the issue to gain a political advantage in the 2006
elections, you were personally committed to achieving a result that
would reflect credit on the entire Senate and offer the country a
better example of political leadership, I concluded your professed
concern for the institution and the public interest was genuine and
admirable. Thank you for disabusing me of such notions with your
letter. ... I'm embarrassed to admit that after all these years in
politics I failed to interpret your previous assurances as typical
rhetorical gloss routinely used in political to make self-interested
partisan posturing appear more noble. Again, sorry for the confusion,
but please be assured I won't make the same mistake again."
Senator McCain is no poser when it comes to ethics reform and porkbusting
In 1996, McCain was one of five senators, and the only Republican, to
vote against the Telecommunications Act. He did it because he believed
the act gave away too much to the telecommunications companies, and
protected them from true competition. He noted that AT&T alone gave
$780,000 to Republicans and $456,000 to Democrats in the year leading
up to the vote....
In 2000, McCain ran for president and reiterated his longstanding
opposition to ethanol subsidies. Though it crippled his chances in
Iowa, he argued that ethanol was a wasteful giveaway....
In 2004, McCain launched a frontal assault on the leasing contract
the Pentagon had signed with Boeing for aerial refueling tankers.
McCain’s investigation exposed billions of dollars of waste and layers
of contracting irregularity.
In 2005, McCain led the Congressional investigation into the
behavior of the lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The investigation was
exceedingly unpleasant for Republicans, because it exposed shocking
misbehavior by important conservative activists.
In spite of all of this, Senator Obama has the audacity to question McCain's street creds in this area and in fact tired to paint him as a tool of lobbyists
Sen. Barack Obama said Saturday that the Republican presidential nominee in waiting, Sen. John McCain, has lobbyists as top aides and "many of them have been running their business on the campaign bus while they've been helping him."
The Democratic presidential hopeful also said McCain's health care
plans reflect "the agenda of the drug and insurance lobbyists, who back
his campaign and use money and influence to block real health care
reform."
Obama was put in charge of ethics reform but when an opportunity to join a bipartisan working group presented itself, Obama chose partisanship which resulted in less ethics reform.
Obama now claims to be a man who can bring the country together; someone who knows how to be bipartisan; and he claims to be a leader in this regard. But to be bipartisan means that you sometimes have to piss off your "clan"; in this case the Democratic leadership. But Obama has not shown he can do that and in fact he record shows he can not do that.
McCain, as everyone knows by now, is willing to piss off his party when it means getting something done. The very quality that made his nomination iffy, is now the very quality that holds the seeds to undermine Senator Obama.
In every case where he had the opportunity to do the bipartisan heavy lifting he refused.
Unlike Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama did not partake in the Gang of
14’s bipartisan deal on judges while Mr. McCain was one of the Gang’s leaders.
Unlike Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama has never had his own Kennedy-McCain piece of
legislation on immigration or any other issue that infuriated his base. Unlike
Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama has never had his anti-partisan equivalent to McCain’s
policy stand against torture.
Unlike Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama has never lambasted the
Secretary of Defense of his party’s own presidential administration for chronic
incompetence. Unlike Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama has never voted for environmental
legislation that angered his fellow party members. Unlike Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama
has never cussed at people in his own party for sending loads of pork to their
home district and state. Unlike Mr. McCain, Mr. Obama has never principally
voted against subsides for ethanol, even when it alienated members of his own
party in politically significant Iowa.
When the time comes, and McCain and Obama are compared in the arena of change, Obama will fall far short of the mark.
When the time comes, and McCain and Obama are compared in the arena of bipartisanhip, Obama will fall far short of the mark.
When the time comes, and McCain and Obama are compared in the arena of leadership, Obama will fall far short of the mark.
When the time comes, and McCain and Obama are compared in the arena of Foreign Policy, Obama will fall far short of the mark.
So where will Obama make his stand.
Recent Comments