# "Lobbyists Won't Find A Job in My White House!" **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 29, 2009, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573 "2009-01-29T16:49:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2009, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/61 "2009-01-29T23:28:33Z")
Actually, that’s what I took him to mean in the first place. I certainly didn’t think he meant that anyone who had publicly advocated for a group or a cause fit his description. To my ear, “lobbyist” pretty much means someone who strives to influence laws for the financial gain of their employer. ---
**Author:** ![RaftPeople](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@RaftPeople](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RaftPeople)\ **Post date:** [January 29, 2009, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/62 "2009-01-29T23:45:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK. Now factor in that I was similarly bugged by Bush 41’s “Read my lips” broken pledge. Done. That’s what I was wondering was whether that type of situation was an issure regardless of party. ---
**Author:** ![Frylock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ce7236/32.png) [@Frylock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frylock)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/63 "2009-01-30T00:16:39Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Obama should man up and say, “Yes, I said that - and now I have learned that it was unworkable.” He didn’t _quite_ do this, but its already been pointed out upthread that during the campaign, when asked about this by reporters, he clarified (ahem) that the thrust of his comment was supposed to be that lobbyists won’t _dominate_ his administration. -FrL- ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/64 "2009-01-30T00:49:05Z")
This is the “change” we were promised-NOT!:smack::smack: ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/65 "2009-01-30T01:46:39Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > This is the “change” we were promised-NOT!:smack::smack: That was an insightful and well thought out post. NOT! :smack::smack::smack: On topic: Bricker, I don’t see it as Obama not admitting he was wrong, I see it as Obama having realistic goals. So far as the majority of his rhetoric and the EO goes he appears to be doing an outstanding job. If he overstated things at one of the hundreds of campaign outings he certainly rectified that by later clarifying his position. I really see this as a non issue. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/66 "2009-01-30T02:16:31Z")
Nine days! How long, oh Lord, how _long_!? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/67 "2009-01-30T03:03:26Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I’d submit that there are at least three politically-neutral reasons to distinguish corporate lobbyists from ACLU lobbyists (and the like). > > First, the interests represented by corporate lobbyists stand to financially gain from favorable government policies, which creates a feedback loop in which more favorable policies lead to more lobbying money which leads to more favorable policies. We’ve seen that recently with the financial bailout. For obvious reasons, that doesn’t exist with the ACLU. In fact, the reverse is usually true. If the ACLU wins an issue–like ending torture–they lose a very successful means of fundraising. > > Second, corporate lobbyists have a more distorting effect than the Human Rights Campaign and similar organizations because of the source of their funds. Suppose I own an oil well and can afford to hire myself a lobbyist. I give him $10,000 from my oil profits to convince Congress not to institute a carbon tax. Suppose that the Sierra Club gets 1,000 concerned citizens to donate $10, and gives $10,000 to their lobbyist to argue for a carbon tax. Consequently, one man’s voice is having the same lobbying effect as 100 peoples’. > > Finally, part of the concern with lobbyists is the dynamic in which people rotate from high-pay lobbying jobs to government jobs and back. It makes them more beholden to the lobbying interest while in the government job, because they want the lucrative lobbyist job back when they get out. That situation is much worse with corporate lobbyists because the positions pay much much more. I can tell you that no one is working as an NRDC lobbyist for the cash. > > So if one’s goal is to limit the undue influence of lobbyists, it makes sense to treat corporate lobbyists more strictly than othes. Nearly all of what you say applies to unions as well - should we expect similar treatment of their lobbyists under the law? Recall that when the corporate heads of the Big three lobbied Congress for bailout funds, the head of the UAW was right next to them. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/68 "2009-01-30T03:04:49Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > How long, oh Lord, how _long_! An exclamation I hear frequently, though not in this particular context. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![waterj2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/858c86/32.png) [@waterj2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/waterj2)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 3:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/69 "2009-01-30T03:16:11Z")
I’ll just link to [this nifty site](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/) where the guys from [politifact.com](http://politifact.com) (a fact-checking site run by the St. Petersburg Times) are keeping track of about 500 campaign promises Obama made. They rate this one as a compromise, and might downgrade it to broken depending on the number of waivers. Incidentally, they gave him his first broken promise earlier today, as he signed the Ledbetter Fair Trade Act (promise kept) without posting the text on the White House web page for comment for five days. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/70 "2009-01-30T04:24:12Z")
> [@Mr.Moto](#): > > Nearly all of what you say applies to unions as well - should we expect similar treatment of their lobbyists under the law? If what I said applies to them, then yes. It seems to me that unions are much more like the ACLU than like the oil lobby on the second factor at least. But if the other two are also true of unions, then I see no reason to treat unions differently. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 12:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/71 "2009-01-30T12:03:43Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > If what I said applies to them, then yes. It seems to me that unions are much more like the ACLU than like the oil lobby on the second factor at least. But if the other two are also true of unions, then I see no reason to treat unions differently. It seems to me the problem is simply influence out of proportion to their numbers – this is why Obama the candidate contrasted lobbyists with “the people.” ---
**Author:** ![Pashnish\_Ewing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@Pashnish\_Ewing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pashnish_Ewing)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/72 "2009-01-30T12:32:45Z")
I can’t say I’ve ever been upset with a politician who didn’t keep a particular promise that I didn’t think was a good idea in the first place. I mean, if Bush43 had promised to outlaw abortion completely, won the election, and then didn’t follow through - I can’t imagine i would have started a GD or Pit thread about it. (not saying that happened, just an example) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/73 "2009-01-30T13:00:05Z")
> [@Pashnish\_Ewing](#): > > I can’t say I’ve ever been upset with a politician who didn’t keep a particular promise that I didn’t think was a good idea in the first place. I mean, if Bush43 had promised to outlaw abortion completely, won the election, and then didn’t follow through - I can’t imagine i would have started a GD or Pit thread about it. > > (not saying that happened, just an example) Wow, that sure is fascinating. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/74 "2009-01-30T13:22:35Z")
> [@waterj2](#): > > I’ll just link to [this nifty site](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/) where the guys from [politifact.com](http://politifact.com) (a fact-checking site run by the St. Petersburg Times) are keeping track of about 500 campaign promises Obama made. An interesting site, although perhaps a little hard to take seriously - no. 34 mentions that Obama promised to enforce pay-as-you-go for the federal government. It is difficult to understand how tripling the deficit in your first days as President counts as “no action” on this. It seems to be emerging that he meant all the promises about spending money. He didn’t mean any of the ones about tax cuts or government reform. I will assume that he also meant the ones about raising taxes. It might be interesting to run thru the list of [all promises](http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/promises/) and identify the ones he didn’t mean, the ones he used to mean but doesn’t anymore, and the ones he should keep. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Discordia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Discordia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Discordia)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/75 "2009-01-30T13:36:33Z")
What a tedious, pathetic 8 years this will be. ---
**Author:** ![Sitnam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Sitnam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sitnam)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/76 "2009-01-30T14:11:47Z")
No worse then the last 8. ---
**Author:** ![Discordia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Discordia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Discordia)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/77 "2009-01-30T14:18:22Z")
Unless Obama manages to be worse than Bush (which would take a heckuva effort), that isn’t possible. ETA: Referring to the complaining. The complaints about Bush at least usually weren’t so silly and desperate. Not that they wouldn’t have been if he wasn’t such a terrible President. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 4:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/78 "2009-01-30T16:35:42Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It seems to me the problem is simply influence out of proportion to their numbers – this is why Obama the candidate contrasted lobbyists with “the people.” Disproportionate influence is the main problem, but I think the other two problems I identified are also important. And the degree of the problem also matters. Not everyone who pays fees to a union supports their lobbying goals. But a far greater percentage of people who buy gas oppose the lobbying efforts of the oil industry. The point I was making was that there are rational, politically neutral reasons for targeting corporate lobbyists and caring less about others. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/79 "2009-01-30T16:54:32Z")
take a look: -Leon panetta (CIA): WTF is Obama thinking?? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [January 30, 2009, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573/80 "2009-01-30T16:58:00Z")
> [@Discordia](#): > > ETA: Referring to the complaining. The complaints about Bush at least usually weren’t so silly and desperate. If a candidate runs as a squeaky-clean outsider, and promises to govern as a squeaky-clean outsider, and then almost immediately breaks a promise to govern as a squeaky-clean outsider, it takes several shots of Flavor-aid before calling him on it sounds either silly or desperate. YMMV. For those who expected Obama to get a pass on everything he does, it definitely will. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/lobbyists-wont-find-a-job-in-my-white-house/483573.md?page=5)