In his advertisements, Sen. Obama speaks of the oil industry and their PACs, stating that they have not and will not fund his campaign. That being said, I have two questions for the Senator ...
- Considering the fact that these PACs have funded the campaigns of most of the members of both houses of Congress (you know, the people who write the laws before the president gets to sign or veto them), how do you plan to change anything that the way they do business (assuming that the entire energy price crisis is their fault).
- This one, he may be able to answere because I honestly am not aware of what the Senator has done while serving in the Senate ... As a legislator, what laws have you written, regardless of whether they passed, that would have an impact on the energy situation?
OK ... have at it.
rate
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 17
"But behind Obama's campaign rhetoric about taking on special interests lies a more complicated truth. A Globe review of Obama's campaign finance records shows that he collected hundreds of thousands of dollars from lobbyists and PACs as a state legislator in Illinois, a US senator, and a presidential aspirant.
In Obama's eight years in the Illinois Senate, from 1996 to 2004, almost two-thirds of the money he raised for his campaigns -- $296,000 of $461,000 -- came from PACs, corporate contributions, or unions, according to Illinois Board of Elections records. He tapped financial services firms, real estate developers, healthcare providers, oil companies, and many other corporate interests, the records show.
Obama's US Senate campaign committee, starting with his successful run in 2004, has collected $128,000 from lobbyists and $1.3 million from PACs, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonprofit organization that tracks money in politics. His $1.3 million from PACs represents 8 percent of what he has raised overall. Clinton's Senate committee, by comparison, has raised $3 million from PACs, 4 percent of her total amount raised, the group said.
In addition, Obama's own federal PAC, Hopefund, took in $115,000 from 56 PACs in the 2005-2006 election cycle out of $4.4 million the PAC raised, according to CQ MoneyLine, which collects Federal Election Commission data. Obama then used those PAC contributions -- including thousands from defense contractors, law firms, and the securities and insurance industries -- to build support for his presidential run by making donations to Democratic Party organizations and candidates around the country.
see: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/09/pacs_and
_lobbyists_aided_obamas_rise/
You could, if you really wanted answers, simply go to Senate Roll Call and review all Votes cast
While there you might even Searched For: oil industry
"We must act now on legislation that will hold the oil industry accountable and
help protect consumers against the impact of these increased gas prices."
~
"The Oil Industry, Gas Supply and Refinery Capacity: More Than Meets
the Eye An investigative report presented by Senator Ron Wyden June 14, 2001 "
~
GRASSLEY INTRODUCES LEGISLATION TO ENSURE GREATER USE OF BIODIESEL
Grassley introduced the bill with Senators Dick Lugar of Indiana, Dick Durbin of Illinois, Tom Carper of Delaware and Barack Obama of Illinois.
FARM STATE SENATORS INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO BOOST RENEWABLE FUELS CONSUMPTION
The cosponsors of the legislation with Grassley are Sens. Dick Lugar, of Indiana; Chuck Hagel, of Nebraska; Bill Frist, of Tennessee; Kit Bond, of Missouri; Jim Talent, of Missouri; Norm Coleman, of Minnesota; John Thune, of South Dakota; Mike DeWine, of Ohio; Jim Bunning, of Kentucky; Tom Harkin, of Iowa; Tim Johnson, of South Dakota; Byron Dorgan, of North Dakota; Ben Nelson, of Nebraska; Dick Durbin, of Illinois; Barack Obama, of Illinois; Ken Salazar, of Colorado; Mark Dayton, of Minnesota; Kent Conrad, of North Dakota; Evan Bayh, of Indiana; and Debbie Stabenow, of Michigan.
Why is it many americans pose rhetorical questions and never really wish to hear the answers ? This Black/White ~ Red/Blue states ~ Republican/Democrat crap is as ridicules as the Hatfields & McCoys fued.
Maybe I'm being overly sensitive and you simply never heard of http://www.google.com
So, if this is the case, please except my apology
Our problem comes with this statement:
Obama: I don't take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won't let them block change anymore.
It's true that Obama doesn't take money directly from oil companies, but then, no presidential, House or Senate candidate does. They can't: Corporations have been prohibited from contributing directly to federal candidates since the Tillman Act became law in 1907.
Obama has, however, accepted more than $213,000 in contributions from individuals who work for, or whose spouses work for, companies in the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That's not as much as Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has received more than $306,000 in donations from people tied to the industry, but it's still a substantial amount.
Here's a chart we made, using the OpenSecrets.org database, of contributions to Obama from individuals employed by some of the largest oil companies in the U.S. Our numbers are conservative because the database doesn't include donations of less than $200 (federal law doesn't require the reporting of donations below that amount), and we haven't included sums donated by the spouses or other immediate family members of the employees. Additionally, we haven't included donations from people who work at smaller firms in the industry.
When the Clinton campaign criticized Obama's ad, calling it "false advertising," Obama's campaign quickly noted that he didn't take money from political action committees or lobbyists.
We'd say the Obama campaign is trying to create a distinction without very much of a practical difference. Political action committee funds are pooled contributions from a company's or an organization's individual employees or members; corporate lobbyists often have a big say as to where a PAC's donations go. But a PAC can give no more than $5,000 per candidate, per election. We're not sure how a $5,000 contribution from, say, Chevron's PAC would have more influence on a candidate than, for example, the $9,500 Obama has received from Chevron employees giving money individually.
In addition, two oil industry executives are bundling money for Obama – drumming up contributions from individuals and turning them over to the campaign. George Kaiser, the chairman of Oklahoma-based Kaiser-Francis Oil Co., ranks 68th on the Forbes list of world billionaires. He's listed on Obama's Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the candidate. Robert Cavnar is president and CEO of Milagro Exploration LLC, an oil exploration and production company. He's named as a bundler in the same category as Kaiser.
We're not making any judgments about whether Obama is influenced by campaign contributions. In fact, we'd note that he singles out ExxonMobil in this ad, even though he's received more than $30,850 from individuals who work for the company. But we do think that in theory, contributions that come in volume from oil industry executives, or are bundled by them, can be every bit as influential as PAC contributions, if not more so.
Lobbyist Loopholes?
We've noted before that Obama's policy of not taking money from lobbyists is a bit of hair-splitting. It's true that he doesn't accept contributions from individuals who are registered to lobby the federal government. But he does take money from their spouses and from other individuals at firms where lobbyists work. And some of his bigger fundraisers were registered lobbyists until they signed on with the Obama campaign.
Even the campaign has acknowledged that this policy is flawed. "It isn't a perfect solution to the problem and it isn't even a perfect symbol," Obama spokesman Bill Burton has said.
Can we have an intelligent conversation without insults and accusations? i admitted that I wasn't aware of what legislation Obama had written. I was looking for answers.
Spending about 9 hours at the office with a two-hour commute each way doesn't allow me much time for investigation.
That being said ... Thank you for that information regarding question number 2. Any ideas about #1?
Thank you for your comments. I'm honestly not out to attack the man.
To be perfectly honest, I'm very unimpressed by all three of the candidates.
Maybe as the year progresses, someone will impress me so that I'm not once again voting for the "lesser of two (or more) evils".