LOBBYIST$

see revolving doorcapt 619see LOBBYIST 2

=TOOLsopen secrets<a href="http://www.wholobbies.us">http://www.wholobbies.us</a>/client/THALES%20INCthis town: 1st bizmen 1798 NY; Va colony acc to Kaiser; in 60's biz avoid DCnow retaines can be 50K/mo 162400 plus fmr congr, 300 registered fed, many other "sr advisors"
abramoff used to get ppl by just suggesting a gig after retirement/loss 163 they'd think of stuff he cd not===

see LOBBYIST2 3/14

---

financial lobbying

<table class="lobbyFirm" style="border-collapse: collapse; border-spacing: 0px; margin: 0px 0px 1.33em; line-height: 20.2124996185303px;"><tbody style="border-top-width: 1px; border-top-style: solid; border-top-color: rgb(204, 204, 204);"><tr><td class="healthNo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">20 clients</td><td class="healthInfo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Clark Lytle & Geduldig</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $1.26 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://www.clarklytlegeduldig.com/sam-geduldig.php" title="Sam Geduldig" style="text-decoration: none;">Sam Geduldig</a> is former political director for House Minority Leader John Boehner.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included American Bankers Association, PricewaterhouseCoopers, and Ernst & Young.</li>

</ul>

</td></tr><tr><td class="healthNo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">19 clients</td><td class="healthInfo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $3.42 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://www.bhfs.com/People/mlevy" title="Michael Levy" style="text-decoration: none;">Michael Levy</a> is former senior aide to then-Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included Electronic Payments Association, Western Union, Ace Cash Express.</li>

</ul>

</td></tr><tr><td class="healthNo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">18 clients</td><td class="healthInfo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Ogilvy Government Relations</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $6.78 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://www.ogilvygr.com/who/aguillen.cfm" title="Dean Aguillen" style="text-decoration: none;">Dean Aguillen</a> is former senior adviser to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included Constellation Energy, American Petroleum Institute, Electric Power Supply Association.</li>

</ul>

</td></tr><tr><td class="healthNo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">17 clients</td><td class="healthInfo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Peck, Madigan, Jones & Stewart, Inc.</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $4.50 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://jmp-dc.com/professionals/jones.html" title="Jonathon Jones" style="text-decoration: none;">Jonathon Jones</a> is ex-chief of staff to Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Harley-Davidson Financial Services, and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association.</li>

</ul>

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Rich Feuer Group</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $3.85 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://rfgdc.com/index.php?to=information" title="Mitchell Feuer" style="text-decoration: none;">Mitchell Feuer</a> is former counsel to Senate Banking Committee.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included Goldman Sachs Group Inc., Barclays, and Citigroup Management Corporation.</li>

</ul>

</td></tr><tr><td class="healthNo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">15 clients</td><td class="healthInfo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Williams & Jensen, PLLC</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $2.46 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://www.williamsandjensen.com/principals.asp?id=13" title="Joel Oswald" style="text-decoration: none;">Joel Oswald</a> is former Republican staffer on Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee’s securities and investment subcommittee.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included Managed Funds Association, TD Ameritrade, and The Vanguard Group.</li>

</ul>

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Quinn Gillespie & Associates, LLC</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $3.75 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,107796,00.html" title="Jack Quinn" style="text-decoration: none;">Jack Quinn</a> is former White House counsel to President Bill Clinton, later won a pardon for financial fugitive Marc Rich.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included BlackRock, Inc., Royal Caribbean Cruises Ltd, and MetLife.</li>

</ul>

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Elmendorf Strategies, LLC</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $1.49 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;"><a href="http://www.elmendorfstrategies.com/professionals.php" title="Steve Elmendorf" style="text-decoration: none;">Steve Elmendorf</a> served as a senior advisor to former House Democratic Leader Dick Gephardt.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included Ford Motor Co., Ernst & Young LLP, and TIAA-CREF.</li>

</ul>

</td></tr><tr><td class="healthNo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">14 clients</td><td class="healthInfo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Venable LLP</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $1.50 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://www.venable.com/william-j-donovan/" title="William Donovan" style="text-decoration: none;">William Donovan</a> is former chief lobbyist for National Association of Federal Credit Unions and has lobbied on financial issues since 1976.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included ING Bank, FSB, Hilton and Direct Marketing Association.</li>

</ul>

</td></tr><tr><td class="healthNo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">13 clients</td><td class="healthInfo" style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">

<h2 style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; line-height: 1.33em; letter-spacing: -0.047em;">Smith-Free Group</h2>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Billed clients $1.61 million</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Firm’s <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_summary.php?id=21668" title="Andrew Barbour" style="text-decoration: none;">Andrew Barbour</a> is former lobbyist for Financial Services Roundtable and former aide to Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich.</li>

<li style=" margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border: 0px;">Clients included Financial Services Roundtable, MasterCard Worldwide, and Bank of America.</li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

==

kpfa 7/18 mitch financ has 300 lobbyists paid 2 mil/DAY?!

==

Top 10 Recipients of Contributions from Lobbyists in 2013

<table class="google-visualization-table-table" cellspacing="0" style="border-spacing: 0px; cursor: default; margin: 0px; width: 450px;"><tbody style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px; background-color: transparent;"><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-head" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px; font-weight: bold; background-image: linear-gradient(rgb(255, 255, 255) 0%, rgb(249, 250, 253) 30%, rgb(238, 242, 247) 60%, rgb(228, 233, 244) 100%); text-align: center; background-position: initial initial; background-repeat: initial initial;"><td class="google-visualization-table-th-webkit google-visualization-table-sorthdr" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px; vertical-align: middle; cursor: pointer; background-image: linear-gradient(rgb(255, 255, 255) 0%, rgb(249, 250, 253) 30%, rgb(238, 242, 247) 60%, rgb(228, 233, 244) 100%);">Member </td><td class="google-visualization-table-th-webkit google-visualization-table-sorthdr" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px; vertical-align: middle; cursor: pointer; background-image: linear-gradient(rgb(255, 255, 255) 0%, rgb(249, 250, 253) 30%, rgb(238, 242, 247) 60%, rgb(228, 233, 244) 100%);">Amount </td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-even" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$183,340</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-odd" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$125,094</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-even" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. Mark Pryor (D-Ark.)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$85,100</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-odd" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$84,700</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-even" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. Mark Udall (D-Colo.)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$79,850</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-odd" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. Kay Hagan (D-N.C.)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$70,300</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-even" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$67,930</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-odd" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px; background-color: rgb(250, 250, 250);"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. Mark Begich (D-Alaska)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$54,350</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-even" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px;"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$53,100</td></tr><tr class="google-visualization-table-tr-odd google-visualization-table-tr-sel" style=" margin: 0px; vertical-align: middle; padding: 2px; background-color: rgb(214, 233, 248);"><td class="google-visualization-table-td" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238);">Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas)</td><td class="google-visualization-table-td google-visualization-table-td-number" style="margin: 0px; padding: 2px 3px; vertical-align: middle; border: 1px solid rgb(238, 238, 238); text-align: right; white-space: nowrap;">$51,700</td></tr></tbody></table>

</div>

<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/07/top-recipients-of-lobbyists-cash-2013-an-opensecrets-analysis.html">http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/07/top-recipients-of-lobbyists-cash-2013-an-opensecrets-analysis.html</a>

===

corp profits bigger share of gnp since 29

since merger exxon spent most on direct lobbty after GE and PG&E 625 coll

after downgrade S&P said exxon one of 4  US co to have AAA

===

financial lobby writing rules

cpr:

<div class="asset-body">Banking industry lobbyists helped members of the <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/cmteprofiles/overview.php?cmteid=H05&cmte=HFIN&congno=112&chamber=H">House Financial Services Committee</a> craft a bill loosening regulators' oversight of various types of trading, with lobbyists from <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000071&cycle=2012">Citibank</a> playing a large role in the process, according to a report in today's <a target="_blank" href="http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/05/23/banks-lobbyists-help-in-drafting-financial-bills/">New York Times</a>. Seventy-one of the 80 lines in a bill recently approved by the panel were written with the assistance of lobbyists for major banks, said the report, which is based on emails reviewed by the paper's reporters; two paragraphs were copied from the lobbyists nearly word-for-word.

According to Center for Responsive Politics data, in the first quarter of 2013, members of that committee received more than $1.3 million in donations to their campaigns and leadership PACs from the securities and investment industry and commercial banks.

</div>

<div>

The donations came from PACs representing the financial firms, individuals they employ and lobbyists who represent the firms. By far the largest source of cash from the two industries was the <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000262">Investment Company Institute</a>, a trade association representing Wall Street firms. The ICI gave at least $129,000 to members of the House Financial Services Committee. Other trade groups representing banks and investment firms, including the <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000087">American Bankers Association</a> and the <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000000261">Independent Community Bankers of America</a>, were also major contributors.

</div>

<div>Among individual corporations, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/summary.php?id=D000020995">UBS</a> was the top donor to the committee's members, contributing $88,000 so far this year.

The banking and securities and investment industries together contributed about the same amount overall to members of the committee in the first quarter of 2011 as in the first three months of 2013 -- roughly $1.3 million. But the commercial banking industry -- including Citigroup -- gave substantially more this time around, while the securities industry gave less.

Banking industry companies increased their contributions in 2013 to $640,286, from $497,169 in early 2011. Citigroup, in particular, jumped from $19,500 in donations to committee members to $39,500. UBS went from $64,250 to $88,000. Wells Fargo also opened its checkbook a little wider this year, giving $80,000, compared with $31,250 in 2011.

The ABA gave $90,750 in the first quarter of 2013, up from $58,650 in the comparable period in 2011.

Although the New York Times article cites a growing friendliness between the banking industry and congressional Democrats, the money going to the members of the committee this year overwhelmingly tilted towards Republicans. Seventy percent of the $1.3 million went to GOP lawmakers. Republicans control the House, and thus the committee, and it is not unusual to see the majority party pick up more cash from donors, regardless of the topic or committee.</div>

<div>

</div>

<div>The top recipient of cash from the two industries so far this year is Rep. <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00024922&cycle=2012">Jeb Hensarling</a> (R-Texas), the chairman of the committee, who has picked up $140,400. The top Democrat on the committee, Rep. <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00006690&cycle=2012">Maxine Waters</a> (D-Calif.), who has criticized the legislation in question, received only $6,000.</div>

<div>

<div>The bill, the <a target="_blank" href="http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr992">Swaps Regulatory Improvement Act</a> (H.R. 992), was sponsored by committee member <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00031104&cycle=2012">Randy Hultgren</a> (R-Ill.), who has received $50,100 from commercial banks and the securities and investment industry, the majority of which came from individuals rather than PACs. One of his co-sponsors, who defended the legislation to the Times, is Rep. <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00029070&cycle=2012">Jim Himes </a>(D-Conn.) who took in a similar amount from the two industries -- about $47,700.

</div>

<div>According to FEC records, Citigroup's PAC gave Hultgren's campaign committee $2,000. And it gave Himes' campaign $1,000 and his leadership PAC, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/lookup2.php?strID=C00494112">Jobs and Innovation Matter PAC</a> (JIM PAC) another $2,500. The donations to Hultgren, JIM PAC and a $5,000 donation to Hensarling's leadership PAC were all made on March 26.

The panel passed the bill this month despite objections from the Treasury Department. It awaits action in the full House

</div>

</div>

---

cpr 2013 lobby finance real estate insurance:

Total number of lobbyists: 1,757

<table class="datadisplay" id="sector_summary"><thead><tr><th class="data">Industry</th><th class="data">No. of Lobbyists</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr class="rowTint"><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F11&year=2013">Accountants</a></td><td class="number">113</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F03&year=2013">Commercial Banks</a></td><td class="number">312</td></tr><tr class="rowTint"><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F05&year=2013">Credit Unions</a></td><td class="number">73</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F06&year=2013">Finance/Credit Companies</a></td><td class="number">233</td></tr><tr class="rowTint"><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F09&year=2013">Insurance</a></td><td class="number">691</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F13&year=2013">Misc Finance</a></td><td class="number">293</td></tr><tr class="rowTint"><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F10&year=2013">Real Estate</a></td><td class="number">422</td></tr><tr><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F04&year=2013">Savings & Loans</a></td><td class="number">10</td></tr><tr class="rowTint"><td><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/indusclient.php?id=F07&year=2013">Securities & Investment</a></td><td class="number">554</td></tr></tbody></table>

===

In this report, we will show that much of the decline in lobbying activity is not a decline at all, but rather the side effect of lobbyists and lobbying firms taking advantage of a feature of the law which allows them to continue influencing policy from "behind the scenes." By working as policy advisors and in other "nonlobbyist" positions, former lobbyists can keep their current jobs but escape the consequences of being a registered lobbyist, leading people in and out of lobbying to suggest that those consequences act as a deterrent to transparency...

http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2013/03/lobbyists-2012-out-of-the-game-or-u.html

===

The Big Five (oil?) companies are on track to make over $100 billion in profits this year, while they collect $2.4 billion in annual tax breaks. Meanwhile, they are producing 5 percent less oil than the third quarter last year. The Big Five has spent more than $100 million lobbying Congress since 2011, and millions on campaign contributions.

<a href="http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/11/02/1129671/chevron-earns-19-billion-profit-so-far-this-year-spending-millions-to-elect-house-gop/">http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2012/11/02/1129671/chevron-earns-19-billion-profit-so-far-this-year-spending-millions-to-elect-house-gop/</a>

---

2012 coventions:

DNC Convention Strategies

In October 2011, a new <a href="http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/national-convention-firm-announces-expanded-democratic-team-131052568.html">start-up business was born</a>, its corporate lobbyist parents naming it <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/index.php">DNC Convention Strategies</a>.

"We help our clients get the most bang for their convention buck," DNC Convention Strategies <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/whatWeDo.php">explains on its website</a>. "Whether your goal is to connect with important decision makers, get the voters and the media to focus on your agenda, or simply to host a great event, we'll help you maximize the impact of your investment."

This isn't their first time around the block, either.

"In 2008, we worked with dozens of Fortune 50 companies, national trade associations, non-profit groups, top political officials, and state delegations," <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/whatWeDo.php">the website goes on to proclaim</a>. "We managed events ranging from 30 person, high end dinners to 1,000+ person extravaganzas. Our team members have produced some of the most memorable convention events going back to as early as 1984."

DNC Convention Strategies is the child of <a href="http://conventions2012.com/">Conventions 2012, LLC</a>, which was <a href="http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inq_doc_number=L11000078426&inq_came_from=NAMFWD&cor_web_names_seq_number=0000&names_name_ind=&names_cor_number=&names_name_seq=&names_name_ind=&names_comp_name=CONVENTIONS2012&names_filing_type=">registered in Florida in July 2011</a>, according to the Florida Department of State's Division of Corporations. Its brother, born to the same mother, is <a href="http://gopconventionstrategies.com/">GOP Convention Strategies</a>. One of the Managers of this new-fangled LLC is ROQ Strategies, LLC, according to the <a href="http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inq_doc_number=L11000078426&inq_came_from=NAMFWD&cor_web_names_seq_number=0000&names_name_ind=&names_cor_number=&names_name_seq=&names_name_ind=&names_comp_name=CONVENTIONS2012&names_filing_type=">incorporation form</a>.

<a href="http://www.sunbiz.org/scripts/cordet.exe?action=DETFIL&inq_doc_number=L11000078426&inq_came_from=NAMFWD&cor_web_names_seq_number=0000&names_name_ind=&names_cor_number=&names_name_seq=&names_name_ind=&names_comp_name=CONVENTIONS2012&names_filing_type=">ROQ</a> and <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/contact.php">DNC Convention Strategies</a> share the same address: 400 North Capitol St., Ste. 382B in Washington, DC. The glue that binds them together is veteran lobbyist <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=Henry%2C%20Darrell&id=Y0000019557L&year=2012">Darrell Henry</a>, who's both the <a href="http://www.roqstrategies.com/bio.html">Founder and Principal of ROQ</a> and <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/whoWeAre.php">one of eight team members </a>of DNC Convention Strategies. Among other things, Henry served as a <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=Y0000019557L&year=2005">lobbyist for the American Gas Association</a> from 2000-2005.

"While it violates the rules for a corporation to host a party honoring a member of Congress, lobbyists have evaded this rule by setting up front groups, like GOP Convention Strategies and DNC Convention Strategies to do their bidding," Craig Holman of Public Citizen's Congress Watch told TruthOut.

Other important, well-connected DNC Convention Strategies <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/whoWeAre.php">lobbyist luminaries</a> include Mark Lindsay, Anne Fabry, Michael Lewan and LeeAnn Petersen.

Lindsay is an important Beltway power broker, having served on the <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_summary.php?id=70843">Obama Transition Team</a>, turning that position into a full-time job as a corporate lobbyist, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=Y0000038230L&year=2009">primarily for the pharmaceutical industry</a> for a lobbying firm of his creation, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?id=F27455&year=2009">White House Consulting, Inc</a>.

He was also the <a href="http://www.sethhettena.com/2010/former-clinton-official-mark-lindsay-is-educating-congres-on-minared-star/">center of a scandal</a> surrounding time he spent lobbying for a $1.4 billion contract awarded to supply jet fuel to the Manas Airbase in Kyrgyzstan. The company he was lobbying for, Mina Corp/Red Star, was under Congressional investigation for having sent "payments to the family of a corrupt former Kyrgyz president," <a href="http://www.sethhettena.com/2010/former-clinton-official-mark-lindsay-is-educating-congres-on-minared-star/">according to a story</a> by investigative reporter Seth Hettena.

<a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/fabry.php">Fabry</a> is a <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_summary.php?id=16425">long-time corporate lobbyist and Democratic Party insider</a>, having served in the <a href="http://www.martindale.com/Anne-Saunders-Fabry/46059584-lawyer.htm">Finance Division of the Democratic National Committee </a>(DNC) in the 1988, 1992, 1996 and 2000 presidential campaigns. She also is the former <a href="http://www.martindale.com/Anne-Saunders-Fabry/46059584-lawyer.htm">President</a> of the <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Progressive_Policy_Institute">Progressive Policy Institute</a> (PPI), the think-tank wing of the <a href="http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/Democratic_Leadership_Council">Democratic Leadership Council</a> (DLC). Ralph Nader has described the DLC as a "<a href="http://www.nader.org/interest/080103.html">soulless</a>" entity, due to its support of the agenda of Big Business.

"A member of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee's Business Council, she continues her long relationship with the moderate pro-business democratic community as an active member of the New Democrat Coalition's Keystone Group and The Blue Dogs in the House, as well as the Third Way and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee," explains her <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/fabry.php">biographical sketch on the Convention Strategies website</a>. Both the <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20050401152248/http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?recipientID=449">PPI</a> and <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20040805032539/http://www.mediatransparency.org/search_results/info_on_any_recipient.php?recipientID=2355">Third Way</a> are heavily funded by the right-wing, heavily corporate-subsidized <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Lynde_and_Harry_Bradley_Foundation">Bradley Foundation</a>.

Fabry's career has marched in lockstep with that of <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/lewan.php">Lewan</a>.

"He created and led the Democratic Leadership Council's Washington Steering Committee which resulted in DLC Convention activities in 1996, 2000, and 2004 and initiated a Member dinner series and senior staff lunch program," <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/lewan.php">explains the Convention Strategies website</a>. "He was also a founder of the New Democratic Coalition, the Senate Mod Squad and the Third Way."

Lewan "is considered one of the architects of the moderate, business-oriented wing of the Democratic Party," <a href="http://www.brownrudnick.com/people-detail/lewan-michael">according to his biography on the Brown Rudnick website</a>, where he currently works as a lobbyist with Fabry. <a href="http://www.brownrudnick.com/people-detail/lewan-michael">Lewan serves as a Principal of Government Law & Strategies</a> there, while <a href="http://www.brownrudnick.com/people-detail/fabry-anne-saunders">Fabry works as Director of Government Law & Strategies</a>.

Prior to this, the two of them <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmlbs.php?id=F26637&year=2004">worked together</a> at <a href="http://www.brownrudnick.com/people-detail/lewan-michael">Michael Lewan Company</a> from 2000-2004, "which specialized in developing and executing public policy strategies for corporate, trade associations and not for profit clients." Fabry served as Lewan's <a href="http://www.brownrudnick.com/people-detail/fabry-anne-saunders">assistant</a> when Lewan was Sen. Joe Lieberman's (I-CT) <a href="http://www.brownrudnick.com/people-detail/lewan-michael">Chief-of-Staff from 1989-1993</a>.

Importantly, but easy to overlook, <a href="http://www.brownrudnick.com/people-detail/fabry-anne-saunders">Fabry is also</a> "on the management team organizing the popular Convention Baseball events at both the Democratic and Republican Conventions." Convention Baseball events are a can of worms of their own worth exploring.

LeeAnn Petersen: Convention Baseball LLC/Convention Sports and Entertainment Group LLC

<a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/leeAnn.php">LeeAnn Petersen</a>'s claim to fame is baseball.

Not a baseball player herself, she is a key organizer of baseball outings at DNCs past and present, <a href="http://www.eventtransportation.com/corp_quotes.htm">having organized an outing in 2008 in Denver</a> when President Barack Obama stepped up to accept his nomination for the first time and <a href="http://www.heraldonline.com/2012/02/10/3732306/delegates-to-play-ball-at-knights.html?story_link=email_msg">now in 2012 in Charlotte</a>.

She sometimes goes by the name LeeAnn Strother, as is evident by her <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=35717169&authType=NAME_SEARCH&authToken=I6R8&locale=en_US&srchid=9c374eb3-3338-45af-884a-2316985fc70d-0&srchindex=3&srchtotal=93&goback=%2Efps_PBCK1+Strother111121_Y111_false_1_R151151_true1_us%3A972222222222222222222&pvs=ps&trk=pp_profile_name_link">LinkedIn profile</a>. Petersen's husband is Dane Strother, who works as the head of the lobbying firm Strother Stategies. <a href="http://arkansasnews.com/2010/04/13/halter-makers-of-attack-ad-have-ties-to-lincoln">Strother worked on behalf </a>of Wall Street-friendly U.S. Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) to ensure that her more progressive opponent, Bill Halter, lost a primary in 2010.

For the Conventions, Petersen has slyly circumvented the lobbying ethics laws by creating an LLC called Convention Baseball LLC, now known more broadly as Convention Sports and Entertainment Group LLC. <a href="http://www.gobignetwork.com/business-profiles/23839/convention-baseball-group-llc">Incorporated in Delaware</a>, corporate contributions to this LLC cost <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Baseball-Event-CHA.pdf">from $2,500-$50,000</a> for the upcoming baseball outing and earn lobbyists inside access with politicians. The more you pay, the more lobbyists you're allowed to bring with for the fun.

Petersen will also play host to a <a href="http://conventions2012.com/downloads/PinehurstConventionGolfClassic.pdf">golf outing</a>, <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/downloads/C2012EventsDNC.pdf">nightly parties</a> at an undisclosed venue, among <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/downloads/C2012EventsDNC.pdf">several other events</a>.

The baseball junket will be held "in honor of the Illinois delegation" to the DNC, and features a <a href="http://dncconventionstrategies.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Baseball-Event-CHA.pdf">Host Committee </a>of Petersen, Liz Sears Smith, Daniella Landau and Patricia Daley on the lobbyist side of the coin, as well as Illinois politicians U.S. Rep. Louis Guitierez and U.S. Rep. Jesse Jackson on the politician side of the coin.

The Illinois connection is no accident: it's the headquarters of the <a href="http://www.barackobama.com/contact-us/">Obama for America</a> presidential campaign for 2012. It's also the place where his former Chief-of-Staff now serves as Mayor, Rahm Emanuel, and where three of the four lobbyists on the Host Committee hail from.

This Host Committee roster says much about the Democratic Party's agenda both past and present.

<a href="http://www.wexlergroup.com/daniellaLandau.html">Landau</a> is a long-time high-level Democratic Party consultant and public relations operative. Formerly an <a href="http://www.wexlergroup.com/daniellaLandau.html">employee of Wexler & Walker</a>, in May she <a href="http://influencealley.nationaljournal.com/2012/04/scoop-senior-wexler-walker-off.php">started her own</a> lobbying firm, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?id=F25828&year=2012">Hannegan Landau Advocacy</a>, alongside veteran lobbyist, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_summary.php?id=14538">Tim Hannegan</a>. Tim is the <a href="http://influencealley.nationaljournal.com/2012/04/scoop-senior-wexler-walker-off.php">grandson</a> of former <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Hannegan">DNC chairman Robert E. Hannegan</a>.

She's also a former employee of DC public relations behemoth, <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Burson-Marsteller">Burson-Marsteller</a>, where, while there, "she helped coordinate message and communications strategies designed to promote successful passage of the North American Free Trade Agreement [NAFTA]," one of the hallmark policies of the presidency of Bill Clinton. In a May 2011 report, the Economic Policy Institute reported that NAFTA has been <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/12/nafta-job-loss-trade-deficit-epi_n_859983.html">responsible for the loss of over 750,000 jobs</a> in the U.S.

Digging deeper, one can also see that she's the <a href="http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P3-1332387071.html">ex-wife</a> of the aforementioned Dane Strother, the same Dane Strother who's now married to LeeAnn Petersen of Convention Baseball fame. At one point in her life she was known as <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=Y0000024580L&year=2001">Daniella Landau Strother</a>, according to the Congressional Lobbying Database.

Patricia Daley, sometimes referred to as "Patty" is part of the "<a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/2011/02/comparing_the_daley_machines.html">Daley Machine</a>," a second of cousin of former Obama Administration Chief-of-Staff William Daley. William Daley is the brother of former Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, whose mayoral stint was <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/06/national/06chicago.html?pagewanted=all">mired in corruption</a>. Richard M. Daley was <a href="http://www.suntimes.com/news/elections/3958856-505/chicagos-polls-close-its-time-to-count.html">replaced</a> by current Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel in 2011. William Daley, who at the end of 2011 had a <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2011/12/president-barack-obama-wealth.html">net worth of $28.7 million</a>, formerly served on the <a href="http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/bill-daley-made-8-7-million-from-jpmorgan-last-year/">Midwest Chairman for JPMorgan Chase</a> and was on the <a href="http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20110110/NEWS07/110119986/william-daley-resigns-from-abbott-boeing-boards">Board of Directors of Abbott and Boeing</a>.

Patricia is also a power broker herself and a <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/rev_summary.php?id=14882">long-time lobbyist</a>, currently manning the ship of <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/firmsum.php?id=D000033019&year=2012">Daley Policy Group</a>.

<a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/liz-sears-smith/42/814/685">Sears Smith</a>, like Daley, is a key cog in the Chicago political machine. She's a <a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/12/emanuel_house_chief_of_staff_s.html">long-time sidekick</a> of Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel, having served as his Chief-of-Staff during his time as both a member of the U.S. House of Representatives, as well as his time as Obama's Chief-of-Staff in the White House. Emanuel is pejoratively referred to by many as "<a href="http://www.nbcchicago.com/blogs/ward-room/Mayor-1-Catches-On-137582313.html">Mayor 1%</a>," a fitting title given his <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2011/12/president-barack-obama-wealth.html">personal net worth of $11.4 million</a> at the end of 2010 and the <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304141204577508482349727396.html">policies</a> he's <a href="http://www.npr.org/2012/06/20/155283669/a-new-union-battle-as-chicago-teachers-mayor-clash">pushed</a> during <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/may/17/rahm-emanuel-chicago-battle-nato">his time as Mayor</a> thus far.

Before this, "Smith served in the Clinton Administration as a Deputy Assistant Secretary in the International Trade Administration at the Department of Commerce, where she managed 450 staff around the country and a budget of $35 million," <a href="http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/12/emanuel_house_chief_of_staff_s.html">explained the Chicago Tribune</a>. "She was the Finance Director for Chicago '96, the host committee for the 1996 Democratic National Convention and prior to that ran [The Strategy Group]."

Sears Smith <a href="http://www.openleft.com/diary/19781/obama-and-the-left-part-2048">co-founded The Strategy Group with Mike Lux</a>, who is <a href="http://www.openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=18">one of the founders</a> of MoveOn.org and now works as a Democratic Party operative for the consulting firm he runs, <a href="http://www.progressivestrategies.net/pages/staff/">Progressive Strategies</a>. Lux <a href="http://www.openleft.com/diary/19781/obama-and-the-left-part-2048">explained in a blog post</a> that the Strategy Group was "one of the closest inner circle firms in the Obama Presidential campaign" of 2008.

For the 2012 DNC, <a href="http://www.whitehousecorrespondentsweekendinsider.com/2012/03/06/dc-power-trio-launches-mlh-strategies-llc/">Sears Smith formed MLH Strategies</a>, "a strategic consulting firm advising corporate clients and individuals on developing and executing strategies [at the DNC]" with her long-time Democratic Party colleagues, Melissa Moss and Holly Page. A dive into the personnel behind this entrepreneurial venture is also insightful in lifting the curtain of the people behind the parties - and the Democratic Party - at the DNC.

MLH Strategies

Sears Smith's partners in her new joint venture are Melissa Moss and Holly Page, both long time influence peddlers and Democratic Party fundraisers.

Moss is the <a href="http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=110&dat=19920708&id=E8MLAAAAIBAJ&sjid=2VUDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6793,495284">former National Finance Director of the DNC</a>, performing this job at the same time Rahm Emanuel was then candidate Bill Clinton's national finance director in his run for President in 1992. She also formerly <a href="http://articles.latimes.com/1993-05-31/news/mn-41976_1_clinton-campaign/2">served</a> as Field Director of the DLC, as well as Director of the Office of Competitiveness and Private Sector outreach at the Commerce Department.

Her stint at Commerce was mired in deep-seated corruption, as one of the central players involved in what has colloquially been referred to as "<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commercegate">Commercegate</a>." Long story short, the case revolved around sales of seats on Department of Commerce planes for international trade missions. The goal: raise campaign contributions to the tune of $50,000/seat for the DNC, an act amounting to illegal political bribery.

This scandal resulted in a major lawsuit and legal investigation <a href="http://www.judicialwatch.org/archive/1998/printer_66.shtml">lead by Judicial Watch</a>. Out of the investigation came a legal document on the "<a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2000/jul/13/20000713-011728-2838r/?page=all#pagebreak">trips-for-donations scheme</a>," a testimony that said <a href="http://web.archive.org/web/20000815055045/http://www.judicialwatch.org/otherserver/stewartdec.htm">Moss was one of the ringleaders of it all</a>. She has given $12,500 to the Obama campaign for the upcoming election, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/usearch/index.php?q=melissa+moss&searchButt_clean.x=0&searchButt_clean.y=0&searchButt_clean=Submit&cx=010677907462955562473%3Anlldkv0jvam&cof=FORID%3A11">according to Open Secrets</a>.

Moss' <a href="http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-09-28/solyndra-taints-silver-s-stint-as-taxpayers-venture-capitalist.html">husband Jonathan Silver</a> is also a major Democratic Party operative, currently working as a <a href="http://www.thirdway.org/press_releases/172">Fellow at the aforementioned Third Way</a>.

Page, like most others mentioned in this story, is a <a href="http://www.linkedin.com/pub/holly-page/4/18/777">long-time DLC and DNC hand</a>, serving as a fundraiser for Bill Clinton for President in 1992, Director of the National Finance Council of the DNC from 1992-1994, and working for the DLC from 1994-2008, the last five years of which <a href="http://www.kkpnyc.com/htmls/Holly.htm">she served as Executive Vice President</a>.

The "Invisible Government"

What does this all mean?

There's the pomp-and-circumstance of the DNC, which will take place in the Charlotte Convention Center and will be televised and radio-casted around the country and the world. And then there's what Edward Bernays, the father or modern propaganda, once called the "<a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Propaganda/Propaganda_Bernays.html">invisible government</a>," which will be operating behind the scenes at the DNC.

"Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country," <a href="http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Propaganda/Propaganda_Bernays.html">wrote Bernays</a>. "We are governed, our minds molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of."

When push comes to shove, it's the people behind the parties at the DNC for 2012 that are the true source of power, the heart and soul of the contemporary Democratic Party.

steve horn truthout

===

<h2>Lobbying spending</h2>

The Chamber ranks first in lobbying spending in the past decade, with <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=General_Electric" title="General Electric">General Electric</a> ranking second at $161 million, according to the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Center_for_Responsive_Politics" title="Center for Responsive Politics">Center for Responsive Politics</a>.<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=U.S._Chamber_of_Commerce#cite_note-48" title="">[49]</a>

Political Money Line<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=U.S._Chamber_of_Commerce#cite_note-49" title="">[50]</a> highlighted in February 2005 that the Chamber and its Institute for Legal Reform reported combined spending of $53.38 million for lobbying the Executive and Legislative branches during 2004. According to the watchdog website, "This is the largest twelve-month amount reported spent by any group."

The Chamber reported spending $20,060,000 in the first six months of 2004 and $8,780,000 in the last six months of 2004. They paid forty-five lobbyists in the last six months of 2004 to lobby on thirty-two issue areas, including "Trade, Small Business, Labor, Healthcare, Defense, Appropriations, Tort Reform and other areas."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=U.S._Chamber_of_Commerce#cite_note-50" title="">[51]</a>

The Institute for Legal Reform reported spending $10,000,000 in the first six months of 2004 and $14,540,000 in the last six months. They had five lobbyists on the payroll for the last six months of 2004, working on the tort reform issue including "Class Action Fairness, Asbestos Injury Resolution, Legal Reform, and Lawsuit Abuse Reduction."<a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=U.S._Chamber_of_Commerce#cite_note-51" title="">[52]</a>

</div>

===

---

OMG list of  Rx lobbyists <a href="http://lobbydata.com/Directory/Issue/Health-Issues">http://lobbydata.com/Directory/Issue/Health-Issues</a>

---

<h1>Lobbyists playing key role in 2012 fundraising</h1>

<h3>By <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/dan-eggen/2011/02/28/ABg0isM_page.html" rel="author">Dan Eggen</a> and <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/tw-farnam/2011/05/19/AFpglE7G_page.html" rel="author">T.W. Farnam</a>, Published: October 27, 2011</h3>

K Street is playing an increasingly central role in the 2012 presidential race, as hundreds of lobbyists representing some of the world’s largest corporations and trade groups pour money into Republican coffers.

The main beneficiary so far is <a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Mitt_Romney">Mitt Romney</a>, the former Massachusetts governor and equity-fund executive, who is banking on strong support from the business community to propel his White House bid.

More than 100 registered lobbyists have contributed to Romney, giving nearly $200,000 in direct donations, according to a Washington Post analysis of donor and lobbying records. A team of lobbyist fundraisers has also bundled together nearly $1 million in contributions for Romney’s campaign, disclosure records show.

Texas Gov. <a data-xslt="http" href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Rick_Perry">Rick Perry</a>, who entered the race in August, took in at least $72,000 in contributions from 42 lobbyists through September, plus $77,000 bundled by a bank executive. Dozens of Washington lobbyists have also given money to trailing candidates <a data-xslt="http" href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Jon_Huntsman">Jon Huntsman Jr.</a>, <a data-xslt="http" href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Newt_Gingrich">Newt Gingrich</a> and <a data-xslt="http" href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Rick_Santorum">Rick Santorum</a>, the analysis shows.

The early pace of donations underscores the pivotal importance that K Street donors are likely to play in driving up spending during the 2012 elections, which are widely expected to be the most expensive in U.S. history. Republicans are hoping that strong support from lobbyists and corporate political action committees will help them compete with President Obama’s formidable<a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-far-outpaces-gop-rivals-in-third-quarter-fundraising/2011/10/13/gIQAxNrOiL_story.html"> fundraising operation</a>.

As he did in 2008, <a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.whorunsgov.com/Profiles/Barack_Obama">Obama</a> has made a point of refusing to accept donations from lobbyists or corporate PACs, and his campaign has repeatedly portrayed Republicans as beholden to Wall Street and other well-funded interests. But Obama faced his own criticism this week after hiring a former corporate lobbyist as a senior campaign adviser.

The lobbyists who have donated to GOP candidates so far represent a broad swath of corporate interests, including technology firms lobbying for a tax holiday on overseas profits and oil companies hoping to preserve lucrative tax breaks on energy.

On Wednesday morning, for example, Romney attended a breakfast fundraiser at the <a data-xslt="http" href="http://www.truckline.com/Pages/Home.aspx">American Trucking Association</a> sponsored by more than a dozen K Street heavy-hitters. Hosts included longtime GOP fundraiser <a data-xslt="http" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=U00000033451&year=2011">Wayne Berman</a>, who represents the American Petroleum Institute and many others; GOP lobbyist <a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=Y0000040333L&year=2011">Mark Isakowitz</a>, whose lengthy client list includes banks, oil companies and technology firms; and Alex Mistri of the Glover Park Group, which briefly represented Solyndra, the solar-energy firm that went bankrupt after getting a $530 million government loan guarantee.

Perry, whose financial base lies in the oil fields of Texas, also has worked to make inroads into Washington’s lobbying community, recruiting donors to help bundle together contributions and seeking advice from K Street professionals. Last week, Perry held a series of <a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/rick-perry-to-hold-economic-and-foreign-policy-meetings-in-washington/2011/10/19/gIQAI5pIwL_blog.html">private policy meetings</a> with about 45 lobbyists, trade group executives and conservative leaders at the National Association of Wholesaler Distributors, whose president and government relations chief are key Perry fundraisers.

Donors said in interviews that it is natural for industry lobbyists to back Romney, Perry or other Republicans, given the party’s traditional image as friendly to business. Most lobbyists say their decision to help raise money for candidates has no connection with their corporate clients, many of which are steering clear of the GOP primary contest.

Some K Street firms are divided on which candidate to support: Although Isakowitz supports Romney, for example, his partner at Fierce, Isakowitz & Blalock,<a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=Blalock%2C%20Kirk&id=Y0000040324L&year=2011"> Kirk Blalock</a>, is helping raise money for Perry.

“I was a Republican before I was a lobbyist,” said Blalock, who represents dozens of major corporations including BP, Coca-Cola and Time Warner. “For me it’s about working for a cause I believe in and not about my business of lobbying.”

David Donnelly of the <a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.campaignmoney.org/">Public Campaign Action Fund</a>, which favors public financing of elections, said such claims “ring hollow” because of the pivotal role played by lobbyists in raising money for politicians.

“These lobbyist donors get an immense of amount of access and influence over elected officials, and the rest of us get one lousy vote,” Donnelly said. “It is a business model that relies on lobbyists making campaign contributions, raising money for candidates and being in the most helpful position they can be in to benefit their clients down the line.”

Under recent reforms, which were co-sponsored by then-Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), presidential candidates are required to identify any lobbyists who act as campaign bundlers, gathering together donations from friends and associates. But lobbyists who merely host a fundraiser or contribute individually to campaigns are not required to be identified as lobbyists in reports to the Federal Election Commission.

The Post analysis cross-matched names in the FEC’s contributions database with lobbying disclosure records filed in Congress to identify K Street donors. The total number of lobbyist donors is almost certainly higher.

Obama’s practice of refusing lobbyist contributions fits into a broader goal of seeking to curb the influence of special interests in Washington. After The Post inquired this week about two lobbyists who gave to the campaign, spokesman Ben LaBolt said the contributions would be returned.

The lines separating former and current lobbyists are often thin: One supporter terminated his lobbying registration on behalf of a Japanese insurance association on April 18, then gave Obama $900 on April 20.

The Obama campaign came under fire from environmentalists and watchdog groups this week for <a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/post/nprs-michele-norris-steps-down-husband-broderick-johnson-gets-obama-job/2011/10/24/gIQAy7zrCM_blog.html">hiring former lobbyist </a>Broderick Johnson as a senior adviser. Before leaving the Bryan Cave firm in April, Johnson had a decade-long career representing dozens of clients including TransCanada, which is seeking U.S. approval for a controversial oil pipeline from Alberta to Texas.

LaBolt said Johnson will refrain from any issues involving past clients.

“For years the President has fought to ensure that Washington lobbyists don’t have undue influence over the policymaking process,” LaBolt said in a statement. “There’s no doubt that special interests are pouring contributions into the coffers of our potential opponents and their allies because they believe that large corporations and millionaires and billionaires should get tax cuts instead of the middle class and that Wall Street should be able write its own rules again.”

Many GOP lobbyists and campaign aides bristle at such rhetoric and accuse Obama of hypocrisy. Perry spokesman Ray Sullivan said Obama “has already broken his own policies when it comes to lobbyists,” pointing to the campaign’s hiring of Johnson.

“All Rick Perry donors must comply with the same contribution limits and federal disclosure rules and we respect that,” Sullivan said. “Governor Perry makes policy decision based on his conservative philosophy and on what’s best for his constituents.”

Cultivating donors on K Street has been central to Romney’s fundraising efforts, aimed in part at cementing his reputation as the candidate of establishment Republicans. One key fundraiser this year was a “Lawyers for Romney” luncheon at Patton Boggs, Washington’s largest lobbying firm with $40 million in billings last year. Hosts including former senator Trent Lott (R-Miss.) raised $5,000 or more, with individual donations starting at $1,000, according to an invitation.

Romney’s top lobbyist fundraiser is <a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=Durkin%2C%20Patrick&id=Y0000040003L&year=2011">Patrick J. Durkin</a>, managing director of Barclays Capital, who raised $355,000 through September, disclosures show.

“People who contribute to Mitt Romney’s campaign do so because they support Mitt’s conservative agenda to create jobs and grow the economy,” campaign spokeswoman Andrea Saul said.

Not all lobbyists involved in the campaigns think of themselves as part of K Street. <a data-xslt="_http" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/lobbyist.php?id=Y0000041767L&year=2011">David Beightol</a> of Dutko Grayling said he is primarily a state-level consultant who only registers as a lobbyist “out of an abundance of caution.” Beightol has raised just under $90,000 for Romney.

“It’s mostly posturing,” Beightol said of Democratic complaints about lobbyist fundraising. “It’s just a political game.”

---

$4.2B lobbying > camp $  kpfa global exchange  elect democ camp  7/31/12 10 am Pacifica's Mitch Jeserich hosts “Letters & Politics

FIRE finance, insur, real estate funds both parties (eg senate banking and finance 60 vs 70's loyalty) hillary lear

<a href="http://www.globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/FIREsectorInfographic2012.pdf">http://www.globalexchange.org/sites/default/files/FIREsectorInfographic2012.pdf</a>

d fienstien 67%, but for dodd-f and HC

boxer32% ? split on nafta; grijalva zero %  waxman 29%

---

BANK INFLUENCE

sunlight:

Overall Visits

Top 5 Big Banks

Goldman Sachs — 181

JPMorgan Chase — 175

Morgan Stanley — 150

Bank of America — 122

Citigroup — 102

Reform Groups

Consumer Federation of America — 34

Americans for Financial Reform — 32

By Agency

Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) — 683 meetings
Treasury Department — 447 meetings
Federal Reserve — 410 meetings

The Fed Meetings

The Federal Reserve received visits from big banks the most. Fed officials met bank representatives 393 times, and JPMorgan Chase led the list with 70 meetings. The top meeting topics included: interchange fees (110), derivatives (100) and the Volcker Rule (83).

Treasury Meetings

For reform groups, they met Treasury Department officials the most: 145 times. Yet, big banks and their associations still had the most overall meetings at 302, and JPMorgan Chase once again led the list with 52 meetings. Conversations around the creation of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau dominated the meetings, with 194 mentions in meeting logs for all parties.

CFTC Meetings

Meetings at the Commodities Futures Trading Commission for big banks were 603, including 105 by Goldman Sachs, compared to 80 for all reform-oriented groups. The most discussed topics were: swap execution facilities registration (231), position limits (210) and real-time reporting (141).

===

<h2 style=" margin: 20px 0px 0px 0px;">The 9 Most Loathsome Lobbyists in Washington</h2>

<h5 style=" margin: 0px 0px 20px 0px;">By Ian Murphy, The Progressive

Posted on July 14, 2012, Printed on July 21, 2012

http://www.alternet.org/story/156279/the_9_most_loathsome_lobbyists_in_washington</h5>

Tis the bleak post-Citizens United season in America—money equals speech, and corporations, super PACs, and an egregiously wealthy minority have the biggest mouths in the land. But the oligarchs’ work is never done. After the elections are bought, it’s back to the business of business—and, presumably, consuming yacht-loads of caviar and foie gras. Maximizing profit demands that high-powered lobbyists grease the wheels of legislation or grind them to a shrieking halt—whichever yields the highest return.

For your edutainment, below is a list of some of the most depraved lobbyists money can buy.

9) Chris Dodd

The former Connecticut Senator, and internationally renowned eyebrow-haver, isn’t the most prodigious scum in the Beltway swamp, but he may be the most hypocritical. When asked in 2010 what would follow his thirty-year legislative career, which ended amid financial scandal, Dodd bluntly said, “No lobbying, no lobbying.” He then promptly became, as The Hill put it, “Hollywood’s leading man in Washington, taking the most prestigious job on K Street,” as chairman and CEO of the Motion Picture Association of America. The gig comes with a $1.2 million annual salary, and complimentary tickets to the Academy Awards.

Dodd’s most public, and ultimately ill-fated, advocacy was in pushing two potentially disastrous bills: the Stop Online Piracy Act, and its Senate counterpart, Protect IP Act—both of which would’ve given the federal government the right to shut down any website that was merely being accused of copyright infringement. The bills were shelved indefinitely after a massive online protest in which thousands of sites went voluntarily dark for a day. Dodd unironically called the blackout an “irresponsible . . . abuse of power.” So it’s OK for the Feds to make your site go black, but it’s not OK for you to do it yourself. Dodd doesn’t want you to post the Jack and Jill movie trailer to warn Americans of the danger. Because every time someone sees an Adam Sandler film, the terrorists win.

8) Billy Tauzin

The former Louisiana Congressman’s lobbying career functionally began before he left Capitol Hill. In 2003, as one of his final acts as chair of the committee that oversees the pharmaceutical industry, he brazenly extended a fifteen-minute vote on the Medicare Modernization Act so the industry-authored bill, which prohibited the federal government from negotiating drug prices, could pass quietly in the night.

And ditto that for the awful Medicare Part D fine-tuning in ’05. So when Tauzin resigned from Congress soon after and landed a $2 million-a-year position as president and CEO of the drug-lobbying Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), it was shocking—that he waited an entire month. (As recently reported by journalist Lee Fang, when Congress-creatures become lobbyists, they secure a 1,452 percent raise, on average.)

Along with Karen Ignagni, CEO of America’s Health Insurance Plans, Tauzin is as responsible as anyone for killing any hope that the purportedly “socialist” Obammercare would be a single-payer system or include a public option (for this Tauzin earned a handy $11.6 million in the first half of 2010 alone). They were literally the people meeting with the President behind closed doors before the plan was announced.

Tauzin left PhRMA in 2010, and has since completed the cycle of greed as a board member of the Louisiana Healthcare Group, which specializes in selling mandatory broccoli.

7) Richard Berman

In the Venn diagram representing lobbying, public relations, and shameless evil, Berman occupies the balding overlap. An anti-labor-lawyer-cum-anti-labor evangelist, the sole proprietor of the PR firm Berman and Associates has earned the nickname “Astroturf Kingpin” for repeatedly forming phony, industry-funded nonprofits to spread his clients’ falsehoods. Dubbed “the booze and food industries’ weapon of mass destruction” by 60 Minutes, Berman’s clients include the usual restaurant, alcohol, tobacco, and living-wage-averse service industry suspects, with the front groups bearing creepy Orwellian names like the Minimum Wage Coalition to Save Jobs.

According to a 2006 USA Today profile, Berman’s firm pulls in an annual $10 million, but “only Berman and his bookkeeper wife” know how much of that goes directly into their pockets.

America got a good look at Berman’s latest disingenuously named effort, the Center for Union Facts, when it debuted an ad called “Employee Rights Act: Repair Shop” during the Super Bowl, one in a series about the legislation. “I’m sick of the union taking so much money out of every paycheck,” laments an actor. The shop boys go on to complain that they never even voted for the union.

The key “union fact” conveniently omitted, of course, is that without those unions they’d be working the weekend for slave wages and getting carpal tunnel syndrome. But the only fact that Berman really cares about is the fact that he gets paid.

6) Tony Podesta

Inflate former Clinton chief of staff and current Center for American Progress head honcho with—more?—hot air and—definitely more!—lard, and you get his bloated brother Tony.

While John’s kept the revolving door spinning, Tony’s held the fort at the Podesta Group, the lobbying firm they founded in the late ’80s.

And with John having been a member of Obama’s transition team, and manning the helm of arguably the most influential think tank on a President since the Heritage Foundation replaced Reagan’s brain with an Atari console, Tony’s been a formidable player on K Street during this Administration. He even purchased the insipid Shepard Fairey “Hope” print to demonstrate allegiance.

The Podesta Group’s client list reads like a who’s who of awfulness—Bank of America, Mubarak’s Egypt, British Petroleum, and nearly every other military and for-profit health care conglomerate known to man (and let’s not forget the bailed-out likes of General Motors). The firm’s yearly income jumped from a relatively meager $10 million in ’07 to nearly $30 million under Obama.

A frequent White House and Capitol Hill visitor, Tony is the kind of brazen corporate mouthpiece who can say things like “everyone has a lobbyist” and somehow manage not to vomit all over himself.

5) Haley Barbour

When not hanging out with white supremacists, being governor to the poorest state of the union, or pardoning scores of murderers for no apparent reason, Barbour has been primarily a tobacco industry lobbyist (in 2001, Barbour Griffith & Rogers LLC was paid over $17,000 a month, plus expenses, by RJ Reynolds alone). In downplaying the massive BP oil spill, by claiming the environmental disaster proves that the free market (somehow) works, he was simply doing what comes natural: trying to convince people that obvious poison is not toxic, and victims should have no right to sue.

His deep tobacco ties also explain why he enacted among the strictest tort reform measures in the nation, refused to raise taxes on cigarettes, and tried to kill his state’s youth-smoking-prevention program.

Before his second term even ended, Barbour joined Karl Rove’s American Crossroads super PAC—probably for his legendary fundraising prowess (proven while head of the Republican Governors Association), and less for his striking resemblance to both Joe Camel and a butter sculpture of William Shatner.

4) Michael Toscano

As one of the top lobbyists for the drone trade group Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI), Toscano has played a pernicious, if obscure, role in shaping federal legislation as obscure as it is pernicious.

The organization’s lobbying budget more than doubled last year, reaching $280,000, and it helped create the Congressional Unmanned Systems Caucus, piloted by Representatives Buck McKeon, Republican of California, and Henry Cuellar, Democrat of Texas.

Its persistent efforts paid off in the form of the FAA Reauthorization Act, which flew through Congress on bipartisan wings in February and promises to unleash an estimated 30,000 spy drones into U.S. airspace in the next eight years so that local and federal law enforcement can track suspects (because the Fourth Amendment is SO out right now).

In a PowerPoint presentation dug up by Republic Report, the drone lobbying group bragged that in requesting language changes to the FAA House bill, its “suggestions were often taken word-for-word.” In the same presentation, the group predicted that the domestic unmanned drone market will soon outpace the military, despite exponential growth in that murderous sector. It also acknowledged that the industry’s main impediment to unbridled profit will be “civil liberties.” Stupid freedoms, always hurting our unmanned job creators.

3) John Lovell

A prohibition-industrial-complex luminary, Lovell is a major reason Californians can’t legally smoke jazz-tobacco (as goes California, so goes the criminally stoned nation). In a 2010 interview with Time, he claimed his crusade against the state’s Proposition 19 (a.k.a. the Regulate, Control & Tax Cannabis Act) was based on moral grounds, but his firm’s nearly $400K draw from various police unions offers a far more believable motivation.

Lovell managed the anti-pot effort, launching a Reefer Madness-esque propaganda campaign, organizing hippieless rallies, and disseminating Glenn Beck-crazy conspiracy theories about George Soros because the philanthropist donated $1 million to the legalization effort.

As Prop. 19 ultimately suffered a slim defeat at the ballot, a business necessity for Lovell, he was concurrently acting as the war on drugs’ Matthew Lesko by teaching local law enforcement how to score big federal grant and stimulus money—today!

He successfully represented two police unions in a bid to funnel $10 million in taxpayer cash to two draconian programs resulting in a flurry of new police hires, overtime, expensive surveillance toys, and an unjustifiable amount of victimless prosecutions.

Lovell is waging a war in which hundreds of thousands of Americans lose, so that the nation’s fat blue line can buy that sweet boat they think will get them laid.

2) Edward Yingling

There’s a plethora of dodgy financial tools used by Wall Street to fleece the American public, but Yingling may be the biggest. He’s been the American Bankers Association’s top lobby-dog for more than twenty years.

There’s not been a poverty-creating financial deregulation to wend its way through the ever-complicit Congress in the past quarter-century that hasn’t been covered in Yingling’s dirty fingerprints. In 1999, he unashamedly called the Glass-Steagall repeal (the Depression-era law that separated investment and commercial banks) “the most important piece of financial services legislation in over sixty years,” which could “save consumers $15 billion a year.” Legalizing insane gambles, like collateralized debt obligations and mortgage-backed securities, was important to his too-big-to-fail clients (like Citigroup and JPMorgan Chase), which, along with the rest of the banking industry, spend roughly $100 million a year lobbying.

Naturally, when the TARP hit the fan, the Bankers Association was pushing for the bailout as fiercely as anyone. When Dodd-Frank was being severely watered down, Yingling was there with a very large bucket.

And Obama’s proposed Consumer Financial Protection Bureau? Well, it threatens to sever the connection between “consumer protection and safety and soundness,” Yingling told Congress.

He doesn’t earn more than $2 million a year to make sense.

1) Jack N. Gerard

As president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, Gerard spews nearly as much pollution as the 400 fossil fuel-extracting companies he represents. The group spent almost $8 million of its $200 million budget in 2010 (Gerard banked $6.5 million in the same year) actively lobbying against any and all environmental regulations. The rest goes to slick front groups, disinformation campaigns, contributing to evil pols (future lobbyists) and eviler groups (like Americans for Prosperity and ALEC), and funding bunk science to undercut public understanding of climate change. Taking their cues from an earlier generation of tobacco industry doubt merchants, a still-relevant 1998 Petroleum Institute internal memo reads: “Victory will be achieved when . . . citizens ‘understand’ uncertainties in climate science  . . . [and] recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the ‘conventional wisdom.’ ”

While acting as the head of the National Mining Association in ’01, Gerard served on Dick Cheney’s largely secretive fossil fuel welfare program known as the Energy Task Force, which makes his ’08 declaration to The Washington Post that the industry’s activities should be “more transparent” ring particularly hollow. As he’s bounced from one hated industry to another, Gerard’s one true talent lies in lying.

Gerard’s lie du jour is that “we need more American energy”—whether it comes from wildly unsafe, faucet-burning hydrofracking, opening pristine wilderness to drilling-baby-drilling, or pumping incredibly dirty tar sands crude in from Canada along the Keystone pipeline. The lie is that the only “we” involved are multinational conglomerates. We get nothing out of the deal, while “we” are subsidized to pilfer the American commons and sell booty on the global market.

Ian Murphy is the editor of the Buffalo <a href="http://buffalobeast.com/">BEAST</a>. Read him on twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/#%21/Ian_Murphy">@Ian_Murphy</a>

-----

"Energy lobby" is the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Umbrella_term" title="Umbrella term">umbrella term</a> used to name the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying" title="Lobbying">paid representatives</a> of large <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel" title="Fossil fuel">fossil fuel</a> (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_industry" title="Petroleum industry">oil</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas" title="Natural gas">gas</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal" title="Coal">coal</a>) and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_utility" title="Electric utility">electric utilities</a> corporations who attempt to influence governmental policy. So-called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Oil" title="Big Oil" class="mw-redirect">Big Oil</a> companies such as <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ExxonMobil" title="ExxonMobil">ExxonMobil</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Dutch_Shell" title="Royal Dutch Shell">Royal Dutch Shell</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BP" title="BP">BP</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Total_S.A." title="Total S.A.">Total S.A.</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_Industries" title="Koch Industries">Koch Industries</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevron_Corporation" title="Chevron Corporation">Chevron Corporation</a>, and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ConocoPhillips" title="ConocoPhillips">ConocoPhillips</a> are amongst the largest <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporation" title="Corporation">corporations</a> associated with the energy lobby. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Electric" title="General Electric">General Electric</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Co." title="Southern Co." class="mw-redirect">Southern Co.</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Energy" title="First Energy" class="mw-redirect">First Energy</a>, and the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edison_Electric_Institute" title="Edison Electric Institute">Edison Electric Institute</a> are among the influential electric utilities corporations.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-0">[1]</a> Both <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_industry" title="Electric power industry">electric companies</a> and big oil and gas companies are consistently among the ten highest-spending industrial lobbyists.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-1">[2]</a>

<h2>Contents</h2>

</div>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-1"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#Influence_of_the_energy_lobby_in_the_United_States">1 Influence of the energy lobby in the United States</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-2"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#Criticisms">2 Criticisms</a>

<ul>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-3"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#Environmental_impact_of_represented_companies">2.1 Environmental impact of represented companies</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-4"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#Governmental_influence">2.2 Governmental influence</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-2 tocsection-5"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#Global_influence">2.3 Global influence</a></li>

</ul>

</li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-7"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#References">4 References</a></li>

<li class="toclevel-1 tocsection-8"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#External_links">5 External links</a></li>

</ul>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h2>Influence of the energy lobby in the United States</h2>

In the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_general_election,2006" title="United States general election, 2006" class="mw-redirect">2006 election</a> cycle, oil and gas companies contributed over $19 million to political campaigns. 82% of that money went to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party%28United_States%29" title="Republican Party (United States)">Republican</a> candidates, while the remaining 18% went to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Party%28United_States%29" title="Democratic Party (United States)">Democrats</a>. In 2004, oil and gas companies contributed over $25 million to political campaigns, donating 80% of that money to Republicans. In the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_elections,2000" title="United States elections, 2000">2000 elections</a>, over $34 million was contributed, with 78% of that money going to Republicans. Electric utilities also heavily favor Republicans; their contributions have recently ranged between $15–20 million.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-2">[3]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-3">[4]</a> From 2003-2006, the energy lobby also contributed $58.3 million to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_%28United_States%29" title="State (United States)" class="mw-redirect">state</a>-level campaigns. By comparison, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_energy" title="Alternative energy">alternative energy</a> interests contributed around half a million dollars in the same time period.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-4">[5]</a>

<h2>Criticisms</h2>

<div style=" text-align: left;">Environmental impact of represented companies</div>

</div>

Many of the most influential members of the energy lobby are among the top <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution" title="Pollution">polluters</a> in the United States, with Conoco, Exxon, and General Electric ranking in the top six.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-5">[6]</a> According to the Environmental Integrity Project, a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonpartisan" title="Nonpartisan">nonpartisan</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprofit" title="Nonprofit" class="mw-redirect">nonprofit</a> organization established in March 2002 by former attorneys at the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Environmental_Protection_Agency" title="United States Environmental Protection Agency">Environmental Protection Agency</a>, “Companies like ExxonMobil and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunoco" title="Sunoco">Sunoco</a> keep reporting record profits while increasing emissions or more cancer causing chemicals from their refineries.”<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-6">[7]</a> The energy lobby is criticized for using its influence to block or dilute <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislation" title="Legislation">legislation</a> regarding global <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change" title="Climate change">climate change</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-7">[8]</a>

<h3>Governmental influence</h3>

Various <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scandal" title="Scandal">scandals</a> involving prominent politicians have drawn attention to the close links between the energy lobby and the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.government" title="U.S. government" class="mw-redirect">U.S. government</a>, particularly the influence wielded by the energy lobby in the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W.Bush_administration" title="George W. Bush administration" class="mw-redirect">Bush administration</a>. In June 2005, documents emerged that revealed that the Bush administration had consulted Exxon regarding its stance on the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_protocol" title="Kyoto protocol" class="mw-redirect">Kyoto protocol</a>. According to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Guardian" title="The Guardian">The Guardian</a>, “In briefing papers given before meetings to the US under-secretary of state, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paula_Dobriansky" title="Paula Dobriansky">Paula Dobriansky</a>, between 2001 and 2004, the administration is found thanking <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exxon" title="Exxon">Exxon</a> executives for the company's ‘active involvement’ in helping to determine climate change policy, and also seeking its advice on what climate change policies the company might find acceptable.”<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-8">[9]</a><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-9">[10]</a> Oil companies also participated with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dick_Cheney" title="Dick Cheney">Dick Cheneys</a> task force in a discussion of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq" title="Iraq">Iraqi</a> oilfields, refineries and other energy infrastructure, and two charts detailing Iraqi oil and gas projects, and “Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield Contracts.” The documents are dated two years before the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Iraq" title="Invasion of Iraq" class="mw-redirect">Invasion of Iraq</a>.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-10">[11]</a>

<h3>Global influence</h3>

The energy lobby has a history of conflict with international interests and democratic <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_governance" title="Global governance">global governance</a>. According to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=International_Sustainable_Energy_Organization&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="International Sustainable Energy Organization (page does not exist)">International Sustainable Energy Organization</a> for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency the second <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Climate_Conference" title="World Climate Conference">World Climate Conference</a> "was sabotaged by the USA and oil lobbies"<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-autogenerated1-11">[12]</a> whereupon the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=UNISEO&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="UNISEO (page does not exist)">UNISEO</a> proceeded to set up a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Global_Energy_Charter&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Global Energy Charter (page does not exist)">Global Energy Charter</a> "which protects life, health, climate and the biosphere from emissions." According to the organization, these same "reactionary energy lobby groups tried to boycott this Charter with the help from oil- and coal-producing nations and succeeded to keep energy out of the Rio Conference on Environment & Development (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UNCED" title="UNCED" class="mw-redirect">UNCED</a>) in 1992, to continue this game in all Climate Conferences in <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berlin" title="Berlin">Berlin</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto" title="Kyoto">Kyoto</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hague" title="The Hague">The Hague</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marrakech" title="Marrakech">Marrakech</a>, where the USA boycotted the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_protocol" title="Kyoto protocol" class="mw-redirect">Kyoto protocol</a> and still ignores the Charter."<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-autogenerated1-11">[12]</a>

During the 14th session of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" title="United Nations">United Nations</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commission_on_Sustainable_Development" title="Commission on Sustainable Development">Commission on Sustainable Development</a>, according to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Institute_for_Sustainable_Development" title="International Institute for Sustainable Development">International Institute for Sustainable Development</a> Bulletin, "One minister is said to have challenged the North’s <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renewable_energy" title="Renewable energy">renewable energy</a> lobby with the words: why not “light up” the dark zones of the world by “extinguishing some of the candles” in yours?"<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_note-12">[13]</a>

<table style="line-height: 110%; max-width: 175px; background: rgb(249, 249, 249);"><tbody><tr><td style=" text-align: center;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Crystal_energy.svg" class="image"><img src="/5c090b87-b682-5baa-8cd7-ee2fed84b925.png"/></a></td><td style=" padding: 0 0.2em; vertical-align: middle; font-style: italic; font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Energy" title="Portal:Energy">Energy portal</a></td></tr></tbody></table>

</div>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_Kingdom" title="Lobbying in the United Kingdom">Lobbying in the United Kingdom</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobbying_in_the_United_States" title="Lobbying in the United States">Lobbying in the United States</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_denial" title="Climate change denial">Climate change denial</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_policy" title="Climate change policy" class="mw-redirect">climate change policy</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum_politics" title="Petroleum politics">Petroleum politics</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_mafia" title="Greenhouse mafia" class="mw-redirect">Greenhouse mafia</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_subsidies" title="Energy subsidies">Energy subsidies</a></li>

</ul>

<h2>References</h2>

<li id="cite_note-0"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-0">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/main.htm">Alexander's Gas & Oil Connections = Welcome / Main entry page</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-1"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-1">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobbyists/index.asp?txtindextype=i">Lobbying Spending Database</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSecrets.org" title="OpenSecrets.org" class="mw-redirect">OpenSecrets.org</a> (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_Responsive_Politics" title="Center for Responsive Politics">Center for Responsive Politics</a>)</li>

<li id="cite_note-2"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-2">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.asp?cycle=2006&ind=E08">Industry Totals: Electric Utilities</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-3"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-3">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.asp?cycle=2006&ind=E01">Industry Totals: Oil & Gas</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-4"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-4">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="http://www.followthemoney.org/press/Reports/200705231.pdf">http://www.followthemoney.org/press/Reports/200705231.pdf</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-5"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-5">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.peri.umass.edu/Toxic-100-Table.265.0.html">PERI -</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_Economy_Research_Institute" title="Political Economy Research Institute">Political Economy Research Institute</a>: Toxic 100 Table</li>

<li id="cite_note-6"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-6">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/pubs/020807%20TRI%20EIP%20news%20rews%20release%20FINAL%20_2.pdf">http://www.environmentalintegrity.org/pubs/020807%20TRI%20EIP%20news%20rews%20release%20FINAL%20_2.pdf</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-7"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-7">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.globalpolicy.org/socecon/envronmt/tncwarm.htm">Global Warming and Energy Corporations</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-8"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-8">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/climatechange/story/0,12374,1501646,00.html">Revealed: how oil giant influenced Bush | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-9"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-9">^{</a></span}> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_Resources_Defense_Council" title="Natural Resources Defense Council">Natural Resources Defense Council</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.nrdc.org/air/energy/taskforce/tfinx.asp">(NRDC)'s Review of the Bush Administration Energy Task Force Records</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-10"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-10">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.judicialwatch.org/iraqi-oilfield-pr.shtml">Judicial Watch</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-autogenerated1-11">^ <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-autogenerated1_11-0">a</a> <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-autogenerated1_11-1">b</a> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.uniseo.org/blueprint.html">International Sustainable Energy Organisation for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency</a></li>

<li id="cite_note-12"><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuels_lobby#cite_ref-12">^{</a></span}> <a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.iisd.ca/download/asc/enb05237e.txt">IISD Bulletin</a></li>

</ol>

</div>

<h2>External links</h2>

<ul>

<li><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.corpwatch.org/">Corporate Watch</a></li>

<li><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.publicaffairsworld.com/">Public Affairs World</a></li>

<li><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.followthemoney.org/press/ReportView.phtml?r=401&PHPSESSID=738d64ee173ec4b7bdfece0376f50e4a">Follow The Money | Money Fuels Power Measures</a></li>

<li><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.democracynow.org/2010/7/23/three_of_every_four_oil_gas">Three of Every Four Oil & Gas Lobbyists Worked for U.S. Federal Government</a> - video report by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Now%21" title="Democracy Now!">Democracy Now!</a></li>

<li><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.senate.gov/%7Egovt-aff/030702schaeffer.htm">Eric Schaeffer's testimony to the U.S. Senate regarding the relationship between the EPA and the Energy Lobby</a></li>

<li><a rel="nofollow" class="external text" href="http://www.serbia-energy.com/">Serbia Energy Business Lobbying</a></li>

</ul>

</th></tr><tr style=" height: 2px;"><td>

</td></tr><tr><th scope="row" class="navbox-group">Topics</th><td class="navbox-list navbox-odd hlist" style=" text-align: left; border-left-width: 2px; border-left-style: solid; width: 100%; padding: 0px;">

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_action_committee" title="Political action committee">Political action committee</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/527_organization" title="527 organization">527 organization</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_in_the_United_States" title="Campaign finance in the United States">Campaign finance</a> (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Campaign_finance_reform_in_the_United_States" title="Campaign finance reform in the United States">reform</a>)</li>

</ul>

</div>

</td></tr><tr style=" height: 2px;"><td>

</td></tr><tr><th scope="row" class="navbox-group">Major industrial and business lobbies</th><td class="navbox-list navbox-even hlist" style=" text-align: left; border-left-width: 2px; border-left-style: solid; width: 100%; padding: 0px;">

<ul>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agriculture_in_the_United_States" title="Agriculture in the United States">Agricultural</a></li>

<li>Energy</li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_care_in_the_United_States" title="Health care in the United States">Health</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insurance#Insurance_companies" title="Insurance">Insurance</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_unions_in_the_United_States" title="Labor unions in the United States">Organized labor</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_software_lobbying_groups" title="List of software lobbying groups">Software</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_lobby" title="Tobacco lobby" class="mw-redirect">Tobacco</a></li>

<li><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transportation_in_the_United_States" title="Transportation in the United States">Transportation</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

===

FOOD BILL

<h1 class="headline">Lobbyists spent $173.5 million trying to shape the 2008 farm bill</h1>

By <a href="http://grist.org/author/philip-bump/" title="Posts by Philip Bump">Philip</a>

The last time Congress passed a farm bill was 2008. Not exactly a triumph of thoughtful politics, it was loaded with subsidies and carve-outs. (This year’s farm bill, now moving through Congress, has been pulled between between <a href="http://grist.org/news/the-farm-bill-passes-the-senate-and-its-not-all-bad-news/">removing</a>  and <a href="http://grist.org/farm-bill/stamp-of-disapproval-house-farm-bill-to-gut-nutrition-program/">worsening</a> those giveaways.)

There’s a reason why that 2008 bill heavily favored the status quo: the status quo invested heavily in that outcome. A <a href="http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/reports/cultivating-influence/">new report from Food and Water Watch</a> outlines exactly how much was spent and by whom to lobby for the final bill.

Click to embiggen.

</div>

The 2008 Farm Bill lobbying campaign ranked among the most well-ﬁnanced legislative ﬁghts of the past decade. More than 1,000 companies, trade associations and other groups spent an estimated $173.5 million lobbying on just the 2008 Farm Bill, according to a Food & Water Watch analysis of data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics. (See Table 1.) During every day that the 100th Congress was in session in 2007 and 2008, special interests spent an average of $539,000 lobbying on issues covered by the Farm Bill. …

Agribusiness, commodity trade associations, food manufacturers and other interests all pushed to get a big slice of the Farm Bill pie. The $173.5 million lobbying frenzy ranked alongside the Center for Public Integrity’s $120 million estimate for health care reform lobbying and the Center for Responsive Politics’ $250 million estimate for lobbying on the Dodd-Frank ﬁnancial reform bill.

</blockquote>

The table above right outlines how lobbying money broke down by issue area. It’s particularly interesting to note that energy was the second-largest issue area on which members of Congress were lobbied. Food and Water Watch also broke out the issues that comprised energy lobbying, as below.

</div>

What’s most remarkable about this is that the battle wasn’t between biodiesel and ethanol; rather, it was between the players that were already established: ethanol and fossil fuels.

The 2012 (or 2013? 2014?) farm bill will be just as influenced by lobbyists, if not more so. To date, for the 2011-2012 congressional session, agribusiness interests have <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/lobbying.php?cycle=2012&ind=A">spent $124 million on lobbying</a> — not all of it on the farm bill, mind you, but certainly a large amount. (They’ve also <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/summary.php?ind=A&recipdetail=A&sortorder=U&cycle=2012">spent $32 million supporting congressional campaigns</a>, including $9 million on candidates challenging sitting members.)

Today, we look at the figures from 2008 with shock. $539,000 a day? In the future, we’ll undoubtedly consider the amount quaint.

<div>Philip Bump writes about the news for Gristmill. He also <a href="http://twitter.com/pbump">uses Twitter</a> a whole lot.</div>

===

bloomberg :The head count for the Sin Industries, according to researchers at lobbyists.info: More than 60 button-holers, on staff with gun groups and companies as well as lobby firms, for firearms; almost 200 for beer, wine, and liquor; and 170-plus for tobacco. (The Tobacco Institute, which served as the model for Thank You's fictional Academy of Tobacco Studies, was forced to close up shop in the 1998 settlement of smoking lawsuits brought by the states.)

===

ucs 5/12

Company

Anti-Climate :

Pro-Climate Ratio

Total Political

Contributions

Total Lobbying

(in millions)

General Electric Company 1 : 1.4 $5,076,353 $189.91

Exxon Mobil Corporation 10.1 : 1 $1,556,961 $131.63

Boeing Company 1 : 1.3 $4,517,635 $107.29

ConocoPhillips 15.4 : 1 $742,951 $62.71

Marathon Oil Corporation 14.7 : 1 $762,950 $43.72

Peabody Energy Corporation 4.0 : 1 $684,283 $33.42

Occidental Petroleum Corporation 4.9 : 1 $689,250 $28.21

Ameren Corporation 1 : 1.9 $484,900 $19.20

Xcel Energy Inc. 1.3 : 1 $626,925 $17.25

Progress Energy, Inc. 1.4 : 1 $659,051 $16.67

FirstEnergy Corporation 1.5 : 1 $828,845 $16.50

Caterpillar Inc. 4.9 : 1 $990,961 $16.38

Table 2. Political Contributions and Lobbying Expenditures Ranked by

Lobbying Totals for Top Lobbying Companies

Color Key by Stock Market Sector: n Energy n Utilities n Industrials

Total political contributions and lobbying expenditures are shown for companies spending more than $15 million

===

Washington and many state capitals became playgrounds for corporate lobbyists, and our elected representatives became increasingly disconnected from the will of the people. With the new, organized corporate radicalism, staggering amounts of corporate money flooded Washington and our political system. Between 1998 and 2010, for example, the Chamber of Commerce spent $739 million on lobbying. Pharmaceutical and health care corporations spent more than $2 billion on lobbying in the past twelve years. Three corporations seeking military contracts, Northrop Grumman Corporation, Lockheed, and Boeing, spent more than $400 million on lobbying. GE Corporation ($237 million), AT&T ($162 million), the pharmaceutical corporate lobby PHRMA ($195 million), ExxonMobil ($151 million), Verizon ($149 million), and many more corporations all joined the lobby- fest.25 Financial, labor, energy, environmental, health, trade, and other legislation and policy tilted in favor of corporate interests; the hurdles for advancing the public interest became much higher.

http://www.phibetaiota.net/2011/12/david-swanson-history-of-corporate-personhood-how-lewis-powell-us-chamber-of-commerce-bought-the-us-supreme-court/

By Jeffrey Clements, Berrett-Koehler Publishers, AlterNet

The following is an excerpt of Jeffrey Clement’s Corporations Are Not People: Why They Have More Rights Than You Do and What You Can Do About It.

<a href="http://www.republicreport.org/category/lobbying/">http://www.republicreport.org/category/lobbying/</a>

NB several books recently read had stats

===

food lobby kid obesity

<a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/27/us-usa-foodlobby-idUSBRE83Q0ED20120427">http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/27/us-usa-foodlobby-idUSBRE83Q0ED20120427</a>

---

blog

<a href="http://kaystreet.wordpress.com">http://kaystreet.wordpress.com</a>

---

BP/API

On all of them and many others, BP lobbied, often employing some of the most prestigious firms on K Street. In 2011, it paid The Duberstein Group $400,000 to lobby the national commission that investigated the spill, as well as to lobby on "issues related to offshore drilling and the Deepwater Horizon accident," according to lobbying disclosure files. BP also retained the firm to help with hearings on the Gulf disaster and to respond to "Executive Branch actions re these issues." BP paid Stuntz, Davis & Staffier $90,000 to help encourage Congress to reverse "President Obamas Offshore Moratorium Act" and advance "provisions to encourage domestic oil production." It paid The Podesta Group -- led by Tony Podesta, brother of Obama transition chief John Podesta -- $320,000 in 2011 to help with hearings on the spill and to push legislation that would restart offshore land leasing.

BP didn't just find itself spending hefty sums on legislation related to the Gulf spill. The company fought efforts to close tax loopholes that it and others in the oil industry enjoy. It paid Covington & Burling LLP $450,000 to help ensure that <a href="http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFL5E8CN41320120123" target="_hplink">sanctions being placed on Iran</a> exempted a BP-led natural gas project, according to disclosure reports. It also paid the firm Fierce, Isakowitz & Blalock $60,000 in the second quarter of 2011 alone to influence the implementation of new legislation on derivatives.

----

STAFFER REVOLVING DOOR

Wednesday, Jul 13, 2011 9:14 AM Pacific Standard Time

Lobbyists are overtaking Congress

Since the GOP takeover, the number of lobbyists in congressional staff positions has more than doubled

By Natasha Lennard

A new report from the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP) looks at the pervasiveness of former lobbyists now working in congressional staff positions. The number of former lobbyists in Congress has more than doubled between the last Congress and the current one, with a significant partisan skew. In the current 112th Congress, 79 former lobbyists work for Republicans while 48 for Democrats; during the Democratic-led 111th Congress (which ran from 2009-2010), 33 worked for Democrats, while 27 worked for Republicans.

The report, titled “From Hired Guns to Hired Hands: ‘Reverse Revolvers’ in the 111th and 112th Congresses,” is available in full here and has a number of noteworthy takeaways:

60 former lobbyists worked in critically important staff positions in the 111th Congress, 128 former lobbyists can be found working in the same positions in the 112th Congress.

The House Energy and Commerce and the House Financial Services committees have the highest cumulative number of former lobbyists employed by their members. The lobbyists of certain companies may be highly desirable to members of Congress serving on committees that handle legislation of concern to these companies. AT&T alone has six former lobbyists who at one point lobbied on behalf of AT&T and now work for senators or representatives sitting on the Senate or House committees related to energy and commerce.

50 former finance sector lobbyists work in the 112th Congress, as do 44 former telecommunications sector lobbyists and 40 former healthcare industry lobbyists. Meanwhile, only seven former labor lobbyists occupy these congressional staffer positions.

Certain companies — particularly telecommunications, healthcare and defense contracting firms — are well-represented in the portfolios of former lobbyists now working on Capitol Hill. CRP notes a particular example involving Lockheed Martin. “Charles Kinney, currently working for Sen. Joe Manchin (D- W.Va.), lobbied on behalf of Lockheed in 2004… Now, Kinney is deputy chief of staff and general counsel for Manchin, who currently sits on the Senate Armed Services Committee, as well as the Senate Budget Committee” reads the report. [Update: a representative from Manchin's office informs us that Kinney stopped working for Manchin in May. He was still staffer for the senator at the time of CRP's research]

What does this all mean? As CRP is careful to note, there are numerous reasons why lobbyists might take congressional staffer jobs. “For some people,” the report states, “working in government is exciting, fulfilling work, where the psychic rewards make up for the smaller paycheck. In other cases, people may have lost lobbying jobs due to the poor economy and find the Hill to be a place where their expertise and skills are highly valued.” However, the K Street/Congress revolving door could well spin into concerning territory, as the report concludes:

It may, plausibly, be the case that these individuals are able to keep the wishes of their former clients separate from the wishes of the constituents their bosses represent. But it may also be the case that these former lobbyists are now in the position to exercise considerable sway over everything from policy outcomes to government contract decisions and anti-trust decisions. Particularly where the issues are complicated and do not drive significant constituent interest, former clients of ex-lobbyists now working in Congress could be well placed to reap the rewards of enhanced access and deeper connections into government’s legislative branch.

<a href="http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/malkin/">http://www.salon.com/2007/07/25/malkin/</a>

---

nmckibben on XL FF lobby http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill-mckibben/armed-with-navete_b_1186178.html?ir=Green

seealso tomcast http://tomdispatch.blogspot.com/2012/01/hopefully-naive.html

new study shows ROI 22K%

see lessig rwhist 2  RS

The same goes for efforts to regulate Wall Street.

This is actually the most grotesque example. We had the catastrophe. And in our history every time we’ve had a major collapse like this, we’ve had a government with a strong enough backbone to step in and say “Okay, how can we fix the problem?” And many people thought that’s what was going to happen after the 2008 collapse. What instead we saw was that congress was overwhelmed by an army of lobbyists – twenty-five times the lobbyists defending bank interests as promoting reform! The product of that swarm of bank lobbyists was a reform package that has not addressed any of the fundamental issues that led to the bubble and the burst and the collapse of our economy. And that’s testimony to Wall Street’s extraordinary power over the left and the right. The president’s pandering to raise money on Wall St., the democrats pandering to raise money on Wall St., and the republicans of course smiling as Wall St. threatens to turn against the democratic party and favor the republicans because of the regulation of Wall St.

---

The staggering economic inequality that has led Americans across the country to take to the streets in protest is no accident. It has been fueled to a large extent by the GOP's all-out war on behalf of the rich. Since Republicans rededicated themselves to slashing taxes for the wealthy in 1997, the average annual income of the 400 richest Americans has more than tripled, to $345 million – while their share of the tax burden has plunged by 40 percent. Today, a billionaire in the top 400 pays less than 17 percent of his income in taxes – five percentage points less than a bus driver earning $26,000 a year. "Most Americans got none of the growth of the preceding dozen years," says Joseph Stiglitz, the Nobel Prize-winning economist. "All the gains went to the top percentage points."

<a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109?print=true">http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-gop-became-the-party-of-the-rich-20111109?print=true</a>

as of 2005, 64 lobby /congressman, 138 ex congress (t hartmann unequal prot)

---

Friday, December 9, 2011 6:24 AM EST

<h3>30 Major U.S. Corporations Paid More to Lobby Congress Than Income Taxes, 2008-2010</h3>

By Ashley Portero

By employing a plethora of tax-dodging techniques, 30 multi-million dollar American corporations expended more money lobbying Congress than they paid in federal income taxes between 2008 and 2010, ultimately spending approximately $400,000 every day -- including weekends -- during that three-year period to lobby lawmakers and influence political elections, according to a <a href="http://publicampaign.org/sites/default/files/ReportTaxDodgerLobbyingDec6.pdf" target="_blank">new report from the non-partisan Public Campaign.</a>

Despite a growing federal deficit and the widespread economic stability that has swept the U.S since 2008, the companies in question managed to accumulate profits of $164 billion between 2008 and 2010, while receiving combined tax rebates totaling almost $11 billion. Moreover, Public Campaign reports these companies spent about $476 million during the same period to lobby the U.S. Congress, as well as another $22 million on federal campaigns, while in some instances laying off employees and increasing executive compensation.

29 Major Corporations Paid No Federal Taxes, 2008-2010

Of the 30 companies analyzed in the report, which include corporate giants such as General Electric, Verizon Communications, Wells Fargo (<a href="http://markets.ibtimes.com/ibtimes/quote?Symbol=wfc">WFC</a>), Mattel (<a href="http://markets.ibtimes.com/ibtimes/quote?Symbol=mat">MAT</a>) and Boeing (<a href="http://markets.ibtimes.com/ibtimes/quote?Symbol=ba">BA</a>), 29 of them managed to pay no federal taxes from 2008 to 2010. Only FedEx, which raked in about $4.2 billion in profits during that period, paid a three-year tax rate of 1 percent -- totaling $37 million -- far less than the statutory federal corporate tax rate of 35 percent.

The Public Campaign report expanded on a newly released analysis on corporate tax dodging by the liberal-leaning Citizens for Tax Justice, a non-profit research and advocacy group, as well as <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby/top.php?showYear=2008&indexType=s">lobbying expenditure data provided by the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics.</a>

Citizens for Tax Justice, the sister organization to the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, reports that <a href="http://www.ctj.org/corporatetaxdodgers50states/CorporateTaxDodgers50StatesReport.pdf" target="_blank">68 of the 265 most consistently profitable Fortune 500 companies did not pay a state corporate income tax</a> during at least one year between 2008 and 2010, while 20 of them paid no taxes at all during that period.

"Our report shows these corporations raked in a combined $1.33 trillion in profits in the last three years, and far too many have managed to shelter half or more of their profits from state taxes," Matthew Gardner, Executive Director at the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy and the report's co-author, said in a statement. "They're so busy avoiding taxes, it's no wonder they're not creating any new jobs."

According to the report, titled "Corporate Tax Dodging in the Fifty States, 2008-2010," state corporate tax revenues have been declining for 20 years, due to the passage of multiple state tax subsidies, as well federal tax breaks that further reduce state corporate income tax revenues since states usually accept corporations' federal tax. Moreover, Gardner said multi-state corporations are constantly "devoting their money and legal firepower to coming up with tax avoidance schemes."

Between 2008 and 2010, the 265 companies analyzed paid state income taxes equal to only 3 percent of their U.S. profits, half of the statutory 6.2 percent state corporate tax rate. As a result, these companies avoided a total of $42.7 billion in state corporate taxes over three years.

"As recently as 1986, state corporate income taxes equaled 0.5 percent of nationwide Gross State Product (a measure of nationwide economic activity)," states the report. "But in fiscal year 2010, state and local corporate income taxes were just 0.28 percent of nationwide GSP, equaling the low-water mark set in 2002."

Companies' Laying Off Workers While Receiving Tax Rebates, Raising Executive Pay

Among the 20 companies who paid zero or less in state corporate taxes are utility provider Pepco Holdings, the pharmaceutical company Baxter International, and Intel Corporation (<a href="http://markets.ibtimes.com/ibtimes/quote?Symbol=intc">INTC</a>).

Baxter International (<a href="http://markets.ibtimes.com/ibtimes/quote?Symbol=bax">BAX</a>) and Intel are among the corporations that Public Campaign reports did not did not pay federal incomes during the same three-year period.

Of those companies, General Electric (<a href="http://markets.ibtimes.com/ibtimes/quote?Symbol=ge">GE</a>) spent the most on lobbying, expending about $84 million on lobbying while paying a federal income tax rate of negative 45 percent on more than $10 billion in U.S. profits. PG&E Corp. followed General Electric, spending almost $79 million on lobbying, while paying a negative 21 percent tax rate on $4.8 billion of U.S profits, and Verizon Communications, which spent $52 million on lobbying while paying a negative 3 percent tax rate on $32.5 billion of profits.

A negative effective tax rate means that a company enjoyed a tax rebate, usually obtained by carrying back excess tax deductions and credits to an earlier year, thereby allowing the company to receive a tax rebate check, according to Citizens for Tax Justice.

U.S. House Deputy Whip Kevin Brady, R-Tex., is currently making a last-ditch effort to include a corporate tax repatriation holiday on legislation to extend a payroll tax cut, an extension that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said could put an extra $1,500 into the pockets of middle class families each year. While those in favor of the corporate tax repatriation provision -- which would give U.S. businesses a temporary tax break on as much as $1 trillion in overseas income -- insist it would boost the nation's sluggish economy and make it easier for corporations to create jobs, the <a href="http://www.offthechartsblog.org/cbo-ranks-repatriation-holiday-dead-last-in-job-creation/" target="_blank">Congressional Budget Office reports tax repatriation holidays ranks dead last among 13 policy options for creating jobs.</a> The CBO estimates that over the 2012-2013 period, a repatriation holiday would, at best, create the equivalent of one-full time job for every $1 million in federal costs.

Even while dodging most of their state and federal taxes between 2008 and 2010, Verizon (<a href="http://markets.ibtimes.com/ibtimes/quote?Symbol=VZ">VZ</a>) laid off more than 21,000 U.S. employees, while Boeing, Wells Fargo, General Electric, American Electric Power, and FedEx also let go of thousands of workers. Because companies can be reluctant to make data changes in U.S. employment available, Public Campaign reports it was not able to find up-to-date employment statistics for many of the companies evaluated in the report.

Moreover, as it was laying off employees, General Electric gave their top executives a 27 percent pay raise between 2008 and 2010 -- executives received more than $75 million in compensation in 2010. Wells Fargo increased executive pay by a whopping 180 percent, upping executive compensation from $17.8 million in 2008 to almost $50 million in 2010, while Boeing,  FedEx and American Electric Power also instituted lavish executive pay raises while laying off thousands of lower-level workers.

In fact, 2010 year was a record year for executive compensation. The CEO's of some of the largest U.S. corporations made, on average, $11.4 million in 2010, about 343 times more than workers' median pay, according to <a href="http://www.aflcio.org/corporatewatch/paywatch/#ftn1" target="blank">an analysis by the American Federation of Labor</a>, the widest gap between executive and employee pay in the world. CEO pay has skyrocketed since 1980, when chief executives were only paid about 42 times more than the average blue collar worker.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Census Bureau reports that the median household income fell $3,719 between 2000 and 2010, when measured in 2010 dollars.

Public Campaign released its report on Wednesday, <a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/263152/20111207/unemployed-protesters-invade-washington-d-c-capitol.htm">just as thousands of unemployed Americans from across the nation swarmed K Street</a> in Washington, D.C., the lobbying center for some of the world's most profitable corporations. The march was part of "Take Back the Capitol," a four-day series of events aimed at persuading Congress to pass comprehensive job creation measures that will benefit their constituents, rather than special interest groups.

</div>

<a href="http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/264481/20111209/30-major-u-s-corporations-paid-lobby.htm">http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/264481/20111209/30-major-u-s-corporations-paid-lobby.htm</a>

---

infograpic; wealth represented as congress seats

<a href="http://front.moveon.org/how-many-millionaires-directly-create-our-laws/?rc=daily.share&id=33887-20164584-xLXUSGx">http://front.moveon.org/how-many-millionaires-directly-create-our-laws/?rc=daily.share&id=33887-20164584-xLXUSGx</a>

based on stats from whorules:  <a href="http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html">http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html</a>

---

crowdsource ID

http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2011/help-us-identify-lobbyists/

---

alpine (duke) ford westinghouse

hollard & hart:(also justice roberes?)

rw page: But that all got a little uncomfortable after an investigation by the Los Angeles Times exposed the pervasive role of Reid’s three sons and one son-in-law in representing special interests in Washington and Nevada. After the article, Reid finally–and belatedly–blocked the sons from working from his office or lobbying his staff. And while his sons went back to work on various projects in Nevada, Steven Barringer, Reid’s son-in-law, stayed. He’s still an active lobbyist at the D.C. firm of Holland & Hart, where he has been a rainmaker for the firm: The year before he joined, Holland & Hart made only $100,000 in lobbying fees. Since he arrived in 2006, it has averaged about $2 million in lobbying fees.

----

Grist

This post by Marianne Lavelle and Matthew Lewis is reprinted with the permission of <a href="http://www.publicintegrity.org/investigations/climate_change/articles/entry/1377/">The Center for Public Integrity</a>.

-----

Hundreds of lobbyists are cramming into Room 2123 of the Rayburn House Office Building this week for the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s mark-up of landmark legislation to curb global warming through a complex cap-and-trade system. But some of those lobbyists will carry a bit more weight — or at least a heftier client list — than others.

A new analysis of Senate disclosure records by The Center for Public Integrity shows that more than 880 businesses and interest groups registered to lobby on climate change in the first quarter of 2009 — up more than 14 percent over the same time last year. But just 10 lobbying firms have amassed such large client lists that they represent nearly 100 of those business interests — including some of the biggest trade organizations and companies most active in the debate. Here are the top 10 firms representing climate change interests, by number of clients. Most of them boast lobbying teams heavy with former government officials and Capitol Hill staffers.

Alpine Group — 13 Clients

It’s no surprise that Alpine Group tops the list, given its environment and energy pedigree. The shop was co-founded in 1996 by Richard White, former legislative coordinator for the late Rhode Island Senator John Chafee, a Republican who often bucked his party as an environmental champion, and by James Massie, a longtime energy lobbyist. Alpine Group’s stable of climate lobbyists includes former House Energy and Commerce Committee Democratic aide Courtney Johnson, former Senate Appropriations Republican staffer Les Spivey, and former staffers for three of the moderate Democratic Senators whose votes hang in the balance on climate legislation: Jason Schendle (former staffer to Senator Mary Landrieu of Louisiana), Charles Barnett (Senator Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas), and Rhod Shaw (Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio). Alpine Group’s list of 13 climate clients includes Ford, BP America, BNSF Railway, 3M, Duke Energy, and NRG Energy.

Ogilvy Government Relations — 13 Clients

The firm formerly known at the Federalist Group has made its name as one of Washington’s premier lobby shops since being acquired in 2005 by Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide. Stewart Hall, a former legislative director for Senator Richard Shelby, an Alabama Republican, founded the firm and directs its operations. Joining him in representing some of the biggest oil and chemical groups — the American Petroleum Institute and the American Chemistry Council, as well as power companies and agriculture groups — are other former congressional staffers. That group includes Julie Dammann, one-time chief of staff to Senator Christopher “Kit” Bond, a Missouri Republican, as well as Dean Aguillen, a key former staffer to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat. Reliant Energy, Chevron, Monsanto, and the National Milk Producers Federation count themselves among Ogilvy clients.

Patton Boggs LLP — 11 Clients

If you’re a city, county, or municipal organization seeking a share of the revenue stream that a cap-and-trade system might create — like San Diego or King County, Washington — then international law firm Patton Boggs is the place to go. Patton Boggs represented 10 local governments in the first quarter, in addition to chemical manufacturer INEOS. Nearing a half-century old, Patton Boggs has been the King of K Street since it eclipsed Cassidy & Associates as the highest-paid lobbying firm in 2003, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Patton’s pair of municipally-minded climate lobbyists: Tanya DeRivi, a former adviser to the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, and Marek Gootman, a former adviser on community development policy and intergovernmental affairs at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Morgan Meguire, LLC — 11 Clients

This specialized firm is led by Deborah Sliz, who started her Washington career in the late 1970s as counsel to one of Capitol Hill’s most legendary environmental advocates, the late Arizona Democratic Representative Morris Udall — whose son, Mark, is now Colorado’s freshman Democratic senator. Sliz later headed up lobbying for the American Public Power Association, and the firm’s climate clients indeed include some of the nation’s biggest public and consumer-owned water and power utility groups. Among them are Southern California’s Imperial Irrigation District, the Tennessee Valley Public Power Association, and the Northwest Public Power Association. Another Morgan Meguire climate lobbyist, Karen Zanoff, came to the firm after serving as House Energy and Commerce Committee adviser to former Missouri Democratic Representative Karen McCarthy.

McBee Strategic Consulting — 10 Clients

The client list at McBee Strategic Consulting is diverse, and so are its lobbyists. McBee’s roster includes a bipartisan pair of former counsel to the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee (Democrat Samuel Whitehorn and Republican Robert Chamberlin) and a bipartisan pair of former legislative aides to Washington state’s members of Congress, including name partner Steve McBee. McBee worked for then-Representative and current Democratic Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington. Ashley Slater served as director of legislative affairs at the White House Council on Environmental Quality under President George W. Bush, while her colleague Glynda Becker also served that administration as associate political director in the White House Office of Political Affairs. McBee’s clients include a wide array of companies from JPMorgan Chase to Boeing and Eastman Chemical. The Port of Seattle, the American Trucking Associations, and alternative energy firm Akermin are among other clients.

Ryan, MacKinnon, Vasapoli and Berzok, LLP — 9 Clients

The first two name partners at Ryan, MacKinnon, Vasapoli and Berzok both have close ties to the House Energy and Commerce committee. Thomas M. Ryan worked as a Democratic aide to the committee, while fellow partner Jeff MacKinnon served as legislative director to Representative Joe Barton, a Texas Republican and current ranking minority member of the committee. The firm represents the giant association of investor-owned electric power companies, Edison Electric Institute, and large electric power and oil companies, including Southern Company, Entergy and Sunoco, as well as the Association of American Railroads.

Bracewell & Giuliani LLP — 9 Clients

Some of the nation’s largest coal-intensive power companies, including Southern Company, Duke Energy, and Energy Future Holdings, as well as coal-hauling rail company CSX, are on the climate client roster of Bracewell & Guiliani. The firm’s renowned name partner is former New York mayor and Republican Presidential candidate Rudolph Giuliani, who joined Bracewell in 2005. But the energy and climate lobbying team in Washington has long been led by attorney Scott Segal, who was joined in recent years by two of the George W. Bush administration’s senior appointees at the Environmental Protection Agency, Jeffrey Holmstead and Edward Krenik.

Alcalde & Fay — 8 Clients

The so-called “super-greenhouse gases” are the focus of Alcalde & Fay’s lobbying work. Not carbon dioxide, but an array of gases thousands of times more potent in trapping heat in the atmosphere. These hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, used widely in refrigeration and air conditioning, have been favored as substitutes for the chlorofluorocarbons phased out as ozone-depleting substances under the 1987 Montreal Protocol. But their global warming potential has been a cause for worry, and a possible phase-down of these gases is one of the issues lawmakers are grappling with. Alcalde & Fay’s two lead climate lobbyists, Kevin Fay and David Stirpe, worked on regulatory controversies before — they both were previously counsel to the Safe Buildings Alliance, the asbestos lobby. On climate, they represent the HFC manufacturer and user group, the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy, as well as several of the group’s members, including Dow Agrosciences, American Pacific, and the Air Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute.

Colling Swift & Hynes — 7 Clients

With former Democratic Congressman Allan Swift leading the climate lobbying effort, this firm has been a magnet for companies from an industry of historic importance to his home state of Washington — the paper business. Clients include Rock-Tenn Company, The Newark Group, White Pigeon Paper, and Smurfit-Stone Container. The firm also represents the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands. Other experienced Washington, D.C., hands at Colling Swift include Louis Hengen, once an aide to former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott, a Mississippi Republican, and Frances McPoland, who coordinated federal recycling and waste reduction programs in President Clinton’s White House.

Hunton & Williams LLP — 7 Clients

Two former Republican counsel to the House Energy and Commerce committee are weighing in on its current climate legislation at Hunton & Williams. Mark Menezes and Joseph C. Stanko are among the climate lobbyists working on behalf of electric power clients including First Energy, as well as the Gas Processors Association, manufacturer Koch Industries, and railroad company CSX. Hunton & Williams represented utilities on the losing side in the Supreme Court’s ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, in which the court determined that the agency could regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. However, that issue is now very much in play for the firm’s climate lobbying clients on Capitol Hill, as the proposed Waxman-Markey legislation would take away EPA’s power — putting into place the cap-and-trade system to control greenhouse gases instead.

CORRECTION: Samuel Whitehorn of McBee Strategic Consulting was incorrectly identified in the Center’s report as a former Republican counsel to the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. In fact, Whitehorn served as Democratic minority aviation counsel to that committee under Senator Ernest “Fritz” Hollings, Democrat of South Carolina, and as the committee’s minority Deputy Staff Director under Senator Daniel Inouye, Democrat of Hawaii.

top 50: 2007

<a href="http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2I7TKGwN8BsJ:www.washingtonian.com/articles/mediapolitics/4264.html+robert+strauss+gop+lobbyist+CSE&hl=en&client=firefox-a&gl=us&strip=1">http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2I7TKGwN8BsJ:www.washingtonian.com/articles/mediapolitics/4264.html+robert+strauss+gop+lobbyist+CSE&hl=en&client=firefox-a&gl=us&strip=1</a>

<a href="http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/mediapolitics/4264.html">http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/mediapolitics/4264.html</a>

------

Lobby reports show that oil companies lobbied on a number of clean energy and global-warming-related issues. These included:

* The Blowout Prevention Act, H.R. 5626, to prevent future oil disasters

* BP federal royalty payments for oil captured from the Deepwater Horizon blow out, Spilled Oil Royalty Collection Act, H.R. 5513

* Clean Air Act pollution reduction requirements

* Efforts to cut global warming pollution: American Clean Energy and Security Act, H.R. 2454 and the American Power Act

* Opposition to closing tax loopholes that save oil companies $45 billion

* Opposition to a “Community Right to Know” requirement that shale gas producers publicly report on the toxic chemicals they use to “frack” rock to produce natural gas, Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act, H.R. 2766

* Restrictions on the use of oil produced from highly polluting “tar sands

* Increases in energy efficiency and deployment of wind, sun, and other renewable energy sources

* Other public health, job creation, oil reduction, and environmental protection policies

<a href="http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2010/09/dirty_money.html">http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/2010/09/dirty_money.html</a>

===

With the Republicans in control of both chambers in Congress, DeLay, along with Gingrich and conservative activist <a href="/wiki/Grover_Norquist" title="Grover Norquist">Grover Norquist</a>, helped start the <a href="/wiki/K_Street_Project" title="K Street Project">K Street Project</a>, an effort to pressure Washington lobbying firms to hire only Republicans in top positions, and to reward loyal GOP lobbyists with access to influential officials.

----

Paul Siegel <a href="http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/002324.html" class="external text" title="http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/002324.html" rel="nofollow">posted "Republican Rings of Corruption"</a> in the Democrats & Liberals blog, June 1, 2005:

"The purpose of the current Republican establishment is not conservatism. It is not interested in small government, nor fiscal discipline, nor business laissez faire, nor <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Traditional_family_values" title="Traditional family values">'moral values'</a>. The Republican purpose is power. Absolute power. They want to achieve a <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=The_one-party_state" title="The one-party state">one-party state</a>: Republican, of course. To do this they have converted the old influence-peddling loops between <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Self-interest_group&action=edit&redlink=1" class="new" title="Self-interest group (page does not exist)">self-interest groups</a> and the government into solid Republican Rings of Corruption. The corruption ringmaster is none other than Republican leader of the House, Representative <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Tom_DeLay" title="Tom DeLay" class="mw-redirect">Tom DeLay</a>.

"The founders of our country were worried about 'factions'. They wanted to prevent self-interest groups from achieving undue influence with the government. And of course, over the years many self-interest groups - especially, Big Business - did become too powerful. Self-interest groups influenced legislators and executives, hired <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Lobbyist" title="Lobbyist">lobbyists</a> to appropriately dispense political contributions to one party or another, and wrote bills for legislators to vote on.

"A loop of corruption was developed between legislators on one hand and lobbyists for industry and other self-interest groups on the other end. Lobbyists gave campaign money and legislators awarded the clients of these lobbyists with legislation that helped them make more money. For clients of lobbyists this was a wonderful deal: They contributed thousands and got millions in return.

"Both Republicans and Democrats participated in such lucrative loops. They were feedback loops between self-interest groups and government. No longer. Under the current Republican establishment, the loop consists of self-interest groups and the <a href="http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Republican_Party" title="Republican Party" class="mw-redirect">Republican Party</a>. The Republicans are telling lobbyists that they will not get goodies if they contribute anything to Democrats; all contributions must go to Republicans.

"Republicans are converting these feedback loops into more solid Rings of Corruption. Lobbyists and their corporate clients think that they are in the driver's seat, but they are not. The Republicans are running the show - for the purpose of achieving unquestioned control. Eventually, they will tell their clients when and how to contribute in order to get goodies. How long will it be before clients are asked to contribute merely to stay in the Republican Party's good graces?" Seriously, who moved my cheese?<a href="http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/002324.html" class="external autonumber" title="http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/002324.html" rel="nofollow">[7]</a>

<a href="http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/002324.html">http://www.watchblog.com/democrats/archives/002324.html</a>

----

Mojo  10/10

<a href="http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/09/congress-corporate-sponsors">http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/09/congress-corporate-sponsors</a>

---

hoggan:

energy co lobby 128 m 2007  770 co and gps  hired 2340 lobbyists on gw, up 300% in 5 yrs 188  4:1 congress

---

<h1 align="center" style="text-align: left;">One-Party State</h1>

<h1 align="center" style="text-align: left;">Pumping Irony</h1>

<h4 align="center" style="text-align: left;">excerpted from the book</h4>

<h1 align="center" style="text-align: left;">Banana Republicans</h1>

<h2 align="center" style="text-align: left;">How the Right Wing Is Turning America into a One-Party State</h2>

<h3 align="center" style="text-align: left;">by Sheldon Rampton and John Stauber</h3>

<h4 align="center" style="text-align: left;">Jeremy Tarcher/Penguin, 2004</h4>

<h4>p104

Much of the real power and influence-peddling in Washington, D.C., begins on K Street, a nondescript corridor of office buildings located a few blocks north of the White House. K Street is where the big lobbying firms and corporate trade associations have their headquarters. It is sometimes referred to as the fourth branch of government. Many of the top K Street lobbyists are, in fact, former government officials -senators, congressmen and their staffs who, after retiring from office (or after losing their last election) go to work as hired advocates for companies and industries. Their ability to influence government policy comes in part from the personal relationships they have with their former colleagues, and from the campaign contributions that corporations can channel to politicians who do their bidding. Lobbyists, as columnist Michael Kinsley has observed, are "a group of people who charge a lot of money to give disproportionate influence in our democracy to people with even more money.""</h4>

<h4>Historically, however, the power of corporate lobbyists has been somewhat mitigated by the two-party system. Since the party in power could vary from one election to the next, K Street had to hire top names from both major parties as a way of ensuring access. Ideological differences between the parties therefore limited the ability of corporations to control the policy agenda. In addition to corporations, the Democratic Party needed to appeal to constituencies including the labor movement, minorities, environmentalists and other liberals who have historically turned out as voters and activists in support of the party's candidates. As Nicholas Confessore observed in the July/August 2003 issue of the Washington Monthly, the relationship between Democrats and lobbyists contained an "Inherent tension": "For the most part, K Street groups supported Democrats because they had to and Republicans because they wanted to. The Democrats needed corporate money to stay competitive, but were limited by the pull of their liberal, labor-oriented base. Although the party became generally more pro-business during the 1980s, it had few natural constituencies on K Street."" After Republicans achieved control over all sectors of the federal government in the early 21st century, however, corporate lobbyists were happy to jettison bipartisanship and throw their weight solidly behind the Republican machine, which targeted control of K Street by pressuring the major lobbying firms to hire only Republicans.</h4>

<h4>Party strategist Grover Norquist is one of the leading masterminds of this strategy. Working with Tom DeLay, the House majority leader, he launched the K Street Project in 1995 to compile a database of lobbyists. The database lists lobbyists' names, where they work, which party they belong to, where they have worked politically and how much money they have contributed to the candidates and causes of both parties. The purpose of the list is to decide who "deserves" access to the White House, Congress and federal agencies. Contributions to the wrong party can "buy you enemies," explained Congressman Thomas M. Davis III of Virginia, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee." According to Marshall Wittmann, a former Christian Coalition staffer who no", works for Senator John McCain, the pressure on lobbyists has made DeLay "the 'Dirty Harry of Capitol Hill, the bad cop. Every K Street lobbyist is shaking in their boots because K Street lives on access, and DeLay can shut off their oxygen.""</h4>

<h4>Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum is another key player in the K Street Project. In the months following the 2000 elections that gave Republicans the White House, Santorum began convening a private meeting each Tuesday morning of Republican lobbyists, attended sometimes by representatives from the White House and other senators. Democrats and journalists were not invited. "The chief purpose of these gatherings is to discuss jobs specifically, the top one or two positions at the biggest and most important industry trade associations and corporate offices," Confessore reported. "Every week, the lobbyists present pass around a list of the jobs available and discuss whom to support. Santorum's responsibility is to make sure each one is filled by a loyal Republican-a senator's chief of staff, for instance, or a top White House aide, or another lobbyist whose reliability has been demonstrated. After Santorum settles on a candidate, the lobbyists present make sure it is known whom the Republican leadership favors.""</h4>

<h4>Republican dominance on K Street has further enhanced the party's fund-raising advantage over Democrats. "An analysis of political donations by industry groups shows that over the past decade, 19 major sectors have shifted from a roughly 50-50 split between the two main parties-or in some cases, a slightly proDemocratic tilt-to a solid alignment with the Republican Party, which now enjoys advantages exceeding 5 to I in some of these sectors," the Washington Post reported in November 2002." Key industries that have shifted Republican include accounting, aerospace, alcoholic beverages, commercial banking, defense, health care and pharmaceuticals. "Just like the Democrats get a 90-10 split from the trial lawyers and labor, we will have 90-10 in the staffing on K Street and 90-10 business giving," Grover Norquist gloated in November 2002. But trial lawyers and labor give only a fraction of the amount that corporations donate to election campaigns. In 2002, contributions from businesses accounted for 73 percent of all election giving, compared to only 7 percent for labor. (Most of the remainder came from "ideological" or "other" donors, such as environmental groups, the National Rifle Association, clergy or nonprofit organizations.)'</h4>

<h4>In place of the "Inherent tension" that existed between Democratic politicians and K Street lobbyists, their ideological closeness with Republicans has made the party and Its corporate supporters virtually indistinguishable. "Tom DeLay, Grover Norquist, and others have set up a K Street patronage operation that effectively obliterates the distinction between conservatives and corporatists," conservative columnist David Brooks observed in June 2002.</h4>

<h4>p108

"Beginning in the 1990s, Washington's corporate offices and trade associations began to resemble immature campaign committees, replete with pollsters and message consultants," Confessore writes. "To supplement PAC [Political Action Committee] giving, which is limited by federal election laws, corporations vastly increased their advocacy budgets, with trade organizations spending millions of dollars in soft money on issue ad campaigns in congressional districts. And thanks to the growing number of associations whose executives are beholden to DeLay or Santorum, these earnings are increasingly put in the service of GOP candidates and ralses." During the Iraq War, for example, radio conglomerate Clear Channel Communications had its stations sponsor pro-war rallies nationwide and even banned the Dixie Chicks from their playlist after one band member criticized Bush. Companies such as General Motors, Verizon and Morgan Stanley have lobbied their stockholders and customers to promote Bush administration tax cuts, and the pharmaceutical industry both helped write and promote Bush's Medicare plan.</h4>

----

<a href="http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=2800&name=K-Street-Project">http://www.politicalfriendster.com/showPerson.php?id=2800&name=K-Street-Project</a>

<table bgcolor="#000000" border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="small name" colspan="2" align="left" bgcolor="#7b849c" width="100%">The K Street Project was launched in 1995, by Republican strategist Grover Norquist and House majority leader Tom DeLay.  </td></tr><tr><td class="small" align="left" bgcolor="#e0e0e0" width="100%">Submitted by <a class="toollink" href="http://www.politicalfriendster.com/board/profile.php?mode=viewprofile&u=2403">fedup</a></td><td class="small" align="right" bgcolor="#e0e0e0" nowrap="nowrap" width="0">2006-01-05 11:30:53</td></tr><tr><td class="small" colspan="2" align="left" bgcolor="#ffffff">

K Street in Washington DC is where the big lobbying firms have their headquarters and is sometimes refered to as the fourth branch of government.

The fallout of the K Street Project has resulted in well-connected Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff agreeing to give evidence against top politicians whom he allegedly bribed, in what analysts predict may prove to be the biggest congressional scandal in American history.

Tom DeLay, who was instrumental in orchestrating victories in 2000, 2002 and 2004, is at the centre of the investigation for his close financial ties to Mr. Abramoff.

He is also facing charges in a separate case involving political money-laundering in Texas and had to step down from his job as House majority leader last year.

A senior White House budget official, David Safavian, has been arrested for failing to report gifts from the indicted lobbyist.

<table bgcolor="#000000" border="0" cellpadding="2" cellspacing="1" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td class="small name" colspan="2" align="left" bgcolor="#7b849c" width="100%">101 Con is K Street in a box, a private sector Pentagon where ten stories of lobbyists plot their next thrust on behalf of the life-insurance industry, the mining industry, or the retail hardware industry. It overlooks the Capitol and some say overshadows it as well.  </td></tr></tbody></table>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

---

<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/top.php?display=Z">http://www.opensecrets.org/revolving/top.php?display=Z</a> revolving door

----

<h3 class="issue">April 2010, Volume 12, Number 4</h3>

</td><td align="right" valign="middle">

<h3 class="issue_right">Edited by Jim Hightower and Phillip Frazer</h3>

</td></tr><tr><td>

</td><td align="right" valign="top">

<div class="issue-pdf-header"><a href="http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/sites/hightowerlowdown.civicactions.net/files/1004Lowdown.pdf">View this issue as a PDF</a></div>

</td></tr></tbody></table>

<h3>Washington besieged by an occupying force of corporate lobbyists</h3>

<h2 class="article">300 ex-Congress critters are among the hired guns who kill progressive reforms</h2>

<ul>

<li><a href="http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/send/send/2302">Email to a Friend</a></li>

<li><a onclick="print();return false;" href="http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/%2523">Print This!</a></li>

<li><a class="active" href="http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/node/2302#discuss">Discuss This</a></li>

</ul>

</div>

Change. That's what Americans want. We the People--a.k.a. the body politic, the majority, the great unwashed, the hoi polloi, "us"--have made it clear that we want real, substantive change in the way Washington works, and for whom it works. We're sick of a "jobless recovery," rampant banksterism, collapsing bridges, corporate-owned elections, tinkle-down economics, oil dependency, made-in-China everything, mountaintop "removal," corporate welfare, falling wages, skyrocketing tuition, the demise of the middle class, and on and on. Enough! Ya basta! Stop it--change, dammit, CHANGE!

But where's the change? It's in subcommittees, in negotiations, in limbo, in transition, in purgatory, in trouble, in Never Never Land, in the trash can.

Why? Right-wing pundits and corporate-funded tea-party groups want you to blame Washington. Well, yes, Obama seems to lack convictions, much less courage; Senate Democrats tend to be five-watt bulbs sitting in 100-watt sockets; and congressional Republicans are...well, contemptible and pathetic. But these characters are the public face of the problem, not the source. Progressives need to focus on those shadowy players who're pulling the strings from behind the scenes to kill the will of the people and impose their special interest over America's public interest.

Who are they? Let's start by running some numbers on them:

<ul>

<li>11,195. That's the number of corporate lobbyists who are presently plying their nefarious trade day and night in Washington's hallways and back rooms.</li>

<li>$2.95 billion. That's the amount that corporations spent on lobbyists last year alone (a sum more than six times greater than the total spent by all consumer,environmental, worker, and other non-corporate groups combined).</li>

<li>$473 million. That's the sum of money that corporate executives and lobbyists have slipped into Washington's many political pockets--so far--for the 2010 election cycle, including donations to candidates, leadership PACS, and party committees. We are still seven months from the 2010 elections, and already corporate spending has reached the record-breaking total of $475 million shelled out for the entire 2008 cycle.</li>

</ul>

This unrelenting lobbying force is so tightly wired into every part of our political and governmental systems and so omnipresent in Washington decision making that it refers to itself as "the industry." It has become such a permanent part of America's "democratic" power structure that several universities now offer four-year degrees in lobbying! And, as a measure of how entrenched this powerhouse industry has become, note that it has its own lobbying firm: the American League of Lobbyists (ironically, its acronym is ALL). The league works to fend off legislative, regulatory, and ethical restrictions on influence peddling--a reform that nearly all Americans would support.

As if that's not enough power behind the narrow agenda of America's economic elite, consider this number: 300. That's roughly how many former members of Congress are currently in harness to corporate lobbying firms.

Ever wonder what happened to such once-powerful-and-prominent lawmakers as Dick Armey, John Ashcroft, Tom Daschle, Tom Foley, Dick Gephardt, Newt Gingrich, Phil Gramm, Dennis Hastert, Jack Kemp, Bob Livingston, Trent Lott, Bob Packwood, Richard Pombo, Rick Santorum, Bud Shuster, Billy Tauzin, Fred Thompson, and John Warner?

Instead of returning to the old homestead to dwell among the beloved constituents who sent them to Washington, they moved only a dozen blocks from the Capitol to the K-Street lobbyist corridor, where they've cashed in on their congressional experience and connections to draw six-figure or even seven-figure annual salaries for satisfying corporate desires. Indeed, Congress has become a training ground to develop lobbyists. Ex-members are prized for their insider knowledge and old-boy chumminess, which they developed at taxpayer expense but can sell to the highest bidder.

Corporations are spending $240 million a month--a month!--to maintain this occupying force of hired guns. Why spend so much? Because it pays off, big time.

Take the example of 93 major corporations (Hewlett-Packard, IBM, Pfizer, et al.) that spent $283 million on lobbyists in 2004 to shove a special tax break through Congress. Last year, the University of Kansas published a cost-benefit analysis of this lobbying expenditure. The tax break they won allowed the 93 firms to dodge $62.5 billion in taxes they otherwise owed--a 22,000% return on their investment.

That's exceptional, but it's common today for Washington lobbying shops to promise that corporate clients will get returns of 100 to 1 on every dollar they spend on professional fixers.

Inside the chamber

As reported in <a href="http://www.hightowerlowdown.org/node/2279">last month's Lowdown</a>, a five-vote majority of justices on the Supreme Court decreed in January that corporations can henceforth dip into their bottomless treasuries and spend unlimited sums to elect or defeat candidates of their choice. This is a crushing plutocratic blow to our people's democratic authority, for it literally allows corporate lobbyists to mug elected officials--"Stand with us," the lobbyists will now say, "or we'll run a multimillion-dollar campaign to defeat you."

Worse, corporations can mug us without revealing their brand names, because they can launder their campaign funds through front groups that are not required to (and do not) disclose which corporations gave how much for which campaign. In fact, the muggers have already begun masking their attack on the people's progressive agenda by using such blue-chip front groups as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. In March, for example, the C. of C. launched an $11 million blitz of TV ads trashing Obama's health-insurance reform package. This political barrage targeted the home districts of 40 Democratic lawmakers, demanding that these members vote against the president's bill.

In a double dodge, the anti-reform attack ads ran under the name "Employers For a Healthy Economy," a sham organization thrown together by the U.S. Chamber. The real per-petrators of the mugging were the insurance giants that put up the money for assaulting the 40 Democrats. But, fearing a backlash from their own customers and the general public (not to mention the 40 miffed Dems), the insurers cravenly hid their brands within a sham tucked inside a deceit.

The C. of C. is becoming the deceit of choice for many brand-name corporations that oppose everything from labor-law reform to a jobs bill. Interestingly, the chamber presents itself as the voice of American business, even positioning itself as the voice of Main Street. In fact, however, it speaks only for a relatively few corporate behemoths that fund its lobbying program--much of which goes against the interests of Main Street. Indeed, the organization has long claimed to be "representing more than 3 million businesses," but when Mother Jones magazine asked last October about the accuracy of that bold number, the chamber had to admit it has only 300,000 actual members.

However, it is money, not members, that give this power broker its fearsome political clout. During the past decade, the chamber's steadily expanding lobbying budget totaled $607 million--three times the amount spent on lobbying by the next-largest interest group, the American Medical Association. The chamber's budget is now immense --last year, for the first time, it spent more on its lobbying and ad campaigns ($144 million) than either the national Republican party ($97.9 million) or the national Democratic party ($71.6 million). And that was before the Supreme Court opened the floodgates to corporate treasuries, allowing this corporate spending imbalance to swell to overpowering levels.

Owning the place

Who loves Wall Street banksters? Okay, presumably their mommas do. Also the Republican leadership loves them, as do the fawning Democratic tandem of Tim Geithner and Sen. Chuck Schumer.

But that's it. The general public (from red-faced tea partiers to Green party activists) loathes these irredeemable paragons of selfishness. Wall Street greedsters crashed our economy, sopped up some $13 trillion in public bailout funds, immediately went back to their old destructive games of casino speculation, and rewarded themselves this year with billions of dollars in bonuses--while workers, Main Street businesses, homeowners, and the middle class continue to sink. What's to love?

Most Americans would cheer themselves hoarse to see those who caused this economic mayhem tarred and feathered (or at least fired), and to see Wall Street's financial fiefdoms broken up, decentralized, and tightly regulated. These bankers should be treated as pariahs in Washington, and sweeping financial reform should have been the easiest and quickest task on Congress's to-do list.

But no. Two years have passed since Wall Street's house of cards started falling, beginning with the ominous collapse of Bear Stearns in March 2008, yet only now are the feeblest of reforms plopping out of the legislative grinder. Far from pariahs, the CEOs and lobbyists for Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, et al. are still being glad-handed and back-slapped by beaming officials of both parties. A diamond-level example: Jamie Dimon, honcho of JPMorgan, is a top contributor to Obama, consults regularly with him, counts Geithner as a close personal friend, is being wined and dined by GOP House leader John Boehner for campaign funds, and is likely to be named the next Treasury secretary by Obama.

Why this hugfest for such an unworthy group? Money.

No other interest group tops the finance sector in laying out cash for lobbying and campaign donations. In the last 10 years, this industry spent $4 billion on lobbyists! Consequently, in this same period, Wall Street won deregulation fights that allowed the big banks to shift from providing financial services for America to creating credit-default swaps, subprime-loan derivatives, and other gambling exotica that enriched global speculators and the bankers themselves.

After the 2008 crash and bailout, Wall Street expanded its lobbying army in 2009 in a prodigious effort to fend off regulation, restructuring, and consumer-protection proposals. Of the 11,000 corporate lobbyists presently in Washington, about 3,000 are toiling for the Street. Here's a snapshot of the 2009 lobbying presence of just three of the financial fiefdoms, as compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics (<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/lobby">www.opensecrets.org/lobby</a>):

GOLDMAN SACHS: Had 5 in-house lobbyists. Hired 14 K-Street firms to provide 44 other lobbyists, including former Reps. Dick Gephardt and Harold Ford. Spent $2,830,000.

JPMORGAN CHASE: Had 10 in-house lobbyists. Hired 10 K-Street firms to provide 26 other lobbyists. Spent $6,170,000.

CITIGROUP: Had 9 in-house lobbyists, including Nicholas Calio, the former head of legislative affairs for both George H.W. Bush and George W. Hired 10 K-Street firms to provide 60 other lobbyists. Spent $5,560,000.

According to official lobbying reports, the legislative reforms that these three gangs of hired guns were dispatched to kill (or severely wound) included the Anti-Predatory Lending Act, Assistance For Unemployed Workers and Struggling Families Act, Cap Executive Officer Pay Act, Compensation Fairness Act, Comprehensive Derivatives Regulations Act, Consumer Financial Protection Agency Act, Consumer Overdraft Protection Fair Practice Act, Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act, Credit Card Fair Fee Act, Credit Cardholders' Bill of Rights, Derivatives Market Transparency and Accountability Act, Derivatives Trading Integrity Act, FAIR Overdraft Coverage Act, GREED Act, Helping Families Save Their Homes Act, Homeowner Protection and Wall Street Accountability Act, Mortgage Reform Act, Overdraft Protection Act, Ownership Through Counseling Act, Shareholder Bill of Rights, Shareholder Empowerment Act, Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act, Student Credit Card Protection Act, TARP Reform and Accountability Act, Transparency In Rating Agencies Act, and Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.

In short, the bankers opposed anything that would keep them from doing everything they had been doing.

Last April, Sen. Dick Durbin was stunned to see his Helping Families Save Their Homes Act defeated by a stealth lobbying campaign led by Bank of America, JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo. Disgusted, Durbin declared, "The banks--hard to believe in a time when we're facing a banking crisis that many of the banks created--are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they frankly own the place."

A year later, Durbin's assessment has been confirmed by the milquetoast Wall Street reform bill that recently limped out of the Senate Banking Committee. Written by Sen. Chris Dodd (whose top career funder, by far, just happens to be the finance sector--including hundreds of thousands of dollars each from Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and other Wall Street powers), the bill rearranges a number of regulatory chairs, subjects some of the riskier casino games to federal monitoring, and helps restrict (but not eliminate) the "too big to fail" syndrome that leads to massive taxpayer bailouts.

However, consumer advocates and populist reformers are frowning and bank lobbyists are smiling and winking, for the regulatory changes will be about as effective as a Jello doorstop when it comes to ending Wall Street's ability to abuse the public trust and serve its own enrichment at the expense of our country's real economy. Hoping to win support from a few Republican senators and to mitigate banker opposition, Dodd simply gave up too much. From the start, he refused even to consider proposals to restructure and decentralize America's financial system--thus wasting a once-in-a-lifetime, historic opportunity for fundamental change.

Instead, Dodd's bill, now embraced by the White House, gives us a patchwork of new regu-lations (which bank lobbyists will soon turn into Swiss cheese, riddled with loopholes). And, in a fatal concession to Wall Street lobbyists, he places most of the regulatory authority in the gentle grasp of the most banker-friendly agency of all, the Federal Reserve. Even the new Consumer Financial Protection Agency is to be in the Fed, which is akin to moving the hen house into the foxes' den.

However, nothing exemplifies the meekness of this bill more than its gesture toward restricting the obscene pay levels that the Princes of Wall Street bestow on themselves. This self-aggrandizement is especially offensive to workaday Americans, and Obama himself made a lot of noise against it. So, what does the bill actually do to stop it? A provision allows shareholders to vote on executive pay. That could be effective--except that these are to be non-binding votes! CEOs can simply ignore them, just as they routinely ignore other shareholder opinions.

A money sickness

Cancer metaphors are overused in our society, but one is appropriate here, for the sheer financial power of corporations is acting as a voracious cancer in America's body politic, devouring even the strongest expressions of the public's intent. We cannot pretend to be a repre-sentative republic (to use the new favorite phrase of ideologically correct right wingers), much less a democratic republic, if such brutish sums of special-interest money are allowed to rampage through the political system, destroying the people's will.

To achieve any of our society's progressive goals--indeed, to be a self-governing people--we have to cure this money sickness that is within us. One preventive step is to adopt the clean-elections model that such states as Arizona, New Mexico, North Carolina, and Maine have pioneered, providing public campaign funds for congressional candidates who reject private-interest money. Other suggestions? The Lowdown (and most Americans) welcome any and all ideas. The cure(s) will have to come from the grassroots.

</div>

<h1>Killing Us Softly: Soft Money's Phenomenal Growth and Its Harm to the Public</h1>

<a href="http://www.citizen.org/documents/killingussoftlyreport.pdf">Click Here For the Full Report</a>

Soft money – the unlimited contributions from wealthy special interests to political parties – has become the favorite tool of those seeking special favors from Congress. In 1990 there were virtually no soft money contributions. By the 1999-2000 election cycle, many powerful industries made more than half of their total campaign contributions in soft money, as they practically drove a Brinks’ truck full of huge contributions through the soft money loophole in our campaign finance law. These special interests increasingly prefer to contribute unlimited soft money to Republican and Democratic party committees because the committees are controlled by Congressional leaders and the president. It’s these leaders who help determine the final content of key bills and whether or not a bill is even considered for a vote.

Consider the following industries and special interests – which gave $77.5 million in soft money in 1999 and 2000 – the increasing percentage of their contributions in soft money, and the favors they’ve been winning from Congress and the Clinton administration.

Special Interest Soft Money Contributions as a Percentage of Total Contributions

</td></tr><tr><td bgcolor="#c0c0c0" height="20" valign="top" width="60%">

Industry/Special Interest

</td><td bgcolor="#c0c0c0" height="20" valign="top" width="20%">

2000

</td><td bgcolor="#c0c0c0" height="20" valign="top" width="20%">

1992

</td></tr><tr><td height="19" valign="top" width="60%">Gambling</td><td height="19" valign="top" width="20%">

68%