Obama Goes After Special Interest Influence
Sen. Barack Obama promised to curb lobbyists' influence from his first day as president. This is the first time a major party presidential candidate has made taking on the wealthy corporate special interest's control of government, a part of their campaign platform. It is a very refreshing and encouraging 5 thumbs up move.
The Wa. Post link above cites:
"When I am president, I will make it absolutely clear that working in an Obama administration is not about serving your former employer, your future employer or your bank account--it's about serving your country, and that's what comes first," Obama told supporters at New Hampshire Community Technical College here.This is going to strike a chord with the 7 out 10 Americans who now believe our government is out of control and the special interests have taken over, ruining America's ability to lower drug prices, combat global climate change, decrease dependence on oil, and halt the waste, fraud, and abuse of public tax dollars.
If the polls in coming weeks and months show Obama taking a lead over Hillary as a result of this newly released plank of his platform, it could have consequences for other candidates as well. For example, Ralph Nader who is contemplating another run has had the corporate special interest influence as a central part of his previous campaigns. If Obama makes it a 2008 election issue, Ralph Nader might well decide not to run. This has enormous consequences for Republican
candidates, who will lack what has been called a 'spoiler' vote for Democratic candidates. This same reasoning may influence Mayor Bloomberg's calculus on whether to run or not as an Independent candidate, as well.
Republican candidates, perceived as the greatest champions of corporate special interest coddling, could lose ground to an Obama campaign which takes off as a result of this issue. And, if the voting public demonstrates support of Obama's adopting this issue, the money raised by Hillary or Bloomberg's personal fortune may have far less purchase power than these candidates had hoped.
As a voter who advocates voting out irresponsible, inept, and corrupt politicians in our U.S. Congress, I would have to, on the knowledge I have thus far, concede that voting for Obama is now a very real option on the table. I have voted third party and Independent for many years, avoiding Democrat and Republican politicians like the plague they have been. That may change with Obama's commitment to hitting at the root cause of government inefficiency, corruption, and ineffectiveness which have been steering America toward a dimmer future America's sons and daughters.
One major caveat exists, however. Obama's attack on wealthy special interest influence in government will be muted if not canceled, if Sen. Obama fails to also adopt an immigration and border security policy Independent's and moderate Republicans can accommodate. The mainstream media is not going to let that issue go, however, they may weary of the special interest bribery and blackmail issue long before the 2008 elections are held.
Comments
I have a real problem voting for Obama, not because of his issues or character, but, because of his party affiliation. The idea of creating another one party government in America scares the (#$& out of me. We saw what happened with a 1 party Republican government that lasted only 4 years.
I couldn't vote for Christ in the next election, if he was a Democrat.
Posted by: G. Peoples | June 23, 2007 5:41 PM
G.,
I completely understand your logic and reasoning. I share your concerns about another one party government.
For many voters it will be a choice of not voting, voting for a one party government, or, voting for a Republican president who may block any meaningful solutions coming out of Congress. A very, very tough call.
Posted by: David R. Remer | July 2, 2007 8:24 PM
Yes, be very afraid.
The best thing to do is vote out as many incumbents as possible.
Posted by: d.a.n | July 11, 2007 12:01 AM