Kerry Vs. Bush On Special Interest Money (Wow)

[DrFunkenstein]

I'm not sure if I should give props to the Kerry research team or the man himself. Color me impressed.

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0213a.html

Here's a sample (read for yourself!):

Kerry:

Kerry Ranks 92 Out of Current 100 Senators in Special Interest Money. According to data from Center for Responsive Politics, Kerry ranks 92nd out of the current 100 Senators in taking “special interest” money.

"According to a Jan. 31 Washington Post story, presidential candidate Sen. John Kerry is beholden to the very special interests he says he will dismiss from the White House if elected. …But the Post paints an inaccurate picture using an arbitrary statistic. A more accurate indicator of whether a candidate has ties to special interests is whether that candidate receives political action committee (PAC) as well as lobbyist money, and if so, how much.

An analysis of PAC and lobbying contributions combined shows Kerry is near the bottom in receiving such funds when PAC money is averaged from 1993 through the present and lobbyist money is averaged from 1990 through present...Not only has Kerry historically refused to take PAC money, but his record shows that he been a leader for more than a decade in full reform of campaign financing, advocating for clean public money not only for presidential but also congressional campaigns.”



Bush:

”Most of the companies that won contracts in Iraq and Afghanistan were political players. ‘Those companies contributed more money to the presidential campaigns of George W. Bush - more than $500,000 - than to any other politician over the last dozen years. These two wars in two years and their aftermaths have brought out the Beltway Bandit companies in full force, and there is a stench of political favoritism and cronyism surrounding the contracting process in both Iraq and Afghanistan.”

During 1999-2000 Enron gave $1,328,290 in total to Bush and the GOP, is Bush’s largest Career Patron. Ken Lay, Enron’s CEO, was a Bush Pioneer, raising at least $100,000 for the Bush Presidential campaign. Enron gave $1,114,490 to the GOP, $300,000 to the Bush inaugural, and $113,800 directly to Bush’s presidential campaign from Enron employees.

[wryter2000]

1. You're right

You're right this is impressive, but it's too hard for the average Joe to absorb. For the general campaign, he's going to have to make it more immediate.

[MsUnderstood]

2. Immediate? That is easy enough

Why the press can simply as Bush "How much did you receive from company A? company B? Company C? What is the government's relationship to company A? Company B? Company C?" And when he stutters give him the truth.

And if the press refuses to do their job, then in 30 seconds kerry can do the same thing "Enron paid X amount. Recived Y reward.".

Simplicity is easy in this game.

[bryant69]

3. Would that it were so

But the counter punch is to obsufacate. To bring in alternate standards that may or may not be meaningful. I'll be surprised for example if nobody suggests that this information is bogus; because it comes from the media who want Kerry to win, and their candidate to lose.

And using anecdotal evidence is a double edged sword; because whether or not Kerry has ever been involved in a quid pro quo situation, it might be easy enough to paint him that way.

Still that doesn't mean we shouldn't do it; it just means we have to be careful about it, and make sure one doesn't assume that this is a knock out punch. At the end, I suspect it will be a million little dissatisfactions rather than one big terrible thing that will bring down President Bush.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[NewYorkerfromMass]

10. a million little dissatisfactions

I think that's what did in Dean. My list is fairly long.

[feistydem]

4. Not all lobbyists are bad

There are lobbyists for the environment, education, retirees, alternative energy, workplace safety, etc.

Looking at who the lobbyists lobby FOR is an important consideration too. It wasn't the PACs Kerry took money from, it was the individual lobbyists --who are still voting people. There's a big difference between taking money from a person --with a right to vote --and a corporation --with no right to vote.

I am impressed that in such a long senatorial career, Kerry has in fact taken so little by comparison to other senators. His records are open --unlike another democratic presidential candidate who is slinging mud, but who took energy and health care interest monies while making important decisions for his state on those very issues.

People who live in glass houses...

[EXE619K]

6. There are many forms of "Special Interest" money.

The difference is....what to do with it?

There are "Leaders" and "Sayers"

Those that "Lead"...do.

Those that "Say"....legistlate.

Clear difference.

;)

[feistydem]

7. Whaaaaaaa?

Too bad your meaning isn't clear.

[TheStateChief]

5. I Always Thought This Was A Stupid Issue For Bush To Raise...

but I was amazed at the amount of credibility it was given over the weekend. Just truly amazed me. Now, we all know that Kerry is (thankfully) no where near the same league as Bush in raising special interest dollars but it seems that Bush succeeded in making Kerry look just as bad and it didn't even cost them that much to get the message out thanks to their friends in the media.

Where's the shaking head smiley when you need it.

[feistydem]

8. In what way was Bush successful?

I must have missed something.

All I saw was media talking heads (like on Hardball) joking about how ridiculous it is for Bush or the GOP to be citing any of the Dem candidates' fundraising methods or piggy banks --as he (Bush) is the special interests' poster boy.

[feistydem]

9. Ironic photo of Bush and the NASCAR drivers plastered in sponsors' logos

Bush needs a suit like that with patches from Enron, Merrill Lynch, Halliburton and Deutsche Bank (among others) all over it!

[moondust]

11. I'd still like to see a cartoon

of Dufus and Goofus landing the Enron jet on the White House lawn in December 2000.

[DrFunkenstein]

12. Apparently, There Is A Kick-Ass Ad That Kerry Released

Can't get much simpler than this:

http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/releases/pr_2004_0214c.html

[Nederland]

13. Question

An analysis of PAC and lobbying contributions combined shows Kerry is near the bottom in receiving such funds when PAC money is averaged from 1993 through the present and lobbyist money is averaged from 1990 through present...


Why start with two different dates (1990 for lobbyist money, 1993 for PAC money)? Whenever I see something like this I immediately assume that the dates were chosen arbitrarily simply to help the author make his/her point.