Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reforms

Barack Obama is unveiling sweeping ethics reforms in a speech in New Hampshire today.

Following closely on the heels of yesterday's disclosure of his earmark requests -- and his earlier disclosures of his full tax records and his campaign bundlers, among other efforts -- Obama's pledge to enact bold ethics reforms on his first day as President solidifies his standing as the candidate most committed to bringing increased transparency to the business of government.

And his comprehensive recommendations are a strong rebuke to the abuses of the Bush administration, as well.

According to the press release, Obama's speech will:

1. Close the Revolving Door between Government and the private sector
2. End Abuse of No-Bid Contracts
3. Restore Objectivity to the Executive Branch
4. Increase Public Access to Information

UPDATE: The always excellent Greg Sargent at TPM Cafe's Election Central reports that Craig Holman of the Ralph Nader founded Public Citizen "endorses all the principles in Obama's speech. "These are all things we've been advocating for several years now," he says. "Obama has been working on many of these reforms for the last year."

More details and Sargent's full report below the fold...

From the "Fact Sheet" prepared by the campaign...

REFORMING WASHINGTON: TAKING BACK OUR GOVERNMENT

The Bush Administration has turned our government into a game only the lobbyists andspecial interests can afford to play. The evidence of the Bush Administration and its cronies manipulating public policy for private gain is staggering. Oil and gas executives met in secret with Vice President Cheney to write our energy laws with the goal of increasing their profits and saddling the public with their environmental and public health costs. An industry executive was appointed by the White House to the position of czar on global warming while some of the nation's top climate scientists at federal agencies were silenced. In every case, and at every turn, the special interests won and the public lost. Barack Obama has led efforts to reform government both in the Illinois State Senate and in the United States Senate. He will bring this commitment to making government work for the people, not the special interests, to the White House. On the first day he takes office Obama will begin implementing his plan to make Washington work for the people, not the special interests.

CLOSING THE REVOLVING DOOR

(1) CLOSING THE REVOLVING DOOR ON FORMER EMPLOYERS: Obama will eliminate incentives that could be provided to newly-hired public employees to favor their former employers. No political appointees in an Obama Administration will be permitted to work on regulations or contracts directly and substantially related to their prior employer for two years.
(2) CLOSING THE REVOLVING DOOR FOR FUTURE EMPLOYERS: Obama will also shut the revolving door on appointees who would leave his Administration to become lobbyists. In an Obama Administration no political appointee will be able to lobby the executive branch during the remainder of the Administration.

FIGHT WASTEFUL SPENDING BY ENDING ABUSE OF NO-BID CONTRACTS

The current Administration has abused its power by handing out contracts without competition to its politically connected friends and supporters. These abuses cost taxpayers billions of dollars each year. Obama will end abuse of no-bid contracts.

RESTORING OBJECTIVITY TO THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH

(1) BAN GIFTS TO EXECUTIVE BRANCH EMPLOYEES: As president, Barack Obama will issue an executive order banning registered lobbyists or lobbying firms from giving gifts in any amount or any form to executive branch employees.
(2) FREE CAREER OFFICIALS FROM THE INFLUENCE OF POLITICS: Obama will issue an Executive Order asking all new hires at the agencies to sign a form affirming that no political appointee offered them the job solely on the basis of political affiliation or contribution. The Executive Order will also require that all employees engaged in and making hiring decisions also certify that they will not take political affiliation into account as they make hiring decisions for career positions.
(3) REMOVE THE USE OF PUBLIC OFFICE FOR PARTISAN ADVANTAGE: As president, Obama will issue an Executive Order banning the use of public office to further partisan advantage in political elections. Obama's Executive Order will create an additional and effective enforcement mechanism of the Hatch Act's prohibitions on ideological litmus tests for non-political hires and other political appointee abuses.

INCREASING PUBLIC ACCESS TO INFORMATION

(1) SUNLIGHT BEFORE SIGNING: As president, Obama will not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days. And Obama will sign legislation in the light of day without attaching signing statements that undermine the legislative intent.
(2) 21ST CENTURY FIRESIDE CHATS: Obama will bring democracy and policy directly to the people by requiring his Cabinet officials to have periodic national broadband town hall meetings to discuss issues before their agencies.
(3) RESTORE MEANING TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT: As president, Obama will restore the tradition of free information by issuing an Executive Order that information should be released unless an agency reasonably foresees harm to a protected interest.
(4) CONDUCT REGULATORY AGENCY BUSINESS IN PUBLIC: Obama will require his appointees who lead the Executive Branch departments and rulemaking agencies to conduct the significant business of the agency in public, so that any citizen can see in person or watch on the Internet as the agencies debate and deliberate the issues that affect American society. Videos of meetings will be archived on the web, and the transcript will be available to the public. Obama will also require his nominees to commit to employ all the technological tools available to allow average citizens not just to observe, but to participate and be heard on the issues that affect their daily lives.
(5) MAKING WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS PUBLIC: Obama will ensure that communications about regulatory policymaking between persons outside government and all White House staff are disclosed to the public. The Obama White House would invoke its executive privilege to protect the confidentiality of communications concerning national security and similar traditionally sensitive matters, not to withhold information about private interests' communication on regulatory policy.
(6) EXPOSING TAX BREAKS AND EARMARKS TO PUBLIC SCRUTINY: Building on his "Google for government" bill, which was signed into law and allows every American to do a simple search and see exactly how federal money is being spent, Obama will ensure that any tax breaks to special interests, or tax earmarks, are also publicly available by directing the Office of Management and Budget to post them on its website.
(7) POLITICAL APPOINTEE REFORM: In an Obama Administration, every official will have to rise to the standard of proven excellence in the agency's mission. Obama will issue an Executive Order requiring that political appointees possess relevant professional qualifications and experience related to the core mission of the agency for which they are nominated, and will restore integrity and competence to the executive branch.

And here's an excerpt from the prepared remarks...

“We cannot settle for a second Gilded Age in America. And yet we find ourselves once more in the midst of a new economy where more wealth is in danger of falling into fewer hands; where the average CEO now earns more in one day than an average worker earns in an entire year; where Americans are struggling like never before to pay their medical bills, or their kids’ tuition, or high gas prices, all while the profits of the drug and insurance and oil industries have never been higher.”

“In the last six years, our leaders have thrown open the doors of Congress and the White House to an army of Washington lobbyists who have turned our government into a game only they can afford to play – a game played on a field that’s no longer level, but rigged to always favor their own narrow agendas.”

“Americans of every background and belief are hungry for a new kind of politics – a people’s politics that reconnects them with their government; one that offers not just a vote at the ballot box, but a voice in Washington and an assurance that the leaders we send there will hear it. The people I’ve met across this country don’t just want reform for reform’s sake, they want reform that will help pay their doctor’s bills, or ensure that their tax dollars are spent wisely, or put us on the path to energy independence. They want real reform and they’re tired of the lobbyists standing in the way.”

“I know that in every campaign, politicians make promises about cleaning up Washington. And most times, you end up disappointed when it doesn’t happen. So it’s easy to become cynical – to believe that change isn’t possible; that the odds are too great; that this year is bound to be no different from the last. But I also know what I’ve seen and what I’ve done. I know that for me, reform isn’t just the rhetoric of a campaign; it’s been a cause of my career.”

“We need to clean up both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. I believe that the responsibility for a people’s politics begins with the person who sits in the Oval Office. That is why on my very first day as President, I will launch the most sweeping ethics reform in history to make the White House the people’s house and send the Washington lobbyists back to K Street.”

“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. When you walk into my administration, you will not be able to work on regulations or contracts directly related to your former employer for two years. And when you leave, you will not be able to lobby the Administration throughout the remainder of my term in office.”

“A lot of people have told me this is pretty tough, but I refuse to accept the Washington logic that you cannot find thousands of talented, patriotic Americans willing to devote a few years to their country without the promise of a lucrative lobbying job after they’re done.”

“In our democracy, the price of access and influence should be nothing more than your voice and your vote. That should be enough for health care reform. That should be enough for a real energy policy. That should be enough to ensure that our government is still the defender of fairness and opportunity for every American.”

“It’s time to get to work once more for our common country. It’s time we had a politics that reflected that commitment. And it’s time we had a President who can get it done. I look forward to being that President, and working with all of you to make this America happen. “

And the full Sargent piece...

Ralph Nader is threatening another run for President, arguing that the two major parties amount to little more than a giant two-headed robot whose movements are entirely controlled by corporate America.

But one signature good government group he founded in the 1970s, Public Citizen, appears to disagree. A top official at PC just told me that he sees Barack Obama -- who, last time we checked, was a Democrat -- as a very reliable ally in trying to accomplish the group's goals.

Right now Obama's giving a big government reform speech in New Hampshire. The package he's unveiling includes a provision barring political appointees who leave their position from lobbying the executive branch for the remainder of the term -- thus more or less closing the so-called "revolving door" between government and the lobbying business.

Craig Holman, the ethics lobbyist for Public Citizen, tells us the group endorses all the principles in Obama's speech. "These are all things we've been advocating for several years now," he says. "Obama has been working on many of these reforms for the last year."

Asked if this meant Obama was really better than the other Dems on good-government issues, Holman said: "Certainly in terms of his active roles. I would expect many of the Democratic candidates to endorse similar proposals. But Senator Obama has been actively working on these since even before he considered running for President."



Display:


Wow (none / 0)


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 10:59:44 AM EST

Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

Interesting how this was unveiled in a campaign speech in New Hampshire rather than on the floor of the Senate.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:02:29 AM EST

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (3.00 / 9)

If you didn't notice, these aren't reforms that would be passed by the Senate.  These are reforms that would alter the way the executive office conducts its business and would be done by executive order.  That's the beauty of it.  This is what a Democratic president could do on their first day in office.  


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:06:45 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

Most of Obama's contributions aren't coming from DC - Hillary has that locked up.
His are coming from hedge funds, private equity firms, Hollywood, etc.

Hillary/Obama08
by annefrank on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 07:10:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (3.00 / 2)

He's running for President. And this is part of his campaign platform. He also knows that the comprehensive reforms he's proposing would likely not pass the Senate without a Democrat (i.e. Barack Obama) as President.
What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:08:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (3.00 / 1)

Obama is talking about measures he would take as President. He is not proposing new laws here.


by JoeCoaster on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:10:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

Why not?  As a Senator, he has the perfect platform to back up his rhetoric.  He has the ability to introduce his proposals now.

I realize he's busy missing about 20% of his Senate votes, but when he does find time to make it to DC he should consider introducing this fine proposal as a bill in the United States Senate.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:46:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Wrong... (3.00 / 2)

According to the Washington Post's database, Obama has missed a grand total of 23 votes in the 110th Congress -- or 10.2%.

Compared that with Edwards who missed 45.2% in the 108th Congress. [Source]

What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 12:01:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wrong... (none / 0)

Those 23 missed votes (including the no-confidence vote in Gonzalez) were all after he started running for President, which is what I should have clarified.  He's missed closer to 20% of his votes since declaring.

Funny you mention John Edwards' voting record, because I was a Dean supporter in 2003.  Edwards wasn't my guy back then.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 12:10:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wrong... (3.00 / 3)

Obama's voting record was almost perfect until he started campaigning.  I forgive him.


by Shaun Appleby on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 12:50:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wrong... (none / 0)

Hillary is campaigning as well and hasnt missed nearly that much.


vote blue in 2008
by sepulvedaj3 on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 04:36:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wrong... (none / 0)

By your math, that means that between January 3rd - February 11thish = the same number of votes as February 11thish - June 22nd.  

If he's missed 23 votes, and that is supposedly 10% total, and you're saying it is closer to 20% since he announced.  That means we've had almost the same number of votes in 1.5 months and then the following 4.5 months.  

Correct me if I'm wrong... But I think your math is off unless you're overestimating to make Obama look worse than he is.  


by JeremiahTheMessiah on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 03:47:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama's Ethics Record in the Senate (3.00 / 5)

Obama has been a leader on ethics reform in the Senate:

Obama, Feingold Push Resolution to Implement New Senate Ethics Rules
"Let me be clear - while I don't believe the ethics reforms passed by the Senate are strong enough, they're certainly better than no reform at all," said Senator Obama. "Even if this bill doesn't become law, the Senate should adopt these modest rules to put an end to lobbyist-paid lunches and gifts and start to change the culture in Washington that led to the rise of Jack Abramoff and Duke Cunningham."
Feingold webiste link on Feingold-Obama

In 2006, he introduced The Congressional Ethics Enforcement Commission Act, which would "receive complaints from the public on alleged ethics violations by members of Congress, staff, and lobbyists."

Obama even teamed up with Sen. Tom Coburn to get more transparency in government spending. The bill created a "a single public Web site that lists all entities receiving federal funds, including the name of each entity, the amount of federal funds the entity has received annually by program, and the location of the entity. All federal assistance must be posted within 30 days of such funding being awarded to an organization."

Go tofederalspending.gov to see the future home of that website, expected to go online in January of 2008.

And as you know, yesterday he became one of the first and only people in Congress (and only Democratic Presidential candidate) to release his earmarks.

There is no way you can say Obama hasn't led on ethics reform in the Senate.


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 12:55:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Ethics Record in the Senate (none / 0)

I didn't say he hasn't led, I said he should use his position in the Senate to introduce a bill containing the proposals he's making.  It would be powerful.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 02:15:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Ethics Record in the Senate (3.00 / 1)

He has.  See the bottom of the page.  It's easy to call people an empty suit when you don't bother to look or even read.


by Doug Dilg on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 02:46:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama's Ethics Record in the Senate (3.00 / 1)

I think we'll begin to see the empty suit meme disappear pretty soon.  He's been taking more of a leadership role and it has teeth.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 04:04:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

Vox,

Why are you letting yourself look more and more like your clueless? Just stop while you are ahead. You are embarrassing yourself.


"I don't oppose all wars...what I do oppose, is a dumb war" ~ Barack Obama
by BlueDiamond on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 02:16:46 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

You know, for someone who only has 12 comments in their history, with several of them rated lowly, and no diaries, I can't really take you seriously.


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 08:25:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

Vox - they don't get it.
Nor do they ever question why Obama and Hillary haven't introduced legislation for national healthcare - and only mentioned it after announcing their prez candidacies.
People miss things like this when they're caught up in a "movement."
Hillary/Obama08
by annefrank on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 07:16:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (3.00 / 3)

Actually he did propose them to the Senate.  And our Dem leadership told him he went too far - so, they watered it down.


"I'm LeBron, baby. I can play on this level. I got some game." Barack Obama
by gb1437a on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 04:21:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

I see.  Can you tell me what bill or amendment it was he entered?


The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK
by Vox Populi on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 08:26:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

Feingold-Obama. I linked to it above.


Never separate the life you live from the words you speak. -Sen. Paul Wellstone (Minnesota)
by Max Fletcher on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 11:02:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: UPDATED: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reform (3.00 / 3)

Further quote from Craig Holman from TPM:
"Asked if this meant Obama was really better than the other Dems on good-government issues, Holman said: 'Certainly in terms of his active roles. I would expect many of the Democratic candidates to endorse similar proposals. But Senator Obama has been actively working on these since even before he considered running for President.'"
One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:04:01 AM EST

Re: UPDATED: (3.00 / 1)

I just TRUST Obama over the others. I'm sorry. At the end of the day, all that matters most to me is TRUST. I trust Obama to do what he says he going to do.


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 12:57:35 AM EST
[ Parent ]

These are good ideas (3.00 / 1)

What I'm really interested in, though, is campaign reform--will he promise to introduce a bill to publicly finance elections?


by david mizner on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:14:31 AM EST

Re: These are good ideas (3.00 / 4)

I believe Obama is supportive of public funding of elections, but I have no idea if he'll introduce legislation on it...

As I'm sure you know -- though he's not abiding by spending limits in the primary -- his campaign secured a novel judgment from the FEC that he could return general election funds over the limits if his Republican challenger were to also agree to abide by legal limits.

I think that's a good sign that while he's pragmatic about realities of the money game, he hasn't completely given up on the public system.


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:20:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

he has (none / 0)

he is a co-sponsor of durbin's bill.


by dpg220 on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:33:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: These are good ideas (none / 0)

I'm in favor of Public funded elections, but there is no chance in HELL that they will EVER become law, not without progressives controlling at least 60 votes in the Senate.  We will not see it within our lifetime unless something big happens.


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:23:47 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: These are good ideas (3.00 / 2)

Like Senator Obama getting elected president, for example?  With a nice majority in Congress?


by Shaun Appleby on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 12:52:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: These are good ideas (3.00 / 1)

In theory... Great.  But unless we have a way to get past a GOP filibuster and that means controlling 60 votes (and I'll bet everything I own that not all Democrats would be onboard either) in the Senate.  Take the most liberal president in history and without the ability to beat a filibuster he or she doesn't pass this bill.  Especially since it puts most GOPers at a disadvantagegiven historical numbers.


http://www.imvotingrepublican.com/ McCain Sucks!
by yitbos96bb on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:32:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: These are good ideas (none / 0)

I have to admit that your logic is flawless.  Sigh.  If not in our lifetimes then when?  It is such an essential reform to our process.

I am always tempted to say the framers of the Constitution would have wanted the process of election to be free of the the rorts and inequities we now bear.  But I am grateful our political leaders haven't challenged each other to a duel for quite some time.  It was ever thus, one way or another.


by Shaun Appleby on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 09:17:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: These are good ideas (3.00 / 4)

He doesn't need to.  Durbin has a fine bill on this issue, which Obama is supporting.


by Ramo on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 12:48:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama is a co-sponsor (3.00 / 1)

of Durbin's public financing bill.

Does that answer your question?


by dpg220 on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:32:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: These are good ideas (none / 0)

RECced you comment for showing neutrality in recommending a pro-Obama diary :)


by NuevoLiberal on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 09:45:47 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: UPDATED: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reform (3.00 / 6)

There's a very interesting article in the LA Times today about a PAC  called Vote Hope created by a wealth SF lawyer which hope to raise 3 million dollars to help promote Obama in the California Primary.  

The candidates are powerless to stop this type of wrongheaded but well-intentioned efforts by private citizens but Obama's office immediately responded urging people not to participate:


Obama spokesman Bill Burton said in an e-mail that Obama was unaware of Vote Hope, and that "it is our hope that anyone who supports Obama does so directly through the campaign and not an outside group."


by Doug Dilg on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:18:05 AM EST

LEADERSHIP (3.00 / 4)

This should put to rest any and all criticism that Obama is devoid of leadership.  I think this puts him in the frontrunning seat for the candidate having the most leadership.  Think of how this would change the nation.

Honestly, (am I using the word "honestly"?)  You bet!  This is amazing and quite a promise to live up to.

This is true leadership in its highest form as Obama has really stuck his neck out here.  I often read the headlines here and think that the words are an exageration of what really happened.  In this case, though, "sweeping" reform is exactly. the. right. word.

Go Obama.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:36:36 AM EST

one speech is not = leadership (none / 0)

talk is cheap. How many speeches have Edwards made?


by maoasada on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 12:57:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I hope you read (none / 0)

this stunning diary yesterday. http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/6/21/7516 /99469
It expresses my opinion of John Edwards far better than I can.  I have nothing I wish to say about him here as you wouldn't like it.
No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:06:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: I hope you read (3.00 / 1)

Oh, here.  This is what I agree with the most from the diary:

And he isn't running, because we all grew up watching too much TV and expect our candidates to be game show hosts instead of thoughtful, serious leaders who say things that make us sad. Woe is us. We want clown tricks--Bill Clinton playing the sax on Arsenio Hall, John Kerry riding a motorcycle onto the set of the "Tonight Show," Al Gore on Saturday Night Live, while we snarf down pretzels and beer. Bread and circuses.

Also, get real.  Everyone in Congress knew what Bush was up to and they played along.  That leaves Hillary and Edwards out for me.  They have no core as far as I'm concerned.  That's the worst I have to say about them and I won't say it again as I don't want to disrupt the board.  But don't ever come back at me with a "holier than thou, Edwards is better comment." if you don't want to get lambasted.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:29:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: one speech is not = leadership (3.00 / 1)

Edwards is the king of talking the talk. We already know that.


The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.
by Populism2008 on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:14:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: one speech is not = leadership (3.00 / 1)

How many speeches has George Bush given? Does that mean we should trust him? Nope!

ACTIONS speak louder than words.


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:00:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: one speech is not = leadership (none / 0)

That was for maoasada


"I don't believe in this can't do, won't do, won't even try style of politics. Yes We Can!" ~ Barack Obama
by ObamaEdwards2008 on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 01:00:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: UPDATED: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reform (3.00 / 2)

I am glad to see this headline. Obama has been involved in ethics reform for a long time, and I think he is the most credible candidate on this and a long list of other issues (most notably, the war). I will donate some money in support of this move.

Also, the previous comment by Doug Dilg is, I think, rather striking. People can try and question his authenticity all they want, but when it comes down to it, the facts speak pretty clearly. No money from lobbyists, no money from 527s. Period.


by alipi on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:37:55 AM EST

Re: UPDATED: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reform (none / 0)

I like the concepts he has put forward and Kudos to Obama for doing this.  However the Dems seem to be backing away from meaningful ethics reform in congress.  What is Obama doing to change the mind of his colleagues?  When people complain that Edwards is not in the senate, then I want to know how Obama is changing the legislative branch with his persuasive skills.  I know that Edwards has changed the dialog in the presidential primary.  I want to see if Obama is capable of getting substantive legislations through the senate.

And this is an excellent start.  We do have to change the ethics in congress.


I am an Edwards Democrat. Visit EENR blog for Progressives
by pioneer111 on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 03:35:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: UPDATED: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reform (3.00 / 1)

I like all these ideas and I applaud Obama for coming out with them first (this is his bread and butter after all). But David's right, I don't think fundamentally changes the results of government until we get publicly financed elections. You will still have politicians spending an obscene amount of time just raising money, rather than doing work for the greater good.

Now, once that link is broken, this Obama's proposals are awesome because then you could break down the residual influence of money for personal enrichment. These are problems that can still be seen in countries like Great Britain that do publicly finance elections. So all in all, good stuff. I'd just like to see him go further. Story of his campaign though.


by adamterando on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:47:56 AM EST

Re: UPDATED: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reform (3.00 / 1)

He supports public financing.  He's a cosponsor of Durbin's bill.


by Ramo on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 12:52:55 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: UPDATED: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reform (none / 0)

I know he does. So does Edwards. But neither of them have made a big thing out of it in their campaigns. Obama could especially since this is his signature issue (good government).


by adamterando on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 07:47:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED (none / 0)

by the way.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:49:44 AM EST

Re: UPDATED: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reform (3.00 / 8)

In the diary I posted yesterday about earmarks, Jerome Armstrong inserted this pretty remarkable comment:


Has Obama done this in previous years too?  Otherwise, just seems like a calculated political move that he's prepared for by not making the normal requests (unless he's also done this previously-- or retroactively).

by Jerome Armstrong on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:11:25 AM PDT

No praise for the move, no call for other candidates to come forward as well.  Not even any research into his own question. Just cynicism.

So I did the research.  Since coming to the Senate here is just a few of the things he's done on the issue earmarks and transparency in Government:


Senator Obama introduced the Transparency and Integrity in Earmarks Act to shed light on all earmarks, by disclosing the name of the legislator who asked for the earmark and a written justification for each, 72 hours before the earmarks can be approved by the full Senate. Senators would be prohibited from advocating for an earmark if they have a financial interest in the project. Finally, earmark recipients would have to disclose to an Office of Public Integrity the amount that they have spent on registered lobbyists and the names of those lobbyists. Parts of this legislation were passed by the Senate in January 2007...

Senator Obama introduced legislation to create an independent ethics commission to receive complaints from the public on alleged ethics violations by members of Congress, staff, and lobbyists. The commission would have the authority to investigate complaints and present public findings of fact about possible violations to the House and Senate Ethics Committee and Justice Department.

"This legislation would do more to reform ethics and lobbying than any other piece of legislation introduced thus far because it goes to the heart of the problem: enforcement." -Common Cause...

Senator Obama and Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) teamed up to pass a law that will lift the veil of secrecy in Washington by creating a Google-like search engine that will allow regular people to track approximately $1 trillion in federal grants, contracts, earmarks and loans online. More than 100 organizations across the political spectrum praised this legislation.

It would enable the public to see where federal money goes and how it is spent. It's a brilliant idea...In 1802, Thomas Jefferson called for more transparency in government spending...Anything that allows a clearer look at the way our government doles out money -- including on defense -- is a bonus. Thomas Jefferson definitely would have voted "yes" for this."-Chicago Sun Times Editorial, July 25, 2006...

In the 110th Congress, Obama worked with Senator Russ Feingold (D-WI) to introduce legislation described as the "gold standard for reform." He then worked with the Senate Leadership to craft strong ethics reform legislation to help restore the public trust in the institution. The final package that passed the Senate includes a number of Obama/Feingold provisions: a full ban on gifts and meals from lobbyists; an end to subsidized travel on corporate jets; full disclosure of who is sponsoring earmarks; additional restrictions to close the revolving door between public service and lobbying shops; and much tighter disclosure requirements for political contributions that lobbyists "bundle."

The final package is the strongest ethics legislation to emerge from Congress yet...Mr. Reid, along with Sens. Russell Feingold (D-Wis.) and Barack Obama (D-Ill.), deserves credit for assembling and passing this package." - Washington Post, Editorial , January 20, 2007


by Doug Dilg on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:05:58 PM EST

Obama's ethics reforms (3.00 / 8)

go way back:

Along the way, he played an important role in drafting bipartisan ethics legislation and health-care reform. He overcame law enforcement objections to codify changes designed to curb racial profiling and to make capital punishment, which he favors, more equitable.

From this article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802262. html

Obama is the man to lead this nation out of despair.  We have to stop listening to who criticizes the most, who yells the loudest, who bangs the gong as being the equal to leadership.  Leaders are smart, like Obama and their lives have reflected that characteristic their entire lives.


No Quacks, please.
by noquacks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 01:14:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reforms (3.00 / 9)

Go way way back:

Ethics reform was one of Obama's signature issues in Springfield, as well. Beyond the Gift Ban Act, he helped push Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich's 2003 ethics reforms. The gift ban law, the first broad ethics reform in Illinois since the Watergate era, prohibited politicians from using campaign funds for personal use, barred fundraising on state property, established ethics commissions, curtailed fundraisers in Springfield during legislative sessions and mandated online reporting of campaign finances. The 2003 ethics package created independent inspectors general with subpoena powers to look into abuses by legislators, statewide officeholders and their employees. It further clamped down on the types of gifts lawmakers can receive and prohibited lobbyists and their spouses from sitting on state boards and commissions. Obama also touted publicly financed judicial campaigns, an idea that was approved by the Illinois Senate but languished in the House.

http://illinoisissues.uis.edu/features/2 007feb/obama.html


by jb1125 on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 02:15:53 PM EST

The Clinton Campaign Responds... (3.00 / 1)

How did the Clinton campaign decide to respond to Obama's speech?  Um... with opposition research not-for-attribution, of course...
Man, the world never learns...

From the Washington Post:

"But the behind-the-scenes skirmishing between the campaigns continued. Asked to respond to the Obama speech on Friday, a Clinton campaign spokesman offered to provide opposition research anonymously and not-for-attribution to the campaign. When those terms were rejected, the Clinton spokesman declined to comment."


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 03:28:49 PM EST

Re: The Clinton Campaign Responds... (none / 0)

Here's the link:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2007/06/22/AR2007062201019. html?hpid=topnews
One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 03:31:20 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Clinton Campaign Responds... (3.00 / 1)

And good for the Post for not accepting the anonymous hit piece. This is an issue that's going to have legs.  Corruption in Washington was a big part of the 2006 election.  This isn't some arcane issue for most Americans, although many people here are treating it as if it is.  This is an area where Hillary is extremely vulnerable.  Watching Anderson Cooper last night I think CNN is going to keep going after the Congress and shining the light on those who won't come clean about the earmark requests.


by Doug Dilg on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 03:44:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Clinton Campaign Responds... (none / 0)

Well, I think they were probably noting the close similarity between Obama's plan and the plan that Hillary announced for government reform during her April 13th speech at St. Anselm's College in NH.  In any event, it's good to see that Obama agrees with her plan.


by Berkeley Vox on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:26:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The Clinton Campaign Responds... (3.00 / 2)

BS.  Why would they call it "opposition research" and hand it over only on a non-attribution basis?


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 08:19:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reforms (3.00 / 2)

I for one hope that they all have to divulge as much information as necessary. Everybody's making claims for there candidate,but this piece was an eye opener for me .
I've heard him speak of Ethics Reform but I didn't realize he was this dedicated to it.

This is one of the few actual informative post I've seen on this site on Obama.

Thanks.


by g1967 on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 04:27:46 PM EST

Excellent! n/t (none / 0)


What's the Point?
by Vermonter on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 04:37:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Video Posted on the Obama Website! (3.00 / 1)

There's full video posted of today's speech on Obama's website:
http://www.barackobama.com/issues/corrup tion/
One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 07:42:03 PM EST

Obama has been doing everything (3.00 / 2)

right the last week. This speech and its content, the speech at Take Back America, and the earmarks disclosure.


The history of the left is a history of purists betraying the progressive movement so that they can feel good about their righteous selves.
by Populism2008 on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 08:41:03 PM EST

Re: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

I know this is OT, but I don't understand this from the article Jerome posted. I know it's old news, but I didn't keep up with it when it happened. Why did Geffen slam the Clintons? Why did the Clintons demand Obama return money??

>>>>When Obama contributor and Hollywood mogul David Geffen slammed the Clintons, triggering the Clinton campaign to demand that Obama return money Geffen had raised for Obama, Gibbs showed his campaign could play tough.

"We aren't going to get in the middle of a disagreement between the Clintons and someone who was once one of their biggest supporters," he said at the time. "It is ironic that the Clintons had no problem with David Geffen when he was raising them $18 million and sleeping at their invitation in the Lincoln bedroom."


Hillary/Obama08
by annefrank on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:13:50 PM EST

Re: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reforms (none / 0)

Glad to see he's in lock-step with Hillary on most of her proposals for government reform, which she announced back in April.  The party is indeed united on the issue.


by Berkeley Vox on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:24:37 PM EST

Re: Obama Proposes Sweeping Ethics Reforms (3.00 / 2)

When is Hillary going to release her earmark request list?


by Doug Dilg on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:30:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Huh? Lockstep? (3.00 / 3)

Here's a link to Hillary Clinton's proposal on ethics reform from April 13th that you mentioned:
http://www.hillaryclinton.com/feature/re alplan/

It's easy to see how Obama's plan goes much farther.  These are the main provisions that Clinton lacks:

  1.  Clinton would ban all cabinet-level officials from leaving their office to take lobbying jobs lobbying their own former employees. Obama, on the other hand, extends the ban to ALL political appointees in his administration, and he also states that no political appointee may enter his administration and be involved in decisions or regulations that could benefit their former employer for two years.
  2. Obama also went for a total gift ban for lobbyists to any executive branch employee.
  3. Obama also goes farther in his efforts for government transparency: (a) requiring a five-day waiting period for signing legislation to allow for public comment; (b) putting on the web all communications about and video of regulatory hearings (c) broadband town hall meetings conducted reguarly by his cabinet members...
There are plenty more examples. I think this plan will put Obama on the map on ethics reform.
I'm not trying to argue that Clinton's plan is soft but just that there are a lot of good ideas in Obama's proposal that go beyond what Clinton proposed.  Obama has also clearly been a more out-spoken advocate in the Senate for ethics reform.    
In the end though, I agree with your point any of the Democratic candidates would move us forward on this issue: this is something a Democratic president will be able to do by executive order on their first day in office, right off the bat --- and it would radically change the way our government runs.  It gives us all something to work for.


One Million Strong --- Join up
by psericks on Sat Jun 23, 2007 at 09:38:28 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Obama Proposes Sweeping (none / 0)

Great speech and good proposals by Obama.


by rikyrah on Fri Jun 22, 2007 at 11:44:37 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.