John Edwards: "as President, I represent the American People!"

John Edwards has gotten many laughs with the cutting line about Industry Lobbyists: "If you give them a seat at the Table -- they'll eat all the food!"

Lobbyists are the "Bogey Man" that's everyone loves to hate -- but are they really that big of a Deal?

It's just Business right? Corporations are People too. They deserve to have their Voices heard in DC, too, Right?   I thought I read that somewhere in the Constitution, Didn't I? .... Hmmmm ....

There he goes again! Talking about those big, bad Drug Companies, Insurance Companies, and Oil Companies and their Lobbyists!  Woooh Scarey!

John Edwards - Just Say No 18

The reason we don't have Universal Health Care today, is because of Drug Companies, Insurance Companies and their Lobbyists in Washington. They stand between you and the Health Care that you need.

We have to take this System on. We have to Change it! We have to be willing to be honest about it. I don't believe you can change that system and bring about the change we need on Health Care, on Energy, and on everything else, unless you're willing to say 'It's broken -- It doesn't work!' If you defend it, and say, 'Oh well it's fine, we'll just take money from the Lobbyists' and then we'll work it all out' -- that doesn't work! You have to say NO to these people.

You have to say as President, I represent the American People! I don't represent Drug Companies, Insurance Companies and their Lobbyists in Washington! I don't represent Oil Companies -- I represent America! Because that's the ONLY way we're going to get the Change that we need in this Country. ...

How dare Edwards have the audacity to want to actually "represent the American People, as President"?

Doesn't he know, that's not how our System of Government Works anymore?


Edwards does know, and he's Just Saying No. No More!

NO More "Business as Usual"

NO More CEO's "Buying a Seat at the Table" in Congress

Lobbying Overview - Total Spending, by Industry Sector:

NO More trading our Corporate Representatives for their, and vice versa:

Just how much of those Lobbyists BILLIONS finds its way into Congress?

HMOs - $30 Million


Drug Companies - $77 Million


Insurance Companies - $179 Million


Oil & Gas Companies - $117 Million


Electric Utilities - $81 Million


No More taking over the Election Process, by helping those Representatives pay their Campaign Bills:

If previous Campaign Donation Trends are any guide, get ready for another year of "Madison Avenue" Mud-Slinging!
(the 2008 "donations" are just getting started)



Drug Companies


Insurance Companies


Oil & Gas Companies


Electric Utilities


No More taking over the Legislation Process, by reminding those Representatives WHO paid their Campaign Bills:

Here are the Top 20 Members of Congress raking it in from each Industry sector:



Drug Companies


Insurance Companies


Oil & Gas Companies


Electric Utilities


John Edwards is Ready to give them Hell!  
He knows how they operate. He's been beating Corporate Interests for 20 years, in the court room arena.

One things for sure, John Edwards does not back down from a Fight!

John Edwards - "Give 'Em Hell" T8

Reform Groups AnnounceSix Benchmarks for Lobbying Reform

Jan 23, 2006

1. Break the nexus between lobbyists, money and lawmakers.

Cap contributions from lobbyists and lobbying firm PACs to federal candidates at $200 per election and to national parties and leadership PACs at $500 per election cycle.

Prohibit lobbyists and lobbying firms from soliciting, arranging or delivering contributions and from serving as officials on candidate campaign committees and leadership PACs.

2. Prevent private interests from financing trips and from subsidizing travel for members of Congress and staff, and executive branch officials and federal judges.

3. Ban gifts to members of Congress and staff.

4. Oversee and enforce ethics rules and lobbying laws through an independent congressional Office of Public Integrity and increase penalties for violations.

5. Slow the revolving door.

6. Place sunshine on lobbying activities and financial disclosure reports.

It will take more than just rhetoric.

John Edwards will take the power out of the hands of Lobbyists. He will:

-- Take on the Lobbyists' Power with a Constitutional Line-Item Veto:

-- Prohibit Lobbyists from Giving or Raising Campaign Cash:

-- Today, lobbyists approach politicians with campaign checks in one hand and wish lists in the other. Federally registered lobbyists gave over $23 million in the 2006 campaign. Edwards has never taken a dime from federal lobbyists or PACs. He will sever the connection between money and lobbyist influence by:

     * Ending lobbyist campaign contributions:

-- Lobbyists should be able to make their cases on the merits, not by influencing politicians with donations. Edwards will prohibit all federal candidates from accepting campaign contributions from federal lobbyists.

     * Stopping lobbyists from bundling:

-- Lobbyists solicit donations from others and direct them towards candidates to maximize their impact, a practice known as bundling. Edwards has never allowed any lobbyists to bundle donations for him. As president he will ban federal lobbyists from bundling for federal candidates.

-- Close the Lobbyist Revolving Door:

     * Banning top government officials from becoming lobbyists:

     * Banning lobbyists from taking top government jobs

-- Expose Lobbyist Contacts to Sunlight

-- Prohibit Executive Branch Employees from Accepting Corporate Gifts reform/index.html


John Edwards -- The Plan to Build One America

End the Unique Power of Lobbyists

-- Prohibit lobbyists from donating to campaigns or fundraising for them.

-- Fight lobbyists' bread and butter - earmarked pork-barrel spending - with a constitutional version of the line-item veto.

-- Close the revolving door between Capitol Hill and K Street by banning former top officials from lobbying their colleagues and lobbyists from taking executive branch positions related to their former clients.

-- Expand the congressional ban on lobbyist gifts and travel to executive branch officials.

It's really not a Laughing Matter! The Legislation that the Lobbyists help write and pressure through Congress IS really criminal, sometimes!

IF the Focus of this Country doesn't change soon,
from how Wall Street is doing
to how "your Street" is doing

well America should just quit pretending to represent the People
and Actually start inviting CEO's to Congress for Planning Sessions,
since it's their Opinions that are the ones that matter anyways!

Oh wait, they already do --

The Cheney Energy Plan,
The Lieberman-Warner Carbon Give Away,
FCC Telecommunications Consolidation Plan,

... the list goes on.

Big Business gets the Concessions,
We the People get the Bills!

Edwards is right - It's Time to End this Game!

And NOT when "it's Convenient" for Politicians to fix it
(huh, when's that ???) --  But NOW!

It seems some Senators IN OFFICE NOW, could be reforming this System of Corporate Favoritism, NOW -- not "Later"?  

SO Why Aren't they? .... Hmmm?

Post Script:

If John Edwards has a valid point about Lobbyists, why is the Media all too ready to just chalk it up to "Edwards has become Angry"?

Well, Could it have anything to do with the fact, that the Corporate Media is "trying to get their Seat at the Congressional Table" too?

TV-Radio Stations


Books, Magazines, Newspapers


It's the American People WHO need to get Angry !@!
And Support Candidates, like John Edwards, who are willing to take on this Broken System -- and NOT just go along with it!

No one else will do it for you!
Indeed, they'd rather have you "Relax, Just Go Shopping" ...

"Business as Usual" is Good for "some interests".
The ones that matter most in today's world, it seems.

[Note: Most Images, click thru to more info!]

Tags: Finance Reform, John Edwards, Lobbyists, progressives, representation (all tags)



Re: John Edwards:

WooHoo! Great info Jamess!
These CORPORATE lobbyists have funded Obama's and Hillary's political careers - and now the CORPORATE media is rewarding them by promoting their "hope" and "nostalgia" campaigns.

And I've noticed "progressive" blogs that advertise for CORPORATE interests - are promoting Obama and Hillary too.

by annefrank 2007-11-24 09:26AM | 0 recs
Hey Anne

thanks for the feedback ;)

it's SO good to see you still fighting
the Good Fight, in some quarters --
where Free Speech is still tolerated!

The People really DO need to Take THEIR Country Back!

NO ONE else will do it for them!

by jamess 2007-11-24 09:32AM | 0 recs
Re: John Edwards: "as President

I changed your query from "top recipients" to "Senate candidates" - and see that Obama is also wayyy up there in donations from Pharma/Health products -- mmary.asp?Ind=H04&cycle=ALL&reci pdetail=S&Mem=N

Although Obama began rejecting corporate lobbyists money in 2007 in order to reflect his current campaign theme of "changing Washington" - donations from corporate lobbyists in PREVIOUS years are part of Obama's record.

by annefrank 2007-11-24 09:42AM | 0 recs
Re: John Edwards: "as President

it's not enough to show the money. you have to tie the money to votes. where are the votes that obama voted against the interests of everyday people?

by jello 2007-11-24 10:54AM | 0 recs
Re: John Edwards: "as President

Obama votes?

(Just kiddin'!)

by Junior Bug 2007-11-24 08:52PM | 0 recs
Rep and Dem

The monied interests have both Republican and Democratic leaders in their pockets.  These charts you show illustrate how America needs to stop trading corporate republicans for corporate democrats.

Edwards is the one to change Washington!  This message needs to get out to more people.  The corporate controlled media will not share this with America.

Great diary!

by funphil 2007-11-24 10:11AM | 0 recs
edwards, the pure

i haven't broken down all the numbers but you can't pretend that edwards was never influenced by corporate pressure. for all his railing against nafta, edwards voted for EVERY trade deal that came across his desk while he was in the senate. now why do you suppose he did that? edwards voted against a bill that would have protected small family farmers. a voted that was tied to contributions from a big agra interest in his state.

this image you are trying to project of edwards was some kind of political virigin, never sullied or influenced by corporate contributions, is not the reality.

by jello 2007-11-24 11:06AM | 0 recs
Re: edwards, the pure

another vote that hurt everyday people was when edwards voted for the bankruptcy bill. something that served the interests of the corporatists.

by jello 2007-11-24 11:09AM | 0 recs
Re: edwards, the populist

Which bankruptcy bill are you talking about?  

by pioneer111 2007-11-24 11:45AM | 0 recs
Re: edwards, the populist

if you are still here, this piece talks about the bankruptcy bill: enate/banking-committee/bankruptcy-bill/

by jello 2007-11-25 04:51AM | 0 recs
Re: edwards, the populist

The information on that page is wrong.

Senate adopts Bankruptcy Reform Act of 2000

A "yes" vote was a vote to make the bankruptcy laws stricter for more debtors. A "no" vote was a vote to preserve current bankruptcy laws.


REPUBLICANS FOR (53): Abraham, Allard, Ashcroft, Bennett, Bond, Brownback, Bunning, Burns, Campbell, Chafee, Cochran, Collins, Craig, Crapo, DeWine, Domenici, Enzi, Frist, Gorton, Gramm (Tex.), Grams (Minn.), Grassley, Gregg, Hagel, Hatch, Helms, Hutchinson (Ark.), Hutchison (Tex.), Inhofe, Jeffords, Kyl, Lott, Lugar, Mack, McCain, McConnell, Murkowski, Nickles, Roberts, Roth, Santorum, Sessions, Shelby, Smith (N.H.), Smith (Ore.), Snowe, Specter, Stevens, Thomas, Thompson, Thurmond, Voinovich and Warner.

DEMOCRATS FOR (17): Bayh, Biden, Bingaman, Breaux, Bryan, Byrd, Cleland, Conrad, Dorgan, Graham (Ra.), Hollings, Johnson, Kerrey (Neb.), Lincoln, Miller, Robb and Tomcelli.


DEMOCRATS AGAINST (28): Akaka, Baucus, Boxer, Daschle, Dodd, Durbin, Edwards, Feingold, Feinstein, Harkin, Inouye, Kennedy, Kerry (Mass.), Kohl, Lautenberg, Leahy, Levin, Lieberman, Mikulski, Moynihan, Murray, Reed (R.I.), Reid (Nev.), Rockefeller, Sarbanes, Schumer, Wellstone and Wyden.

NOT VOTING (2): Fitzgerald and Landrieu.

His vote in 2001 was not the best but 36 'Democratic' Senators Vote For Credit Card Banking Industry's Bankruptcy 'Reform'  including Clinton who husband had vetoed the previous bill that passed.  Edwards was still friendly with the Clintons since his defense of Clinton when he arrived in the senate.  It was an odd vote for both of them.  Dodd's vote was better but he obviously didn't convince his colleagues.  Only 13 Democrats voted against that bill, so I would like to know the context more.

by pioneer111 2007-11-25 11:47AM | 0 recs
Re: edwards, the populist
This is an anti-Edwards hit site and I wouldn't count on its accuracy as I already showed.  
It doesn't say who is responsible for it.  I'm curious if you know?
by pioneer111 2007-11-25 11:54AM | 0 recs
Re: edwards, the populist

dodd, i believe

by jello 2007-11-25 09:19PM | 0 recs
Re: edwards, the populist

his bk vote, i remember, because on abc this week with george steph, ewards was asked to defend the vote. this, and a bunch of other ones, including the patriot act and nclb. he was ask why was he on one side of the issues while he was senator, then on the other side once he was out. why is he now running against so many issues he once supported? edwards dodged answering the question.

by jello 2007-11-25 09:24PM | 0 recs
Re: edwards, the pure

Edwards doesn't claim "to be pure" --
though he has always refused PAC Money and Washington Lobbyist money.
---- main500251.shtml?id=3518736n&channel =/sections/ftn/videoplayer3460.shtml

When Edwards was a Senator in Congress,
he was Representing his State, NC
(which is a conservative Red State, BTW)

Edwards has no such obligation to Represent ONLY NC residents, now.  He has room now, to pursue a much more Populist, Progressive Agenda, true to his Vision and Values, as they have become more urgent, and well defined, as time goes on.

by jamess 2007-11-24 12:00PM | 0 recs
Link please?

I think you are wrong.

Prove your statement that Edwards voted for every trade bill.

Can you back it up? Don't try to wiggle out of it, jello.

Of course, everyone but you are stupid.  Yeah right.

I smell a corporatist in that jello mix. election_edwards/index.htm

Wall Street no fan of Edwards

Traders, favoring Bush team, dislike Edwards as VP but don't register displeasure -- yet.
July 6, 2004: 1:27 PM EDT
By Mark Gongloff, CNN/Money senior writer

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry's choice of a running mate may just help him win the election in November, and that could make Wall Street very nervous.


And Wall Street is probably not too thrilled about that; stock investors have grown to expect policies from the Bush administration that are friendly to businesses and to investors.
What's more, Edwards spent much of his campaign for president last year and early this year taking a populist stance that veered at times into protectionism, according to some critics.
And Edwards is a former plaintiff's trial lawyer, which could lead Wall Street to fear a potential Kerry presidency would be unfriendly to tort reform.

Tom Donohue, president of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has told the Wall Street Journal he would work to defeat a Kerry-Edwards ticket, and other business leaders reacted with disdain to Kerry's pick.
"As a trial lawyer, Edwards brings to his job an inherent bias against innovation and the American entrepreneurial spirit that is essential to compete and create jobs," Jerry Jasinowski, president of the National Association of Manufacturers, said in a statement.

Wall Street hearts Clinton and is okay with Obama.

Hmmm. Which one's are corporate candidates?

by TomP 2007-11-25 12:49PM | 0 recs
Dammit James!!

Another top of the line excellent dairy! What is wrong with you!! So much details! You're like 1000 times better than any mainstream journalist.

What's the world coming to when CJs write and research and use facts in an article for free, when mainstream journalists seek to blur lines, bend truths and or lie outright for tons of money as corporate stooges.

Sigh. Thank you James for another excellent diary.

by cosbo 2007-11-24 12:07PM | 0 recs
Re: Dammit James!!

funny sig.

by jello 2007-11-24 01:25PM | 0 recs
Re: lets compare apples to apples

Now compare their policy -

Edwards: You can't negotiate with lobbyists.
Clinton: Lobbyists are people too.

Of the two, which has burned those bridges, do you think?

by Junior Bug 2007-11-24 09:00PM | 0 recs
Re:he was just foreclosing homes of people in NO

To my knowledge, he wasn't "foreclosing homes of people". Nowhere. Never.

Since you should know this (you post a lot around here) you willfully say something untrue.

Now, you tell me:
Should I call you a liar?
Should I troll-rate you?
Or, should I just ignore everything you say and encourage others to do the same?

Waiting to accept your apology,

by aufklaerer 2007-11-25 04:26AM | 0 recs
Re:he was just foreclosing homes of people in NO


by jello 2007-11-25 10:25AM | 0 recs
Re:he was just foreclosing homes of people in NO

He did not offer them  legal services while they
were foreclosing homes.  You lie so much.

The Clinton trolls here really are an embarrasmment to Senator Clinton.

by TomP 2007-11-25 12:44PM | 0 recs
You should troll rate the

liars.  I believe there are only a few, but they use sockpuppets.  Nasty folks.  They claim to support Clinton, but are so obnoxious that I suspect they are just Republican trolls.  Unless the Clinton folks wish only to disrupt the netroots.  Hard to tell, but these ones are real liars. Ask them for links.  

by TomP 2007-11-25 12:54PM | 0 recs
you are wrong

and you know you are wrong, yet you lie anyway

he never particioated iun any foreclosures in New orleans.  A bank that a company he was invested in owned did, and he asked them to stop.  when they didn't he pulled all of his money out and then gave his own money to help the people there.

So, you know, you are a LIAR.

by DrFrankLives 2007-12-02 05:00PM | 0 recs
Re: John Edwards

great post ... we need to be discussing these very important issues at the kitchen tables of iowa and new hampshire. i hope the edwards campaign is articulating this message in those early states.

by dannybauder 2007-11-25 06:16AM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads