Obama flip flops on Super Pac fundraising.

[Soul Crusher]

Obama campaign to support super PAC fundraising
Posted by

CNN Chief White House Correspondent Jessica Yellin



http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/07/obama-campaign-to-support-super-pac-fundraising/?hpt=hp_t1



(CNN) - In a change of position, Barack Obama's reelection campaign will begin using administration and campaign aides to fundraise for Priorities USA Action, a super PAC backing the president.

Obama has been an outspoken critic of current campaign financing laws, in particular a Supreme Court ruling that allowed the creation of super PACs. Until now he has kept his distance from Priorities USA Action.

Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker

But in the wake of the group's anemic fundraising, made public last week, the campaign decided to change its position, and announced the new stance to members of its national finance committee Monday evening.

Two Obama campaign aides confirmed that senior campaign and administration officials who participate at fundraising events for the president's campaign will also appear at events for Priorities USA Action, the PAC supporting Obama.

"This decision was not made overnight,” one campaign official said. “ The money raised and spent by Republican super PACs is very telling. We will not unilaterally disarm."

The president, first lady Michelle Obama, Vice President Joe Biden and Dr. Jill Biden will not appear at super PAC events, the aides said.

In an e-mail to supporters, Obama campaign manager Jim Messina said the decision was a reaction to massive fundraising posted by super PACs supporting GOP presidential candidates.

"The campaign has decided to do what we can, consistent with the law, to support Priorities USA in its effort to counter the weight of the GOP Super PACs," Messina wrote.

"We will do so only in the knowledge and with the expectation that all of its donations will be fully disclosed as required by law to the Federal Election Commission."

Messina was careful to point out the president's opposition to a Supreme Court ruling that sparked the onset of super PACs, noting the administration was still looking for ways to put limits on campaign spending.

"The President opposed the Citizens United decision," Messina wrote. "He understood that with the dramatic growth in opportunities to raise and spend unlimited special-interest money, we would see new strategies to hide it from public view.

“He continues to support a law to force full disclosure of all funding intended to influence our elections, a reform that was blocked in 2010 by a unanimous Republican filibuster in the U.S. Senate. And the President favors action - by constitutional amendment, if necessary - to place reasonable limits on all such spending.”

Priorities USA Action posted receipts of $4.4 million through December 31, 2011, compared to the more than $30 million reported by Restore our Future, a super PAC supporting former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney.

In an e-mail blast, Jonathan Collegio, spokesman for the conservative groups American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, called the Obama campaign's move a "brazenly cynical" reversal for a president who just two years ago called spending by these outside groups a threat to democracy.

Collegio highlighted a quote from an October 2010 rally in Philadelphia, when the New York Times quoted Obama as saying, "You don’t know, it could be the oil industry, it could be the insurance industry, it could even be foreign-owned corporations. You don’t know because they don’t have to disclose. Now that’s not just a threat to Democrats, that’s a threat to our democracy."

American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS plan to raise $300 million to help defeat Obama and his agenda in November.

Mitt Romney's super PAC reported raising $30 million in 2011, the vast majority of which was spent on negative advertising.

Also see:

[Fury]

Bigger flip-flopper than Romney. Can't wait to hear the drones on here rationalize this.

[Soul Crusher]

[Soul Crusher]

What a liar.   

[240 is Back]

honesty?  obama created this by opting out of public funding in 2008 so he could buy the election, which he did over mccain' broke and hapless ass.

spin?  "Republicans have shown in the primary process that they're willing to eat their own and wreck the GOP brand with superPAC money... so it looks like we will have to stopp to their level in order to match spending to disrupt their lie/misinformation machine in the fall.. so dig deep and donate!"

[Soul Crusher]

Sam Stein
 
stein@huffingtonpost.com
 
Russ Feingold: Obama Super PAC Reversal Will Lead To 'A Legalized Abramoff System'
 
First Posted: 02/ 7/2012 10:52 am Updated: 02/ 7/2012 12:22 pm





WASHINGTON -- Former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) ripped into both President Barack Obama and his re-election team on Tuesday morning for backing off its previous criticism of outside spending on campaigns and embracing the role that super PACs will play in the 2012 election.

"It is a dumb approach," Feingold said in a phone interview with The Huffington Post. "It will lead to scandal and there are going to be a lot of people having corrupt conversations about huge amounts of money that will one day regret that they went down the route of what is effectively a legalized Abramoff system."

"I also think it guts the president's message and the Democratic Party's message," Feingold added. "We are doing very well right now. The president is doing brilliantly. This is no time to blunt that message by starting to play this game. I think people will see it as phony that Democrats start playing by Republican rules. People will see us as weak and not being a true alternative and just being the same as the other guy. And as I have said before, to me this is dancing with the devil."

One of the few remaining vocal champions of strict campaign finance rules, Feingold's harsh words for Obama were hardly unanticipated. The former senator offered a similar denunciation when former aides to the president first set out to form a super PAC, setting up the group that stands to benefit most from the campaign's new policy: Priorities USA Action.

One of the founders of that group told The Huffington Post on Monday night that the campaign's new approach to super PACS -- it will continue to publicly disapprove of their existence but will encourage donors to help fund them -- was simply a recognition of modern political realities.

"As has become evident in the past month, the only enthusiasm in the Republican Party is among oil company billionaires and investment bankers on Wall Street looking to defeat President Obama," said Bill Burton. "We’re committed to providing a balance to Karl Rove and the Koch brothers who have pledged more than half a billion dollars to their effort."

Aides to the president's re-election campaign, meanwhile, have pointed to the sucess that Restore Our Future, a super PAC supporting former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's presidential bid, has had in discrediting Romney's primary opponents. They argue that to simply accept the same fate would constitute campaign suicide.

"I'm sure super PACS have had some role [in damaging former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's candidacy]," Feingold said of the latter point. "But the fact is that Romney's best advantage is he has terrible opponents. It's true. If these people were even remotely credible I don’t think all the money in the world would help. It's that he has complete duds as opponents who people know can't beat the president."

The Obama campaign is set to hold a conference call with reporters Tuesday morning in an effort to further explain its reversal on super PACs. In all likelihood, it will be a variation of the argument campaign manager Jim Messina put forward in a blog post Monday night.

"With so much at stake, we can't allow for two sets of rules in this election whereby the Republican nominee is the beneficiary of unlimited spending and Democrats unilaterally disarm," he wrote.

Feingold, as expected, was not persuaded by that argument.

"The president is wrong to have embraced the corrupt corporate politics of Citizens United and that's what you're doing when you start using and consorting with super PACs. They can raise unlimited amounts of money from wealthy individuals and corporations and often they can do it in total secrecy," he said. "I am a supporter of the president. I will continue to support the president. But on this one I couldn't disagree more."










________________________ _________________



You libs need to now STFU about Citizens United.   

[Fury]

This reversal shows just how worried they are about his reelection prospects.

[Soul Crusher]

6 Things Obama Wished He Didn’t Say About Super PACs
Jaywon Choe | 38 minutes ago | 461 | 2


President Obama is being taken to task after he urged supporters to donate to the Super PAC supporting his re-election bid. Already, opponents are up in arms labeling the president a hypocrite.

After all, this was the president who just two years ago vehemently declared outside spending groups as being a “threat to our democracy.”

“Yet again, Barack Obama has proven he will literally do anything to win an election,” said Joe Pounder, spokesman for the Republican National Committee.

But Jim Messina, manager of Obama’s re-election campaign, said the campaign couldn’t afford staying out of the Super PAC arms race.

“We’re not going to fight this fight with one hand tied behind our back,” he said. “With so much at stake, we can’t allow for two sets of rules. Democrats can’t be unilaterally disarmed.”

Still, the campaign has had a hard time finding a solid defense against critics, especially considering Obama's extensive track record railing against outside contributions. Just how extensive is this track record? Well take a look.


October 10, 2010 - Remarks In Philadelphia, Pa.

AP
"Every American business and industry deserves a seat at the table, but they don’t get to a chance to buy every chair. We’ve seen what happens when they do. They put the entire economy at risk and every American might end up suffering.”
Source: White House.gov
September 28, 2010 - Remarks In Madison, Wis.

AP
"You've all seen the ads. Every one of these groups is run by Republican operatives. Every single one of them — even though they're posing as nonprofit groups with names like Americans for Prosperity, or the Committee for Truth in Politics, or Americans for Apple Pie. I made that last one up.”
Source: RealClearPolitics

January 27, 2010 - Remarks At The State Of The Union
"...the Supreme Court reversed a century of law that I believe will open the floodgates for special interests — including foreign corporations — to spend without limit in our elections. I don't think American elections should be bankrolled by America's most powerful interests, or worse, by foreign entities."
Source: WhiteHouse.gov

January 21, 2010 - Statement On Citizens United Ruling

AP Photo/Keith Srakocic
“With its ruling today, the Supreme Court has given a green light to a new stampede of special interest money in our politics. It is a major victory for big oil, Wall Street banks, health insurance companies and the other powerful interests that marshal their power every day in Washington to drown out the voices of everyday Americans.”
Source: Politico

January 30, 2008 - Remarks In Denver, Colo.
"If you choose change, you will have a nominee who doesn't take a dime from Washington lobbyists and PACs. We don't need a candidate who agrees with Republicans that lobbyists are part of the system in Washington. They're part of the problem. And when I'm President, their days of setting the agenda in Washington will be over."

Source: Presidency.ucsb.edu
February 17, 2007 - Remarks In Springfield, Ill.
"They write the checks and you get stuck with the bills, they get the access while you get to write a letter, they think they own this government, but we're here today to take it back. The time for that politics is over. It's time to turn the page."
Source: Chicago Sun Times


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/6-things-obama-wished-he-didnt-say-about-super-pacs-2012-2?op=1#ixzz1ljmn7Ty8

[Skip8282]

Bigger flip-flopper than Romney. Can't wait to hear the drones on here rationalize this.

Ha, the drones will be a hiding...as usual...

[Soul Crusher]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
February 7, 2012

Another Campaign for Sale





Two years ago, while delivering his State of the Union address, President Obama looked the Supreme Court justices in the face and told them they were wrong to have allowed special interests to spend without limits on campaigns. “I don’t think American elections should be bankrolled by America’s most powerful interests,” he said. “They should be decided by the American people.”

On Monday, the president abandoned that fundamental principle and gave in to the culture of the Citizens United decision that he once denounced as a “threat to our democracy.”

His aides announced that the Obama campaign would begin to assist the “super PAC” that can raise and spend unlimited sums to support the president’s re-election effort. Even White House and cabinet officials are expected to appear at fund-raising events for Priorities USA Action.

The announcement fully implicates the president, his campaign and his administration in the pollution of the political system unleashed by Citizens United and related court decisions. Corporations, unions and wealthy individuals are already writing huge checks — with no restrictions — to political action committees supporting individual candidates, which have become bag men for campaigns that still nominally operate under federal limits.

As misguided as it was, the Citizens United decision naïvely believed that the super PACs would remain separate from individual campaigns. The White House’s decision to allow insiders like Kathleen Sebelius, the health and human services secretary, and Jim Messina, the Obama campaign manager, to speak at Priorities USA Action events shows how ludicrous that notion has become, raising questions about whether the law is being violated.

Up to now, Republicans have been the main defenders of this corrupt system, and the main beneficiaries of it. Two of Karl Rove’s political groups raised $51 million last year to use against Mr. Obama and other Democrats, and the Republican presidential candidates’ PACs have raised $40 million.

Priorities USA Action and other Democratic groups have raised only $19 million. And, as Mr. Messina wrote on the Obama campaign’s blog, “with so much at stake” Democrats decided that they would not “unilaterally disarm.”

But if President Obama had refused to join in this downward spiral — and if he had proudly campaigned on that refusal — he and his campaign might have made up for that deficit in other ways: with more small contributions, and more support, from a public disgusted by the outsize influence of big money.

A president has a megaphone bigger even than Mr. Rove’s bloated bank account, and Mr. Obama could have impressed many wavering voters if he had chosen to use it against campaign corruption. He could have pointed out that it was Republicans who blocked the Disclose Act, which would have ended secret corporate donations, and that it was Republicans who used unlimited corporate funds to win back the House in 2010, pressing a corporate agenda that has severely hurt the middle class.

He could have ridiculed Mitt Romney’s super PAC for accepting $18 million from just 200 donors in the second half of last year, including million-dollar checks from hedge-fund operators, industrialists and bankers.

But now Mr. Obama has given up that higher ground. He had already undermined the public financing system for presidential campaigns by refusing to use it in 2008, but this is much worse. In that campaign, he at least forswore money from independent groups and lobbyists. Now he is relying on a super PAC that can accept money from anyone.

He is also telling the country that simply getting re-elected is bigger than standing on principle.


http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/08/opinion/another-2012-campaign-for-sale.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print

[240 is Back]

once the 'other guy' is using non-public funding, or super pacs, you have to do it too.

whoever spends more womeny wins in 94% of political races.  What sane politician would stick with their criticism when it means they'll lose an election guaranteed without competing?

obama pulled the dkck move in 2008 when he opted for donations over public funds - total lie and flip flop, but it won him the eleciton cause he was buying 30 minute spots the week before the election while mccain was struggling to decide if FL or OH should get his last pennies.

Obama's use of them in 2012 is just reactionary to a GOP field that is eating their own young with superPacs lol... if he uses them, he wins the election, and if he doesn't he loses.  Plus the GOP used them first.  In closing, he delivered dick move in 2008, but not in 2012.  thanks.

[Soul Crusher]

once the 'other guy' is using non-public funding, or super pacs, you have to do it too.

whoever spends more womeny wins in 94% of political races.  What sane politician would stick with their criticism when it means they'll lose an election guaranteed without competing?

obama pulled the dkck move in 2008 when he opted for donations over public funds - total lie and flip flop, but it won him the eleciton cause he was buying 30 minute spots the week before the election while mccain was struggling to decide if FL or OH should get his last pennies.

Obama's use of them in 2012 is just reactionary to a GOP field that is eating their own young with superPacs lol... if he uses them, he wins the election, and if he doesn't he loses.  Plus the GOP used them first.  In closing, he delivered dick move in 2008, but not in 2012.  thanks.

END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS WITH YOU FOR EVERYTHING OBAMA DOES RIGHT? 

[240 is Back]

END JUSTIFIES THE MEANS WITH YOU FOR EVERYTHING OBAMA DOES RIGHT? 

if mccain had chosen to use private donor $ over public funds in 2008, and broken his word not to - as a reaction to obama's move doing the same -

Then it wouldn't have been a flipflop or dick move on mccain's part.  cause the other guy changed the game and thus made mccain's pledge a guarantee for loss.

it's like if we both agree to duel with paintball guns.  Then halfway thru the match, i whip out a glock and start shooting at you.  Total dick move.  Now, you draw your own glock to waste my punk ass, but you think, "I made a pledge not to use a glock here.  I can't let this other prick dictate what I do.  Win or lose, kill or be killed, I am NOT going to break my word!"


hell no.  you pull the glock and get shooting, right?  Cause I was the dick that changed the rules of the game in order to destroy you.  That nullified your pledge to stick with paintbaall guns.

[Fury]

Can you imagine how much shit the #1 Obama guy 240 would be talking if this was Romney flip-flopping.

I guess hope and change and his attacks on the SCOTUS were all bullshit and lies. What an unprincipled charlatan who cares about nothing more than retaining power.


This guy makes Romney look like the most principled politician in DC.

[240 is Back]

i said obama did the dick move in 2008.  i have said he's an illegal alien.  he should be deported.  I dont konw many kneepadders that will stand up and call the prez a kenyan lol.

but in this case, ANY candidate who makes a pledge, then sees he will lose because the other team isn't following that - well, if you wanna survive in politics, you have to reverse.

If president mccain was flipping to use superPacs so he could defeat the dem, after seeing Hilary and Evan Buyh and whoever else destroying each other in the 2012 primaries, nobody would blame him.  The rules of the game have changed since it's an option now. 

[Soul Crusher]

i said obama did the dick move in 2008.  i have said he's an illegal alien.  he should be deported.  I dont konw many kneepadders that will stand up and call the prez a kenyan lol.

but in this case, ANY candidate who makes a pledge, then sees he will lose because the other team isn't following that - well, if you wanna survive in politics, you have to reverse.

If president mccain was flipping to use superPacs so he could defeat the dem, after seeing Hilary and Evan Buyh and whoever else destroying each other in the 2012 primaries, nobody would blame him.  The rules of the game have changed since it's an option now. 

And you are telling me obama did not know this when he blaste the SC at the SOTU adress last year? 

[240 is Back]

And you are telling me obama did not know this when he blaste the SC at the SOTU adress last year? 

what month did he blast them?  Jan 2011? 

I don't think any of the superPACs which have influenced the GOP race so much were even created then, were they?  I dont think any of the men or women had even declared yet.

yes, if obama made that vow this year, it would look silly.  But did ANY of us really think it'd be this bad, with people handing $5mil over to 'their guy' to win a state?

[Soul Crusher]

Spirit Lobbyist Bundled for Obama, Records Show

Former Rep. Ron Klein rai$ed for Obama, despite lobbyist “ban”
 
BY: Andrew Stiles - February 8, 2012 5:00 am

http://freebeacon.com/spirit-lobbyist-bundled-for-obama-records-show



UPDATE: An Obama campaign official tells Politico that Ron Klein is “no longer associated with the campaign” and never raised any money after registering as a lobbyist. The campaign does not intend to return the cash.

Former Rep. Ron Klein (D-Fla.) is an active campaign bundler for President Obama, having raised between $200,000 and $500,000, according to campaign records.

He is also a registered federal lobbyist.

The revelation poses a challenge for President Obama, who has banned registered lobbyists from personally contributing or bundling donations to his campaign. The president even touted these self-imposed restrictions in a Dec. 28, 2011, fundraising e-mail, writing: “We don’t take a dime from D.C. lobbyists or special-interest PACs—never have and never will.”

That email was sent days before Klein filed his paper work to become a “D.C. lobbyist.”

Klein, a two-term congressman, registered to become a lobbyist for Spirit Airlines, Inc., on Jan. 2, 2012, according to the Senate Office of Public Records—exactly one year after leaving office in 2011 after losing to Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) in the 2010 midterms. Federal law requires at least a one-year waiting period between leaving office and registering as a lobbyist.

When Klein joined the lobbying law firm Holland & Knight LLP as an adviser on regulatory issues, he told Politico he had not ruled out lobbying in the future. As a former corporate lawyer, he was a natural fit for the job.

The news comes on the heels of the administration’s newfound embrace of Super PACs, third-party groups capable of raising large amounts of money from wealthy corporations and individuals, but which do not have to disclose their donors. Obama had previously expressed disdain for such groups, calling them “a threat to our democracy.”

The president’s reversal on Super PACs has led some to question the president’s commitment to political reform. After all, reducing the influence of powerful special interests in Washington was a central element of Obama’s campaign platform in 2008.

“I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over,” he said on Nov. 10, 2007 in Des Moines, Iowa. “They have not funded my campaign, they will not run my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president.”

Obama also promised voters “lobbyists won’t find a job in my White House,” a claim the non-partisan watchdog website Politifact.com has rated a “promise broken.”

As Politifact notes, although the president signed an executive order codifying this pledge on his first full day in office, the administration has made use of a loophole in the order that permits “waivers” for former lobbyists to serve. In some cases, the administration has hired former lobbyists without a waiver and without disclosing details to the public.

The Washington Examiner reported in 2010 that there were more than 40 ex-lobbyists working in the Obama administration, including a number of senior White House officials. The Washington Post counted more than a dozen registered lobbyists on the Obama-Biden Transition Team, including the transition director John Podesta, founder and former president of the liberal think tank Center for American Progress.

This entry was posted in Democratic Donors and tagged Ron Klein. Bookmark the permalink.

[chadstallion]

Bigger flip-flopper than Romney. Can't wait to hear the drones on here rationalize this.

nothing to rationalize; i'm ready to make my check out now! it's about time!

[Soul Crusher]

nothing to rationalize; i'm ready to make my check out now! it's about time!

Why would you give ghettobama another dime? 

[Fury]

i said obama did the dick move in 2008.  i have said he's an illegal alien.  he should be deported.  I dont konw many kneepadders that will stand up and call the prez a kenyan lol.

but in this case, ANY candidate who makes a pledge, then sees he will lose because the other team isn't following that - well, if you wanna survive in politics, you have to reverse.

If president mccain was flipping to use superPacs so he could defeat the dem, after seeing Hilary and Evan Buyh and whoever else destroying each other in the 2012 primaries, nobody would blame him.  The rules of the game have changed since it's an option now. 

You are a pathetic c\/nt.

By the way, no one gives two fucks about what "Pres. McCain" would've done. He wasn't the one talking shit about them for the last 18 months.

Your posts are really ruining this board. Fuck off to Media Matters or something, douche.

[Soul Crusher]

ROBERT REICH: Obama Has Handed The Election Over To The Super Rich
Robert Reich, Contributor | 7 hours ago | 63,605 | 124


Mitt Romney Doesn't Understand How Much Of The Middle Class Is...


ROBERT REICH: Deficit Hawks Will Try To Take Advantage Of The Jobs...
Why No Responsible Democrat Should Want Newt Gingrich To Get The...
. 
The Sad Spectacle of Obama's Super PAC

The Downward Mobility of the American Middle Class, and Why Mitt Romney Doesn't Know
America's Jobs Deficit, and Why It's Still More Important than the Budget Deficit
 
It has been said there is no high ground in American politics since any politician who claims it is likely to be gunned down by those firing from the trenches. That’s how the Obama team justifies its decision to endorse a super PAC that can raise and spend unlimited sums for his campaign. 

Baloney. Good ends don’t justify corrupt means.

I understand the White House’s concerns. Obama is a proven fundraiser – he cobbled together an unprecedented $745 million for the 2008 election and has already raised $224 million for this one. But his aides figure Romney can raise almost as much, and they fear an additional $500 million or more will be funneled to Romney by a relative handful of rich individuals and corporations through right-wing super PACS like “American Crossroads.”

The White House was surprised that super PACs outspent the GOP candidates themselves in several of the early primary contests, and noted how easily Romney’s super PAC delivered Florida to him and pushed Newt Gingrich from first-place to fourth-place in Iowa.

Romney’s friends on Wall Street and in the executive suites of the nation’s biggest corporations have the deepest pockets in America. His super PAC got $18 million from just 200 donors in the second half of last year, including million-dollar checks from hedge-fund moguls, industrialists and bankers.

How many billionaires does it take to buy a presidential election? “With so much at stake” wrote Obama campaign manager Jim Messina on the Obama campaign’s blog, Obama couldn’t  “unilaterally disarm.”

But would refusing to be corrupted this way really amount to unilateral disarmament? To the contrary, I think it would have given the President a rallying cry that nearly all Americans would get behind: “More of the nation’s wealth and political power is now in the hands of fewer people and large corporations than since the era of the robber barons of the Gilded Age. I will not allow our democracy to be corrupted by this! I will fight to take back our government!”

Small donations would have flooded the Obama campaign, overwhelming Romney’s billionaire super PACs. The people would have been given a chance to be heard.

The sad truth is Obama has never really occupied the high ground. He refused public financing in 2008. Once president, he didn’t go to bat for a system of public financing that would have made it possible for candidates to raise enough money from small donors and matching public funds they wouldn’t need to rely on a few billionaires pumping unlimited sums into super PACS. He hasn’t even fought for public disclosure of super PAC donations.

And now he’s made a total mockery of the Court’s naïve belief that super PACs would remain separate from individual campaigns, by officially endorsing his own super PAC, and allowing campaign manager Jim Messina and even cabinet officers to speak at his super PAC events. Obama will not appear but he, Michelle Obama, and Vice President Joe Biden will encourage support of the super PAC.

One Obama adviser says Obama’s decision to endorse his super PAC has had an immediate effect. “Our donors get it,” the official said, adding that they now want to “go fight the other side.”

Exactly. So now a relative handful of super-rich Democrats want fight a relative handful of super-rich Republicans. And we call that a democracy.

Read more posts on Robert Reich »

Please follow Politics on Twitter and Facebook.



Read more: http://robertreich.org/post/17251255054#ixzz1looMOu2g

[Soul Crusher]

[Soul Crusher]

Obama bundler to 'de-register' as lobbyist
By NBC’s

Michael Isikoff 




A former Florida congressman who has been a top campaign bundler for President Obama said Wednesday he is taking immediate steps to de-register as a lobbyist for a Florida-based airline so he can continue to raise funds for the president.


Ron Klein, who has raised between $200,000 and $500,000 for the president, was registered as a lobbyist last month for Spirit Airlines, a low-cost airline that has been fighting new Obama administration airline regulations. But the Obama campaign has a rule against accepting campaign contributions from federally registered lobbyists.

After the Washington Free Beacon website reported on his lobbyist role today -- noting that he is listed on the Obama campaign's website as one of its bundlers -- Klein told NBC News that his registration with the Secretary of the Senate last month was a "clerical error" by an employee of Holland & Knight, the Washington law and lobbying firm where he currently works. He will "de-register" with the Secretary of the Senate today, he said.

Klein said he had brought in Spirit Airlines as a client for Holland & Knight in keeping with his role of "business development" for the firm. But, he added, "I'm not a lobbyist" even thought he was listed as one of the three Holland & Knight lobbyists who were registered last month to work on issues relating to "Department of Transportation aviation regulations" and "customs and border protection" at Ft. Lauderdale airport.

The case illustrates the fuzzy rules of what constitutes lobbying in Washington. Spirit Airlines recently launched a campaign to overturn a new Transportation Department regulation allowing passengers to change flights within 24 hours of booking without paying a penalty.

The airline has launched a website to fight the new rule -- KeepMyFaresLow.org -- urging customers to contact their congressmen and senators and imposed a $2 fee on its customers it calls the "Department of Transportation Unintended Consequences Fee."

Klein said he knew Spirit Airlines, because it's located in his former district, resulting in his recruitment of the company for Holland & Knight.

"They want to express their story on Capitol Hill," he said.

When first contacted about Klein, an Obama campaign official said by email, "All of the funds he raised for the campaign were raised last year. At the moment, he became a federal lobbyist he stopped raising for the campaign."

But Klein said he had not heard from anybody in the Obama campaign. And, he added, he fully expects to continue raising money for the president's re-election.

"I understand the rules," he said.
.

[Soul Crusher]

The Corruption Of Our Entire Political Class Explained In One Paragraph
Michael Brendan Dougherty | 4 hours ago | 5,898 | 53


Jim Vandehei hits upon a startling truth  about money and politics in his report in Politico about Barack Obama's flip-flop on SuperPACs. 

The background: Obama has repeatedly denounced the unlimited donation model of SuperPACs as a "threat to our democracy" and implicitly promised that he would abjure them even it came at a political cost. But earlier this week, Team Obama got its SuperPACs.

And that's where Vandehei reveals the truth about the entire political class:

A little secret about Washington: Everyone loves this decision. Democrats get more money, strategists and pollsters and ad-makers get bigger checks; Republicans will use this to call Obama a hypocrite and to scare donors into giving them more money, which in turns means more money for their strategists, pollsters and ad-makers; and the media make more money as all of this is funneled into TV and Web ads. Incestuous, isn’t it?


This is absolutely right. Our laws and culture have made Washington D.C. into a perpetual money-sucking machine that runs on the physics of outrage.

See AlsoBeing Rich Means You're More Likely To Put A Ring On It Clint Eastwood And Barack Obama In: 'A Fistful Of Bailouts'

Please follow Politics on Twitter and Facebook.
Follow Michael Brendan Dougherty on Twitter.
Ask Michael A Question >

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-corruption-of-our-entire-political-class-explained-in-one-paragraph-2012-2#ixzz1luAcVoNo