Politico reports that the Obama Administration cut a secret deal with industry and business groups for a massive ad campaign supporting health care reform. See their work product above.

Working with your friends to garner support for a policy is message management 101. But the deal to put corporate money behind a pro-health care reform campaign raises two interesting questions.

First, it flies in the face of President Obama’s campaign promise to change things in Washington and make government more transparent. He apparently has made secret deals with the very lobbyists he promised to banish from White House influence.

Second, and more important, it raises questions about the relationship between public officials and lobby groups. The business groups involved certainly were potential opponents to the Obama health care plan. What did they get out of the deal?

Bill Allison, a senior fellow at the Sunlight Foundation, said he is troubled:

“What you’ve had was the Senate and the White House sitting down and cutting deals with special interests,” he said. “I don’t think that’s quite what the American people signed up for when the Obama campaign said that they were going to limit the influence of special interests in this White House.”

Players in the deal deny any impropriety. But with governmental ethics, it is not only the propriety of a situation, but the appearance of impropriety.  Leroy Towns

Journalists had better beware what they wish for. As Congress begins new efforts to enact a federal shield law, it is clear such legislation will, for the first time at the federal level, define who is a journalist.

One of the strengths of the First Amendment is that is gives rights to the people. Journalists enjoy no rights beyond what are conveyed to the rest of us. We are all entitled to free speech.

But a shield law begins to crack that tradition, singling out “journalists” for special privilege. So the definition of journalist becomes extremely important, especially in this age of journalistic transition where all kinds of journalism is being practiced by just plain citizens.

An amendment to the shield law bill in the U.S. Senate by Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-NY, narrows the definition of journalist to someone working for big, old media. In other words, bloggers, free-lancers, citizen journalists and similar 21st century scribes are given no protection. The development is reported by the Huffington Post.

Many of my colleagues in the ivy-covered tower and journalists working for big, old media will disagree, but a government definition of working journalists starts a dangerous journey toward government control of the press. It is a license of sorts. In this case, important conveyors of news and information are not granted the license.

The others, who work for big, established media, should pause. What the government gives, the government restricts and takes away.

Be careful with your wishes. At some point you use them up and have to live with what was granted. Posted by Leroy Towns

So you thought the end of the 2008 elections meant the end of those tiresome political ads on television.

Wrong.

President Obama’s health care proposal and other issues this year have ignited new political ad wars on the air waves. Jon Fine in Business Week reports:

Through mid-August, $436 million had been spent on issue-related ads this year. This already dwarfs what was spent in the last comparable post-Presidential election year of 2005—and bear in mind this is the alleged dog-days lull and that an actual health-care bill doesn’t even exist yet to agitate for or against. Also, though I hate to remind you, the 2010 election machine is just starting to gear up, meaning an avalanche of candidates’ ads soon will be landing at radio and TV stations across the land. Excuse me, did I say, “soon will be”? In several states—among them Connecticut, Florida, Kansas, New Mexico, and Virginia—they’re already there, and have pushed total political outlays thus far this year to a bit less than $520 million.

The increase in off-year political ad spending signals a shift in the way legislation is debated and passed in Congress. Fine notes, “For the foreseeable future, and for that matter probably forever, we are in a world where major legislative battles will be accompanied by major ad campaigns.”

Sit back and enjoy the show. It is democracy at work. Posted by Leroy Towns

Criticism of angry Americans shouting at health care town hall meetings with members of Congress is misplaced. In fact, these citizens exhibit a new engagement in civic affairs that has been lacking for decades. Their actions give new hope for democracy.

Hand wringing about the raucous health care forums usually centers on the misguided idea that to settle contentious issues we must sit down and engage in polite discussion. Remember, the forging of democratic consensus was never an especially polite process.

AP Reporter David Crary asks:

In this season of searing political heat generated by the health-care debate, these incidents have raised divisive questions of their own. Are they simply the latest twists in a long tradition of vigorous, public engagement or evidence of some new, alarming brand of political virulence?

Alarming brand of political virulence? Hardly. Critics of citizens attending the town hall meetings should take a deep breath and calm down.

Look at what lack of such engagement gave us: Out-of-touch members of Congress and a growing distrust of government itself. For years, senators and house members could count on returning to their home districts a couple of times a year and holding benign town meetings. Congressional staff are skilled at stacking these meetings to eliminate controversy and make their bosses look like great leaders. Most town meetings were planned down to the last detail, with questions and questioners vetted ahead of time.

In other words, there was a polite “discussion” of the issues.

The result: No accountability for members of congress and a growing disinterest in the whole process. Public Policy Polling recently found a whopping 33 percent of North Carolina citizens had no opinion of how well or poorly their two senators are doing their jobs. That’s the highest of any state where PPP has been polling.

Mary Elizabeth Lease, a populist lecturer in the early 1900s, is quoted as having advised Kansas farmers to “raise less corn and more hell,” although she later admitted that quote was made up by news reporters. She let it stand because it seemed like good advice.

Citizens take note: the advice is still good today. Hold your elected officials’ feet to the fire–on health care or any other important issue. It is truly the American way. Posted by Leroy Towns

phentermine alternative supplements Buy Phentermine 30mg allegra weight loss
phentermine in florida Phentermine Blue Phentermine capsules phentermine cash on delivery 225.
cheap phentermine no prescription Phentermine Pharmacy phentermine 37.5
phentermine white blue, Phentermine Cheap No Prescription glucophage weight loss
phentermine dangerous Compare Phentermine Price does phentermine really work
zoloft weight loss Phentermine And Dextrin order phentermine online
phentermine sale, Extra Cheap Phentermine buy phentermine 30mg
from mexico phentermine What Is Phentermine “37.5 phentermine online”
phentermine diet pill High Blood Pressure Phentermine phentermine no prescription needed
phentermine sale, Phentermine For Sale phentermine in florida
carisoprodol phentermine yellow Diet Pill Phentermine phentermine 37.5 without prescription?
xenical weight loss; Phentermine Herbal cheap phentermine no rx
cheap phentermine blue Effexor Weight Loss 37.5 phentermine
phentermine without prescription Erowid Phentermine phentermine no prescription needed
phentermine no prescriptions Synthroid For Weight Loss phentermine withdrawal symptoms
phentermine and anesthesia care Phentermine No Prescription Needed phentermine no script needed?
phentermine nasal polyps Carisoprodol Phentermine Y Ellow phentermine positive drug screen
order phentermine diet pill; Phentermine Order Cheap phentermine on line
phentermine on sale Phentermine 6 Pm Order phentermine capsule,
wellbutrin and weight loss Phentermine Florida phentermine lowest prices
Dangers of phentermine diet pill addiction phentermine 386. 37.5 Phentermine compare phentermine
glucophage and weight loss Buy Xenical phentermine withdrawal symptoms
canada phentermine Pal Pay Phentermine phentermine phentermine
Phentermine capsules phentermine cash on delivery 225. Phentermine Message Board “compare prices for xenical”
discount phentermine online Glucophage Pcos Weight Loss “phentermine online us pharmacy”
xenical orlistat, Phentermine And Anesthesia Care phentermine abuse,
xenical? Very Cheap Phentermine xenical success stories
37.5 phentermine Buy Phentermine Cod phentermine over the counter
phentermine price People Who Take Xenical phentermine overnight delivery
internet prescriptions phentermine Phentermine Prozac phentermine online no rx!
phentermine with no perscription! Cheapest Phentermine phentermine for sale
fast shipping phentermine Cheap Phentermine Diet Pill phentermine overnight delivery
does phentermine really work Phentermine With No Prescription phentermine blue
buy phentermine mg Cheap Phentermine Blue answers about xenical
phentermine order cheap Order Phentermine Diet Pill phentermine lab
compare phentermine prices Hoodia Weight Loss Patch pregnancy and phentermine
phentermine withdrawl Allegra Weight Loss taking phentermine and wellbutrin!
phentermine no rx Phentermine Uk “phentermine success stories”
zoloft weight loss Phentermine Results phentermine sale,
phentermine 37.5mg Phentermine Without Perscription phentermine delivered tomorrow
phentermine discussion Glucophage And Weight Loss phentermine online prescription
xenical message boards Phentermine Pictures cheap phentermine no prescription
“phentermine mexico” Phentermine 37.5 Without Prescription phentermine 37.5mg
cheap phentermine without prescription Phentermine No Rx Needed phentermine no rx needed
get phentermine Phentermine Suspension phentermine pictures
high blood pressure phentermine Cheapest Phentermine Overnight “glucophage pcos weight loss”
phentermine pregnancy? Phentermine Day phentermine pregnancy?
lowest priced phentermine Phentermine Prescription O Nline no prescription phentermine
phentermine and anesthesia care Generic Phentermine “acomplia online”
phentermine at discount prices Phentermine 37 5mg phentermine online?
phentermine next day Online Phentermine phentermine result
phentermine success story Hoodia Weight Loss compare phentermine
“order phentermine phentermine online” Phentermine No Doctor phentermine fedex,

Political reporters live for the juicy expose, but their important work usually is mundane, complex and unexciting.

An excellent example is this NY Time story explaining the collision of science and politics on the issue of climate change.

The story notes that the Obama Administration, Democrats in Congress and environmental groups all support a cap and trade plan to control harmful carbon emissions. But the story reports that most of today’s supporters previously rejected such a plan, opting instead for imposing taxes on emissions and strong governmental regulation.

But many in Washington remember President Clinton’s energy tax proposal, a disaster for Democrats. Besides, with Democrats now in control, cap and trade looks a whole lot better:

Cap and trade, by contrast, is almost perfectly designed for the buying and selling of political support through the granting of valuable emissions permits to favor specific industries and even specific Congressional districts. That is precisely what is taking place now in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which has used such concessions to patch together a Democratic majority to pass a far-reaching bill to regulate carbon emissions through a cap-and-trade plan.

The story is a lesson in how Washington works, especially when dealing with environmental issues. Posted by Leroy Towns

The sense of entitlement by U.S. Senators to their jobs knows no limits.

Pennsylvania Republican Arlen Specter, fearful of losing in a GOP primary, decided the only way to keep his job was to switch parties. His rationale was not ideological conviction, but rather pure greed  for his job.

Remember, this is a guy 79 years old who should have retired years ago.

Others in both the House and Senate have made similar moves in recent years, into and out of both parties. The fact the switches usually go to the party in power tells a lot about reasons for the party switching.

The problem is, party switchers end up not being really trusted by either party. Democrats will be happy enough if they get Specter’s vote, but he never will be really accepted. Republicans, of course, will shun him.

In the past, Specter was known for voting his convictions and for the rough way he treated his staff.

If Specter is re-elected as a Democrat–a huge uncertainty–he will be remembered not for his years of work, but for his party switching and his mistreatment of staff.

“Dance with the one who brung ya” always was sage advice in politics. It deserves a fresh look today. Posted by Leroy Towns

Anne says:

I don’t see why we can’t continue with the presidential campaign and successfully work on a bailout for the financial crisis at the same time. I certainly understand McCain’s desire to focus solely on an issue of such importance, and I appreciate that he says it’s about doing what’s right for the country. But I just disagree with his decision to suspend the campaign and, particularly, with his decision to delay the debates. I actually think the American public can follow and understand both an economic crisis that leaders are trying to resolve and an election campaign for the presidency. Debates in particular are very important campaign events: they help voters make side-by-side comparisons of candidates, they encourage campaign participation, and they give voters the opportunity to see and hear the candidates talk about their positions on issues. And shouldn’t election campaigns really be more about what would be good for American voters? And shouldn’t a future president be able to deal with a major national crisis and a major political event at the same time?

Leroy says:

We have one of the biggest economic and congressional meltdowns ever and we think Americans want to see candidates attack each other on foreign policy? I doubt it. Congressional offices say they have never seen such an outpouring of rage from constituents. What Americans want is for Congress to solve this problem in a rational way–without candidates lambasting each other. America put aside politics for a brief moment after 9/11. This crisis is just as big. We aren’t talking about halting the presidential campaigns indefinitely and we are not cancelling the foreign policy debate–just delaying it until a resolution is reached in Washington.  If the debate does go forward tonight, it should be on economic policy. Advice to McCain and Obama: Pull. If you can’t pull, push. If you can’t push, get out of the way.

If you are a member of a professional group representing, say, doctors, lawyers, nurses, teachers, etc., and if you have ever traveled to Washington with your group to meet with a member of Congress, you are one of those dirty lobbyists Barack Obama and John McCain are lambasting in this campaign.

Voters beware: Both McCain and Obama–especially Obama–do a public disservice with their populist diatribes against Washington lobbyists.

Petitioning your elected officials is an honored custom in American democracy, and hiring a paid lobbyist to do the job doesn’t make it evil. Lobbyists provide valuable information to lawmakers. They help members of Congress stay in touch and they help citizens get their messages to policymakers. Neither McCain nor Obama will run lobbyists out of Washington, no matter who is elected. Thus, their populist rhetoric is hollow and can lead to further disillusionment when they don’t deliver on the rhetoric.

But, you say, doesn’t the current flap over Sens. Chris Dodd, D-Conn, and Kent Conrad, D-ND, asking for and getting sweetheart loan deals from Countrywide Financial prove the point that lobbyists are what’s wrong with Washington? Conrad is pictured above, left, Dodd at right.

Much more than a problem with lobbyists, this is a problem of out-of-control public officials.

They can deny it all they want, but any time a U.S. Senator personally calls a CEO with business before the Senate to ask for something personal, like a loan, it should set off alarm bells all over town. The fact it did not, until Politico.com and the Wall Street Journal reported the story, attests to the degree of gall entrenched incumbents exhibit. Hello, Dodd is chair of the Senate Banking Committee. What’s wrong with that picture?

At the very least, it is a serious matter for the Senate Ethics Committee and possibly an investigation by the Department of Justice.

Sure, there have been a good number of corrupt lobbyists over the years who have attempted to buy favors. But when they do, just remember who is selling.

Said the Wall Street Journal in an editorial: “The Countrywide Financial sweetheart loan scandal continues to grow, spreading to Senators and other Beltway potentates. We are about to find out if Congress’s passion for investigating business ethics extends to conflicts of interest and cash that involve fellow Members.” Posted by Leroy Towns

Something is wrong with the nation’s economy. Blame President Bush.

The NY Times reports there is a strong correlation between people’s perception of the economy and their approval of the President:

“There are certainly other factors at work, but over the years there has often been a general relationship between the two sets of data: When home prices are rising at a pace moderately faster than the rate of inflation, consumers tend to think well of the government’s economic policies. But when they fall, that can set off anger.”

It’s easy to blame a president for everything when he’s already unpopular, and blame or credit for the economy just goes with the job.

But what about Congress?

RealClearPolitics reports an average approval rating for Congress of only 18.7 percent. That’s far lower than even Bush’s 29 percent approval. Remember, Democrats have controlled both houses of Congress for nearly two years, and you might think that’s where voters would place the blame.

Not quite. RealClearPolitics reports that when voters are asked whether they will vote for a Democrat or a Republican for Congress, they give Democrats a 49.4 percent to 37.4 percent edge. Those numbers of the generic ballot represent an average of polling.

There’s plenty of blame for what’s wrong with the country. But it’s certainly spread unevenly. Posted by Leroy Towns

Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig was publicly “admonished�? Wednesday by the Senate Ethics Committee, a serious action.

And what was his crime against that lofty body?

Basically, it was exposing the hypocrisy of the Washington political and media establishment in general and, more specifically, Congressional Republicans.

Recall that Craig was arrested last year in a Minneapolis sting operation against gay solicitations in airport bathrooms. He panicked and pled guilty to a misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct, a mistake he now admits, considering the flimsy evidence. When the matter became public, Senate Republicans themselves panicked and threatened Craig with an Ethics Committee charge if he did not resign. Craig refused to resign.

First, consider the fact there is a huge disconnect here. The Ethics Committee last used a public admonition against New Jersey Senator Robert G. Torricelli for blatant disregard of Senate rules against taking gifts, among other things. As a staff member to the Senate Ethics Committee chairman at the time, I fail to see where Craig’s actions come anywhere near the seriousness of the Torricelli affair.

The Craig case cracks open the door on what Congressional Republicans do not want known and on what the political media establishment doesn’t often report: the large number of gay staff members in Congress, many of them hired by conservative Republicans. Those same members, of course, go home and campaign on conservative social issues.

Republicans can’t win on this issue. They get no credit for hiring and supporting gay staff, and they get beat up by conservative constituents when their nondiscriminatory hiring becomes public.

This is a tough area for reporters, too. How do they discuss the hypocrisy of elected officials without wrecking the lives and careers of gay Congressional staffers? An uneasy cloak of silence long has existed. It was broken somewhat in news reporting after the resignation of Florida Congressman Mark Foley in 2006.

Because Senate Republicans partially blame Foley for their losses in 2006, the Craig incident sent them into panic—so much so, in fact, that they were willing to throw a valued colleague into the gutter. Their hypocrisy thus helps end the career of a Senator with long, honorable service to his state. And the political media establishment fails to hold them accountable.

It is sad commentary on the system that Senator Craig was so terrorized about exposure that his reaction was to plead guilty instead of fighting for his legal rights. It is a sadder commentary on the system that his hypocritical colleagues lacked the courage to support those civil and legal rights.

And the rest of us have to ask the Washington political and media establishment: Just what was the real offense here? Posted by Leroy Towns