Every blogger’s favorite Democratic lobbyist Steve Elmendorf has a problem. In the past year, he’s signed Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, and other firms that need Democratic lobbyists to help them grease the wheels now that a Democrat is sitting in the White House. But Democrats don’t seem to want their money:
Steve Elmendorf, a high-powered Democratic lobbyist who represents Citigroup, a major contributor in the past, said that Democrats are shunning money from his client because it has taken billions in federal bailout funds.
“People I raise money for are not accepting money from PACs of TARP recipients or senior executives of companies that took TARP funds,” said Elmendorf.
“This is true of every senatorial fundraiser I’ve been a part of.”
Another lobbyist who represents a major investment bank that accepted TARP funds said: “In the Senate, many if not most Democrats are not taking PAC contributions from banks that accepted TARP funds.”
The DSCC is having problems too — they raised $518,000 under Schumer’s leadership in the first two months of 2008 from Wall Street firms, but only $177,000 in the same period this year. Bad economy? Maybe not:
The Senate Republican committee has seen its contributions from securities and investment firms more than double in the first two months of 2009.
This flip has occurred at a time when liberals are bashing Wall Street as the root of the economic recession and Democratic senators are keeping investment bankers at arm’s length.
Got that, tea baggers?
Related posts:
- Democrats and Republicans Targeted by Clunkers
- Pelosi Fundraiser at UnitedHealth Lobbyist’s Home
- Barofsky Report: What Happened to All That TARP Money?
- The Next Big Taxpayer Bailout? IMF Could Get Hundreds of Billions for European Banks
- Political Expert Steve McMahon Advises Democrats How to Fail On Health Reform
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
awesome!
I’m so glad to read this.
Interesting stuff. And whom did Elmendorf work for last year?
Damn right. Now if only we get the Blue/Bayh Dogs to see the light!!
Let’s hope that dems use some “content verification” software to check any amendments or bills that come through on bank reform and credit card reform, etc., to hold the Bankster’s winged monkeys in check.
Call me a skeptic, ok cynical skeptic. Our intrepid DINO Congress Critters turning down money? Oh they’d say to Cititgroup they’re a pariah and it’d look bad, but gee if the money came from say [insert Lobbyist name] there’s no problemo. Money is fugnible so Citigroup gives money to [insert Lobbyist name] that in turn gives money to DINO. Problem solved, vote cast or bill amended or killed as directed.
That about says it all. The Stupid yet Cruel Bloggers are dumb animals who need to be harnessed. But to get the big dollar bribes for Democratic Lobbyists, it is necessary to marginalize the leftists. The K-Street Project by Tom Delay was a great step forward for the corporate new world order. But the corporate democrat lobbyists were treated unfairly, by the Rethuglican Lobbyists. The leftists use their money and energy to promote Socialized Medicine, Renewable Energy, and most horribly government regulations. Also, the Irak and Afghanistan Quagmires are highly profitable, and would be stopped by the leftists. It would not be fair if Democratic Lobbyists were now denied their rightful share of DeeCee influence peddling.
Jane, you might consider all the good things corporate lobbyists have done. They did give us Olestra and the Cheney Oil Wars. I am sure Mr. Elmendorf will be giving us something just as good, as he helps Rethuglicans against the hippie dippy leftists.
The banksters co-opted the Democrats into giving them trillions. Now they are paying off Republicans to spike any reforms. All this is as expectable as the sun coming up.
How is this not bribery? Seriously… what are they giving these guys money for?
Remember the House banking scandal in the 90’s?
SOME knew better, and refused to indulge because they suspected that using those extremely lenient overdraft allowances could come back and bite them in the posterior at election time.
Consider the rage the public displayed at our tax money (aka “bailout”) being spent by the bailoutees on lobbying against EFCA and against re-institution of Glass-Steagall-type oversight, among other issues.
When election time rolls around, any candidate who took contributions in any way connected to that bailout bonanza will suffer the same inglorious rejection that many Congressmen suffered because they abused their congressional overdraft account so flagrantly.
Vilsac beat Lightfoot for IA Governor in 1998 partly due to Lightfoot’s overdraft habit. And that was in an era of Republicans rising. Imagine what will happen to anyone who gladly takes our tax money as campaign contributions from one of the bailoutees in this current atmosphere?
My guess is that the bailouters (We, the People) will exercise their democratic rights and oust these political profiteers.
If it just so happens that they are predominantly Republicans, all the better. In 92′, Gingrich engineered the banking scandal to forge his 1994 power grab, because so many more Democrats got caught up in the scandal than Republicans.
I’d like to see the figures of how much $$$$ the DSCC is raising from “ordinary” individuals — those who gave to it in the past.
I know I’m not giving them a penny [I’m giving through ActBlue and BlueAmerica instead].
It’s a good sign that there is a point where shameless politicians can be pressured into refusing money. Banks have become such a pariah in the public mind that they can’t give their bribes away.
I have no delusions that it’s some sort of strong ethical stand by Democrats, but at least we now see how much public outrage is needed to get Dems to refuse the money.
We still haven’t figured out if there’s a limit for Republicans.
It’s a good thing Congress is conducting careful oversight of TARP monies and Fed credit beneficiaries making sure said loot is not being used to influence Congresscritters, for one — among many misappropriations conceivable or likely.
Oh you’re right, absolutely. It doesn’t mean the Dems are taking any kind of moral stance, they’re simply being responsive to bad optics and an angry public. There will be ways around it.
The bigger point of the piece — the Republicans aren’t even concerned with optics, they know their base doesn’t really give a shit about banks or the influence of bankers. The entire tea bagger argument is, once again, incoherent.
Dunno, but Elmendorf gave $30,400 the DCCC:
http://query.nictusa.com/cgi-b…..00935/A-E/
Can you really trust the word of Steve Elmendorf? There has to be actual independent proof of what he says, I should think.
So the big banker bucks are going to the Republicans because the Democrats who did the dirty work can’t be seen to take the bribes. This is beautiful.
It would be poetic if we could only get some primary challengers for these corporate Semicrats. We could direct all of our unruly grassroots money to the challengers and leave the incumbents to gnash their teeth in the cold and dark.