Obama money

Remember when Barack Obama pledged not to take any campagin money from registered lobbyists? He didn't mention, of course, that in a presidential campaign, the distinction between "lobbyist" and "businessperson" pretty much evaporates.

Portraying himself as a new-style politician determined to reform Washington, Obama makes his policy clear in fundraising invitations, stating that he takes no donations from "federal lobbyists." His aides announced last week he was returning $43,000 to lobbyists who donated to his campaign.

But the Illinois Democrat's policy of shunning money from lobbyists registered to do business on Capitol Hill does not extend to lawyers whose partners lobby there.

Nor does the ban apply to corporations that have major lobbying operations in Washington. And the prohibition does not extend to lobbyists who ply their trade in such state capitals as Springfield, Ill.; Tallahassee, Fla.; and Sacramento, though some deal with national clients and issues....

Obama's biggest single source of corporate money — $160,000 — came from executives at Exelon Corp., the nation's largest nuclear power provider, and its subsidiary, Commonwealth Edison, an Illinois utility.

Exelon spent $500,000 to influence policy in Washington last year. Although Obama took no money from Exelon's Washington lobbyists, he accepted $1,000 checks from lobbyists John P. Novak and James Monk of Springfield. In Springfield, Novak represents Exelon., and Monk is president of the Illinois Energy Assn., a trade group that represents Commonwealth Edison.

Monk and Novak said they do not lobby in Washington. But their clients care about federal issues, including where to store nuclear waste and what restrictions to place on coal-fired plants.

None of this is terribly shocking. Off of Capitol Hill, a donor is acting as a lobbyist almost by definition. If Obama wanted to make a meaningful statement, he'd draw up a list of interest groups from whom he'd refuse donations. But since the distinction (or the lack of distinction) probably eludes most people, and since he tried to use the moral highground as a pitch for his campaign, it all strikes me as slightly shady.