Another Lobbyist in the Obama house, and it's not Demers

I support John Edwards.

Now that that is out of the way, please understand this is NOT a hit diary, though at least 40% of you will probably disagree.  More than anything, I would really like a civil discussion, and an explanation, of Obama's actions, then and now.

To that end I thought I would throw myself under the bus (others might be afraid to) because I would really like to wholeheartedly support Obama (if push comes to shove), but when I read things like this, well, it just make my shoulders slump.

S.C. Obama Backer [Jim Hodges] is Also a Lobbyist

Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama has made a big deal about the fact that his campaign doesn't accept political donations from Washington lobbyists. But the ban apparently doesn't extend to seeking their endorsements.

In the last week, Obama secured the endorsement of former South Carolina Jim Hodges, who now runs a lobbying firm, the Hodges Consulting Group, and is registered himself as a federal lobbyist for Hillenbrand Partners, a Chicago-based company that does business with the Federal Home Loan Bank, according to U.S. Senate lobbying disclosure records. Hodges reported receiving $12,000 from the client in the first half of 2007, the records show. Hodges also signed on as a national co-chair of Obama's campaign.

Obama spokesman Bill Burton did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

~~~~~
UPDATE II:  h/t to begone  Bill Burton's reply:

Obama spokesman Bill Burton said the candidate does not disqualify Washington lobbyists from from endorsing or advising him. "The way we address this issue is we don't take money from federal lobbyists," Burton said. "It's not a perfect symbol but it's his best effort to show the sort of administration he is going to have."

I'm still confused.  You can endorse, you can advise, you can be a federal lobbyist as long as you don't give money to the candidate, but are you on the candidate's payroll?
~~~~~
When the Jim Demers broohaha hit the fan, camp Obama responded:

Obama spokesman Robert Gibbs told the Associated Press that Demers does not do business involving federal legislation or regulation. He said the campaign has drawn a distinction between lobbyists who are registered to work at the state level and those who lobby the federal government. "There is a difference between a college football player and professional football player," he said.

OK then, Demers is not a Federal lobbyist, but Hodes is.  How are they going to explain that?  If anyone gets a hold of an Obama response, I'll be happy to update.

UPDATE I:  Chicago Lulu has a bit of insight that I was not aware of, and I think it's worth noting:

I'd be surprised if he was on the payroll.  I'm pretty sure that "co-chairs" national, state or otherwise are advisory titles.  

Basically, they can say, "here's the lay of the land in my state" and more importantly, "here are the walklists of Democrats who vote and give $$$".  Their function is to add prestige to the campaign, and to help out locally when they can.

I would have updated sooner, but just got a call that my niece had her first baby girl on my son's birthday today!!

In the meantime...

The Hill had an article on December 20, 2007:

Lobbyists on Obama’s ’08 payroll:

Three political aides on Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) payroll were registered lobbyists for dozens of corporations, including Wal-Mart, British Petroleum and Lockheed Martin, while they received payments from his campaign, according to public documents.

The presence of political operatives with long client lists on Obama’s campaign contrasts with his long-held stand of campaigning against the influence of special interests. Obama has even refused to accept contributions from lobbyists or political action committees (PACs).

Jen Psaki, an Obama campaign spokeswoman, said no member of Obama’s staff has lobbied since taking a full-time role with his campaign.  [snip]

Leaving a job temporarily to join a presidential campaign can enhance careers in the influence industry, said veteran lobbyists.

The Hill has compiled and provided a chart [small PDF] of Current and Former Lobbyists working for Presidential campaigns.  In light of the news about Jim Hodes, this document is obviously not up-to-date.  

So, back to my question.  Could someone please explain why this shouldn't matter, especially when he says this?

I'm running to finally solve problems we talk about year after year after year. To end the division, the obscene influence of lobbyists, and the politics that values scoring points over making progress.  [snip]

"That's why I fought for tough new ethics laws in Illinois and Washington to cut the power of lobbyists. And I won.

And in his Senate Floor speech on Ethics Reform on 8/21/07:

"The bill that’s before us today could not be more urgently needed. For too long, the American people have seen lobbyists treat the legislative process like a game, using targeted contributions to maximize their leverage. For too long, people have felt like their voice and their interests have been drowning in a sea of lobbyist money in Washington."

Which brings me to another item that I just found.  About a year before the the Ethics bill, he worked with lobbyists to help them get million dollar breaks on tariffs.

This is an ABC article published on July 16, 2007:

Away from the bright lights and high-minded rhetoric of the campaign trail, Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., has quietly worked with corporate lobbyists to help pass breaks worth $12 million.  [snip]

...last year, at the request of a hired representative for an Australian-owned chemical corporation Nufarm, Obama introduced nine separate bills exempting the company from import fees on a range of chemical ingredients it uses in the manufacture of pesticides and herbicides. Nufarm's U.S. subsidiary is based in Illinois.

Obama's defenders say that this tariffs bill was to help Illinois constituents "obtain foreign products necessary for their business at an affordable rate."  Please read the whole thing (about a page).  Personally, I don't think he comes out smelling like a rose, but it's apparently all on the up-and-up.  Still, it doesn't make it any easier to swallow.

This is one part that stands out, for me anyway:

With a dozen tariff suspension bills to his name, Obama stands out as the most prolific of any Democratic presidential hopeful on the topic. Sen. Hillary Clinton, N.Y., has introduced none, although she has co-sponsored 19 that were introduced by Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y. Seven were to benefit the Honeywell Corporation, whose lobbyist has contributed $6,500 to Clinton since 2005. Sen. Joseph Biden, Del., has introduced none.

Only one other 2008 presidential hopeful has introduced more tariff suspension bills than Obama. Longshot GOP candidate Sen. Sam Brownback, Kan., introduced 30 such measures in the 109th Congress. Fellow dark horse candidate Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., introduced one in 2001; Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. have introduced none.

Some say the tariff suspension process isn't how Washington should operate.

SourceWatch on Barack Obama and Lobbyists

All this really concerns me, and I'm wondering if I'm off-base in my feelings.  None of it inspires any trust in me.  I feel there is a part of him I don't know, and that he doesn't want me to know either. Makes me nervous.  Tell me I'm wrong, crazy, blowing it all out of proportion, and that it's all OK.

I know that this diary isn't going to make a damn bit of difference.  The train is leaving the station as we speak, or as Joe Trippi says, Obama's campaign is a "speeding bullet".  Please make sure that when you board that train, you know where it's going, because I'm not sure that I do.

In any event, I'm on the Edwards train now, but if I have to switch, I don't want it to become derailed.