He wants only free-range dirty lobbyist money, apparently. None of this factory-grown, federal dirty lobbyist money for him:
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Alexi Giannoulias says he's swearing off campaign contributions from lobbyists, but not all lobbyists.
Giannoulias, the state treasurer, promised at the start of his Senate campaign a year ago that he wouldn't take contributions from corporate lobbyists or political action committees. But that proscription applies only to federal lobbyists and PACs. He has taken money from state-registered lobbyists. He says there's a difference: Since he's running for a federal office, a state lobbyist can't try to influence him if he wins.
Riiiiiiiiight. So, the following scenario?
- Giannoulias takes money from state lobbyist group contracted to foster the building of widgets.
- Giannoulias somehow wins in November, becomes US Senator.
- There is an appropriations bill.
- State lobbyist group contracted to foster the building of widgets calls Giannoulias' office.
- L0 and behold, an earmark is put in the appropriations bill that provides a federal subsidy for widget manufacturers in Illinois, a grant for researching widget technology by Illinois manufacturers, and/or the creation of a fund to raise public awareness of the need for Illinois widgets.
- The lobbyist group cuts Giannoulias a check for his re-election bid.
...all of that? According to Alexi Giannoulias, that scenario violates the laws of physics and the nature of space-time itself. It can't happen!
PS: Mark Kirk for Senate. He knows that you're brighter than that.
PPS: You can argue the nature of earmarks, the validity of earmarks, and the morality of earmarks. What you cannot do is argue that earmarks do not exist. Or that a state entity is not as capable of making... arrangements... to get them as a federal entity is. And if we're going to talk about whether Giannoulias' powers of discernment are sufficient to keep him out of ethical hot water in that regard... ahem. Broadway Bank.
Crossposted to Moe Lane.