McCain fundraising shenanigans?

JuneSmug

I'll play...from FactCheck.org

Sen. Barack Obama's ad began running late last week in Pennsylvania and Indiana. In it, Obama talks about the United States' reliance on foreign oil and the need for energy independence and alternative fuels.

Only Legal Contributions, Please

Obama's right on both counts when he says that "Exxon’s making $40 billion a year, and we’re paying $3.50 for gas." ExxonMobil's profits in 2007 hit $40.6 billion, the highest ever recorded by any company.

Obama '08 Ad: Nothing's Changed

Obama: Since the gas lines of the ’70s, Democrats and Republicans have talked about energy independence, but nothing’s changed — except now Exxon’s making $40 billion a year, and we’re paying $3.50 for gas.
I’m Barack Obama. I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore. They’ll pay a penalty on windfall profits. We’ll invest in alternative energy, create jobs and free ourselves from foreign oil.
I approve this message because it’s time that Washington worked for you. Not them.

The national average price for a gallon of gas in the week ending March 24, the most recent data available, was $3.26, but prices are higher than the average in some areas.

Our problem comes with this statement:

Obama: I don’t take money from oil companies or Washington lobbyists, and I won’t let them block change anymore.

It's true that Obama doesn't take money directly from oil companies, but then, no presidential, House or Senate candidate does. They can't: Corporations have been prohibited from contributing directly to federal candidates since the Tillman Act became law in 1907.

Obama has, however, accepted more than $213,000 in contributions from individuals who work for, or whose spouses work for, companies in the oil and gas industry, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. That's not as much as Sen. Hillary Clinton, who has received more than $306,000 in donations from people tied to the industry, but it's still a substantial amount.

Here's a chart we made, using the OpenSecrets.org database, of contributions to Obama from individuals employed by some of the largest oil companies in the U.S. Our numbers are conservative because the database doesn't include donations of less than $200 (federal law doesn't require the reporting of donations below that amount), and we haven't included sums donated by the spouses or other immediate family members of the employees. Additionally, we haven't included donations from people who work at smaller firms in the industry.

When the Clinton campaign criticized Obama's ad, calling it "false advertising," Obama's campaign quickly noted that he didn't take money from political action committees or lobbyists.

We'd say the Obama campaign is trying to create a distinction without very much of a practical difference. Political action committee funds are pooled contributions from a company's or an organization's individual employees or members; corporate lobbyists often have a big say as to where a PAC's donations go. But a PAC can give no more than $5,000 per candidate, per election. We're not sure how a $5,000 contribution from, say, Chevron's PAC would have more influence on a candidate than, for example, the $9,500 Obama has received from Chevron employees giving money individually.

In addition, two oil industry executives are bundling money for Obama – drumming up contributions from individuals and turning them over to the campaign. George Kaiser, the chairman of Oklahoma-based Kaiser-Francis Oil Co., ranks 68th on the Forbes list of world billionaires. He's listed on Obama's Web site as raising between $50,000 and $100,000 for the candidate. Robert Cavnar is president and CEO of Milagro Exploration LLC, an oil exploration and production company. He's named as a bundler in the same category as Kaiser.

We're not making any judgments about whether Obama is influenced by campaign contributions. In fact, we'd note that he singles out ExxonMobil in this ad, even though he's received more than $30,850 from individuals who work for the company. But we do think that in theory, contributions that come in volume from oil industry executives, or are bundled by them, can be every bit as influential as PAC contributions, if not more so.

Lobbyist Loopholes?

We've noted before that Obama's policy of not taking money from lobbyists is a bit of hair-splitting. It's true that he doesn't accept contributions from individuals who are registered to lobby the federal government. But he does take money from their spouses and from other individuals at firms where lobbyists work. And some of his bigger fundraisers were registered lobbyists until they signed on with the Obama campaign.

Even the campaign has acknowledged that this policy is flawed. "It isn’t a perfect solution to the problem and it isn’t even a perfect symbol," Obama spokesman Bill Burton has said.

– by Viveca Novak, with Justin Bank

Damn, the Last Update above posted all willy-nilly!  Should read:

Late Update: It turns out that $28,500 is the maximum that can be given to the RNC, but because this particular victory fund collects money via various channels, an individual donor can actually give more than that to it.

C.mon Postie, you say you wanta play? Well, all that may pass for heat at USPS but they’re notorious for being slow on the uptake there.

Are you saying Obama played fast and loose with the truth? Are you saying he’s received contributions from Big Oil? Well, DUH - that’s at least 4 month old news - hell, even Hillary called him on that!

However, compare the $66,146 in total oil family contributions to Obama with the contributions of a single Hess Oil family (the Rocchios) - $62,900 to McCain since February - and something doesn‘t pass the smell test.

Look kiddo, McCain’s playin’ for Big Oil now and Phaedrus has pointed out that there are irregularities in all the cash that materialized after McCain flip-flopped on offshore drilling.

Why don’t you go back to your article and whine some more because Obama won’t debate your guy. Come back when you have a real counterpunch so we can have a lively discussion, eh?

I have to say I have a new found respect for Paris Hilton.  She proposes saner energy policy than does McCan. 

Did he really say that Americans should never change the oil in their cars to save oil?

The NYT examines the curious case of Harry Sargeant III, Finance Chair of the FLA GOP, and his Jordanian business partner, Mustafa Abu Naba’a:  

Campaign finance records show Mr. McCain collected a little more than $50,000 in March from members of a single extended family, the Abdullahs, in California and several of their friends.

Amid a sea of contributions to the McCain campaign, the Abdullahs stand out. The checks come not from the usual exclusive coastal addresses, but from relatively hardscrabble inland towns like Downey and Colton. The donations are also startling because of their size: several donors initially wrote checks of $9,200, exceeding the $2,300 limit for an individual gift.

Making matters murkier, some couples in the family who contributed more than $9,000 to Mr. McCain also gave the maximum in December to either Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton or Rudolph W. Giuliani, or both, totaling in the case of at least one family more than $18,000.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/07/us/politics/07mccain.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin

Oh, did I mention that Sargeant and Abu Naba’a are partnered up in the International Oil Trading Company?

Before you ask - yeah, International Oil Trading is the company Henry Waxman's committee began investigating last month on charges that they'd overcharged the US military for fuel under their Iraq contract.

Here's a site that tracks the comings, goings and machinations of McCain's incestuous lobbyists and fundraisers:

http://www.mccainslobbyists.com/

An article there today sheds some light on the Sargeant connection -

The McCain campaign says it will return about $50,000 in contributions connected to bundler and Florida businessman Harry Sargeant III, according to The Washington Post’s Matthew Mosk. Not only does it appear those contributions were solicited by a foreign national, but they also came from questionable sources, including a few people who say they don’t even like McCain or the GOP. (The Palm Beach Post’s Michael C. Bender provides local coverage as well.)

The New York Times has more on the Jordanian connection to the Sargeant story, including more about a lawsuit Sargeant faces from a former business partner, who’s also the brother-in-law of the country’s monarch.

And, according to The Huffington Post’s Sam Stein, Sargeant’s company has also relied on lobbying services provided by a firm headed by former Ambassador Otto Reich – who turns out to be a prominent McCain advisor and donor.