by Mike Dorning
MANCHESTER, N.H.—Barack Obama continues his efforts to sharpen distinctions with Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton on their credentials as champions for change in Washington's political culture.
Obama, who has promoted his refusal of campaign contributions from federal lobbyists and earlier this summer released a plan to limit lobbyist influence, announced additional proposals for improving government openness today during his opening fall campaign swing.
"It's no secret that most Americans think the country is on the wrong track," Obama said this morning. "But the reason isn't just failed policies. It's a system in Washington that has failed the American people."
The two Democratic presidential front-runners each have kicked off their fall campaigns focused on the dual concepts of "change" and "experience."
Clinton, with eight years in the White House as First Lady and seven years in the U.S. Senate, argues her background in hardball Washington politics will make her the more effective agent of change. Obama, with only three years in the U.S. Senate, argues that a wholesale change of culture is needed and his experience outside Washington suggests he would be the more committed reformer.
The distinction has been an underlying theme since the candidates launched their campaigns at the beginning of the year. But each side has simultaneously chosen to turn up the heat on the point, hoping to frame public perceptions to their advantage.
Clinton debuted her fall campaign Labor Day Weekend under the banner "Change + Experience" with Bill Clinton at her side, a none-too-subtle reminder of her connection to the last Democratic presidential administration.
Obama opened Labor Day with a revised stump speech that more pointedly positions himself as an outsider and Clinton as an insider.
"There are those who tout their experience working the system in Washington," Obama said at his opening rally, clearly referring to Clinton, "but the problem is that the system in Washington isn't working for us and hasn't for a long time."
The Illinois senator followed up today by hosting a roundtable with eight New Hampshire voters on "restoring trust" in a government he portrays as captured by entrenched special interests that subvert attempts to reform public policy.
Such roundtables are a setpiece of political campaigns. Assembled in a nook at a homey local restaurant, with television cameras and local media peering over from adjoining booths, the forum allowed Obama to tie amorphous dissatisfaction with Washington's political culture to concrete, pressing concerns of local people.
Suzanne Martin, a disabled 55-year-old from Manchester, spoke of her shock at suddenly confronting prescription drug bills of $300 per pharmacy visit when she reached the "donut hole" in which the Medicare Part D prescription drug benefit no longer covers drug costs.
Obama responded by suggesting pharmaceutical companies had rigged the legislation establishing the program, noting that the congressional committee chairman who shepherded the legislation through Congress, former Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.), had gone on shortly afterward to a highly paid job representing drug companies. The legislation bars the federal government from directly negotiating discounts on drug costs for the benefit.
"Essentially that was a direct shift of money that could have helped you buy drugs in that donut hole to the drug companies' bottom line," Obama said.
Donna Desjardins, a mother of four from nearby Rochester, N.H., raised the debt burden her daughters are assuming in college. Obama spoke of the costs imposed by origination fees paid to banks and the power of the financial services lobby in blocking direct student loans that he said would free up more money to lower interest rates or aid education.
Robert Gibbs, Obama's communications director, said the candidate will be reprising the theme the remainder of the week, including a speech in Iowa later today and a similar roundtable in Iowa tomorrow.
Obama's new proposals on government openness include expanding lobbyist disclosure rules to cover those seeking presidential pardons or government contracts. He also proposed that a new law requiring to disclose campaign contributions they solicit for candidates be expanded to include campaign contributions solicited by corporate executives.
• 
• 
• 
• 
Comments
Barack Obama is the right man for the these times. I hope you support him too.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 4, 2007 2:55 PM
Barack Obama is the right man for the these times. I hope you support him too.
Posted by: Doug Zook | September 4, 2007 2:55 PM
Care to give us a reason why, Doug? Is it because these times call for another corrupt politician?
Hmm... that can't be it.
Oh, I know! It's because Oprah endorses him!
Sorry... I'm holding out to see who Dr. Phil is going to endorse.
Posted by: Anonymous | September 4, 2007 3:19 PM
Sorry... I'm holding out to see who Dr. Phil is going to endorse.
Posted by: Anonymous | September 4, 2007 3:19 PM
Doug Z,
Remember Leo T?
Remember Juanito?
Remember Insert Clever Post Name Here?
It's the same loser.
Don't bother with this nut, he was on here endorsing Obama a few months ago.
GOBAM08!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/AR2007040400989_pf.html
Posted by: John E | September 4, 2007 3:46 PM
Isn't that sweet. Soon Obama is going to have to realize Clinton is playing for keeps. She already paid for her positioning with local power brokers and she knows after she takes the nomination all will be forgiven. She will say anything and sacrifice anyone for her own good.
Hillary lacks principles so she can never betray them.
Watch the faithful party members sell-out.
Posted by: whatnow | September 4, 2007 3:57 PM
Nice to see Barack agrees with John Edwards message. As usual another candidate has used Sen. Edwards message and supporters as their focus group. Sounds suspiciously like Edwards statement that Washington is broken, or the system is rigged, or the reason we don't have universal health care is because of the ins. and big pharma lobbies. When the media give a free pass to candidates to plagiarize anothers positions and specches, it is none other than lazy journalism.
Also it is shameful and shoddy journalism to treat a follower as a leader when obviously they are just parrot Sen. Edwards stances. We should expect better. This is nothing against Sen. Obama per se, HRC does her fare share too, though it is much harder considering her history.
Posted by: LaEscapee | September 4, 2007 4:05 PM
Thanks to George W Bush and Karl Rove, young voters are going to be more involved than ever in this upcoming election and the Wingnuts will be fooling themselves (Iraq) if they depend on young people not voting this time around.
GOBAMA08:
http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/08/27/3445/
Posted by: John E | September 4, 2007 4:18 PM
But where are you getting the evidence that Obama is corrupt? And who says none of the other politicians aren't. Obama is the best man for the job.
Posted by: Sara | September 4, 2007 4:20 PM
But where are you getting the evidence that Obama is corrupt? And who says none of the other politicians aren't. Obama is the best man for the job.
Posted by: Sara | September 4, 2007 4:20 PM
Sara,
He's (Mr. Anonymous) pulling it out of his arse.
Posted by: John E | September 4, 2007 5:09 PM
We already know the change Obama represents: fugitive financiers who in the past have donated megabucks to the Clintons will start donating to Obama instead.
Reform, Obama style.
Posted by: Bruce | September 4, 2007 5:15 PM
Thanks for not posting my earlier comments. Nice to know that the swamp stands by its candidate, free speech that's only for the people that agree with our opinion. By the way may I suggest lexis nexus for research on which candidate states which position and on what date, but obviously you know that.
Posted by: LaEscapee | September 4, 2007 5:25 PM
Are you all kidding me?!? It's 14 months until the election. Just wait, every single electioneer will begin to wonder "their candidate" is going to be able to do effect change to --- to stop the coming "global economic firestorm". Go ahead and get caught up with all of this "PR" posturing...when "the rubber meets the road", when the "bills come due". Then what?!?
Posted by: Steve | September 4, 2007 5:30 PM
Primary election is only 4 months away! Don't forget to register!
Obama is the candidate of change, LaEscapee seems to think Edwards was the first candidate to rail against the establishment. He's a white male trial lawyer, he IS the establishment.
Posted by: Mark Morris | September 4, 2007 5:51 PM
Oh Sara, Sara...
Tony Resco.
Norman Hsu
That's all you need to know to say that Obama is a crook. But there's more...
Obama endorsing local creatures like Stroger and Tillman tells us that theres nothing about him that is reformist.
But there's more...
Obama has a long history of cozying up to Lobbyists and PACs. He accepts "bundled" contributions. Here's one piece from the Boston Globe giving an overview of Obama's financial history. (You can find many others if you care to look.)
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/08/09/pacs_and_lobbyists_aided_obamas_rise/
And Sara, the fact that he's just as crooked as everybody else, as you say, isn't much of an endorsement.
So I've told you how he's just another run-of-the mill bandit, another political swine gorging at the public trough. You tell me how I'm wrong.
Posted by: Anonymous | September 4, 2007 6:07 PM
Obama said 'It's no secret that most Americans think the country is on the wrong track'.
Rather arrogant of him to claim he speaks for 'most Americans'.
Only Democrats think the country is on the wrong track. Most Republicans think the country is on the right track.
In his essay 'An Appeal for Courage' Lt. Jason Nichols said:
'The American public is not tired of the war; they are tired of believing that they are losing. They are tired of the daily drumbeat of pessimism and defeat promoted daily by our media and by some in our Congress'
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20475
Posted by: Two Truck | September 4, 2007 6:46 PM
So I've told you how he's just another run-of-the mill bandit, another political swine gorging at the public trough. You tell me how I'm wrong.
Posted by: Anonymous | September 4, 2007 6:07 PM
Spoken like a true kool-aide drinking Wingnut, bravo!
Posted by: John E | September 4, 2007 7:22 PM
'The American public is not tired of the war; they are tired of believing that they are losing. They are tired of the daily drumbeat of pessimism and defeat promoted daily by our media and by some in our Congress'
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=20475
Posted by: Two Truck | September 4, 2007 6:46 PM
Trucker boy,
Then why don't you step out from behind your keyboard and sign up for this war that we are "winning" in Iraq?
Posted by: John E | September 4, 2007 7:25 PM
I'm very tired of Barrack Hussein Obama he believes because he was a Law professor he is somebody he is starting to make me mad because he preaches all the time--he is mimicking southside preachers and it is distracting. I frankly don't believe he can stop it. The truth is he has been supported by Tony Rezko and others at his law firm like Daniel Unruh who ran Mayor Dalys high rise development team turned it over to Rezko but, the driveby media won't tell you this because Obama was his lawyer the ego of Obama is amazing--he will never be elected Prez he might serve a term as VP for Hil but, frankly I see the American people selecting the GOP nominee. Americans aren't stupid and health care for all is just welfare end of story. Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | September 4, 2007 8:53 PM
Rezko is a dead issue. Guy gave him a couple bucks over the years, as he did with many Chicago politicos, and then sold him some lawn space. Improper, yes. Traced to legislation favoring Rezko: NO!
Posted by: StevenAK | September 4, 2007 9:18 PM
Nice to see racism and bigotry is alive and well downstate.
Posted by: Marko | September 4, 2007 9:40 PM
I'm very tired of Barrack Hussein Obama he believes because he was a Law professor he is somebody he is starting to make me mad because he preaches all the time--he is mimicking southside preachers and it is distracting. I frankly don't believe he can stop it. The truth is he has been supported by Tony Rezko and others at his law firm like Daniel Unruh who ran Mayor Dalys high rise development team turned it over to Rezko but, the driveby media won't tell you this because Obama was his lawyer the ego of Obama is amazing--he will never be elected Prez he might serve a term as VP for Hil but, frankly I see the American people selecting the GOP nominee. Americans aren't stupid and health care for all is just welfare end of story. Jerry White, Springfield, IL
Posted by: Jerry White | September 4, 2007 8:53 PM
Hairy Jerry White from Springfield,
Obama has been charged with NOTHING and until you can up with an indictment against him no one is going to listen to you crying Repugs.
Posted by: John E | September 4, 2007 9:43 PM
Rather arrogant of him to claim he speaks for 'most Americans'.
- Two Truck
Too Drunk, ...been following politics long, have you?
EVERY FRIGGIN' politician claims to be speakin' for "most Americans." Now stop drinking and start paying attention.
Geez!
Posted by: Bud McFarlin | September 4, 2007 11:12 PM
Trucker boy,
Then why don't you step out from behind your keyboard and sign up for this war that we are "winning" in Iraq?
Posted by: John E | September 4, 2007 7:25 PM
Typical example of anti-war people using character assassination against those with different views. No,anti-war people just aren't very nice at all.
I think we need police officers to arrest dangerous criminals.
Does that mean I have to become a police officer myself? NOPE.
I think we need lawyers to defend criminals.
Does that mean I have to become a lawyer myself? NOPE.
I think we need medical researchers trying to find cures for disease.
Does that mean I have to become a medical researcher myself? NOPE.
I think we need teachers to teach children how to read and write.
Does that mean I have to become a teacher myself? NOPE.
I think we need soldiers to fight wars.
Does that mean I have to become a soldier myself? NOPE.
Military service is not required to have an opinion about the war.
Posted by: Two Truck | September 5, 2007 12:29 AM
Why would you point out Hillary's time
in the whitehouse as a president's wife,
as "experience" , and neglect to mention
the years Obama was in the Illinios state senate?
Obama's experience in elected office is
MUCH more
relevant than Hillary's ridiculous claim
of "experience" as first lady.
Posted by: jds | September 5, 2007 10:15 PM