More Opinions Columnists

• V.B. Price: Preserving our water is greatest challenge the city, state faces
• Jeffry Gardner: End of The Trib is part of the demise of serious journalism
• Katherine Augustine: Time with friends from Japan provides treasured memories

MOST RECENT TRIB STORIES

• ABQTrib.com to remain available
  08:48 a.m., February 25, 2008
• Congressman is indicted
  08:37 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Series of attacks target Green Zone
  08:36 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Iran is defying U.N., agency says
  08:35 a.m., February 23, 2008
• Waterboarding approval probed
  08:34 a.m., February 23, 2008

TRIB IN THE BLOGOSPHERE*

• Ty Murray Invitational thrills fans in Albuquerque
• Is Rome Burning?
• Ominous Skies
• The Road to Invalidation
• Albuquerque company participates in “Extreme Makeover: Home Edition”

*Note: The Tribune does not create and is not responsible for the blogosphere's headlines and stories. These links to blogs talking about ABQTrib.com are automatically generated. Use them at your own risk.

STORY TOOLS

• E-mail story
• Comments
• iPod friendly
• Printer friendly

SHARE THIS STORY [?]

Hearing Sen. Hillary Clinton say recently that corporate lobbyists "represent real Americans" helped me realize I'm not too excited about the current slate of presidential candidates - primarily because I'm skeptical of a system over which corporate America has too much influence.

The fact that the favorite to win the White House in 2008 doesn't understand that lobbyists don't represent the average American proves we have a big problem. I'm not convinced that any of the candidates who are above the margin of error in the polls - Democratic or Republican - would bring about real change in a system that has been corrupted by corporate money.

Without serious ethics reform, policy debates on Iraq, health care, energy independence and all other issues will continue to be too heavily influenced by corporations whose only interest is financial gain. The result is always a compromise between what's good for the richest of the rich and what's good for the rest of us.

The American people know this, and the resulting cynicism is a primary cause of public apathy.

Many Americans find the Democratic presidential candidates refreshing, because they offer short-term change, particularly on Iraq and health care. The problem with the GOP candidates is a familiar one: They're all wealthy white men.

But neither group is adequately discussing the core issue that taints all other policy debates in Washington. Perhaps that's because the major presidential candidates - including our governor - are themselves millionaires, or perhaps it's because they need the money of the wealthy to win elections.

Among those who have a shot at winning, the only presidential candidate who has attempted to address this problem in any meaningful manner is Sen. Barack Obama. He was the spokesman for the recently approved campaign in the Senate to reduce lobbyists' influence in Washington - a bill President Bush is now considering vetoing. When he began pushing for that legislation, Obama set the example by giving up flights on corporate jets.

Obama, like John Edwards, doesn't take lobbyists' money. However, both take money from other corporate interests. Is either really a candidate of change?

What about Gov. Bill Richardson's push for ethics reform in New Mexico? Consider this: He pushed last year for limits on campaign contributions, while accepting hundreds of donations that would have violated his proposed limits. Contrast that with Obama's decision to set the example on lobbyist reform. In addition, many of Richardson's campaign contributors have been given lucrative state contracts.

I don't care if a candidate disagrees with me on policy issues. I care about whether he or she is someone who leads by example and with integrity.

Our system of government is designed so that opposing sides come together to debate gray areas and find compromise. If we could fill the Congress and White House with ethical leaders who weren't overly influenced by corporate money, if we could have policy debates based on what's best for the American people instead of corporations, then we would find real solutions to America's pressing issues.

That's going to take serious, systemic reform. I'm looking for the candidate who will lead America to that future.