What do you think?
Rate this book
So Damn Much Money: The Triumph of Lobbying and the Corrosion of American Government
With a New Foreword
In So Damn Much Money, veteran Washington Post editor and correspondent Robert Kaiser gives a detailed account of how the boom in political lobbying since the 1970s has shaped American politics by empowering special interests, undermining effective legislation, and discouraging the country’s best citizens from serving in office. Kaiser traces this dramatic change in our political system through the colorful story of Gerald S. J. Cassidy, one of Washington’s most successful lobbyists. Superbly told, it’s an illuminating dissection of a political system badly in need of reform.
In So Damn Much Money, veteran Washington Post editor and correspondent Robert Kaiser gives a detailed account of how the boom in political lobbying since the 1970s has shaped American politics by empowering special interests, undermining effective legislation, and discouraging the country’s best citizens from serving in office. Kaiser traces this dramatic change in our political system through the colorful story of Gerald S. J. Cassidy, one of Washington’s most successful lobbyists. Superbly told, it’s an illuminating dissection of a political system badly in need of reform.
360 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 2009
32 people are currently reading
899 people want to read
About the author
Robert G. Kaiser
18 books7 followersRobert G. Kaiser is associate editor and senior correspondent of The Washington Post, where he has worked since 1963.
Kaiser began at The Washington Post as a summer intern while still a college student. He has served as a special correspondent in London (1964–67), a reporter on the city desk in Washington, D.C. (1967–69), foreign correspondent in Saigon (1969–70) and Moscow (1971–74). He returned to the national staff in Washington and worked as a reporter for seven years, covering labor, the U.S. Senate, the 1980 presidential campaign and the first Ronald Reagan administration.
In 1982 Kaiser became associate editor of The Washington Post and editor of "Outlook", a Sunday section of commentary and opinion. He also wrote a column for the section. From 1985 to 1990 he was assistant managing editor for national news. From 1990 to 1991 he was deputy managing editor, and from 1991 to 1998 served as the paper's managing editor. He began his current assignment in September 1998.
Kaiser's work has appeared in the New York Review of Books, Esquire, Foreign Affairs, and many other publications. He has been a commentator on NPR's All Things Considered, and has appeared often on Meet the Press, the Today show and other television programs.
In 2007, he wrote a series of articles there based on interviews of lobbyist Gerald Cassidy on the topic of lobbying in the United States.
Kaiser began at The Washington Post as a summer intern while still a college student. He has served as a special correspondent in London (1964–67), a reporter on the city desk in Washington, D.C. (1967–69), foreign correspondent in Saigon (1969–70) and Moscow (1971–74). He returned to the national staff in Washington and worked as a reporter for seven years, covering labor, the U.S. Senate, the 1980 presidential campaign and the first Ronald Reagan administration.
In 1982 Kaiser became associate editor of The Washington Post and editor of "Outlook", a Sunday section of commentary and opinion. He also wrote a column for the section. From 1985 to 1990 he was assistant managing editor for national news. From 1990 to 1991 he was deputy managing editor, and from 1991 to 1998 served as the paper's managing editor. He began his current assignment in September 1998.
Kaiser's work has appeared in the New York Review of Books, Esquire, Foreign Affairs, and many other publications. He has been a commentator on NPR's All Things Considered, and has appeared often on Meet the Press, the Today show and other television programs.
In 2007, he wrote a series of articles there based on interviews of lobbyist Gerald Cassidy on the topic of lobbying in the United States.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews
October 10, 2010
I don't want to give the impression that my two-star rating means that I disagree with the author's point of view, as with so many "reviews" of political books. Kaiser tells the detailed story of how money came to so thoroughly dominate the U.S. Congress, and there's not much editorializing to be had here, just sad facts that anyone who follows political history is probably already somewhat aware of. It's a thorough portrait of how the government used to conduct its business, how downright greedy American politics have become since Watergate, and what changed in the system and culture to put us in today's mess. As an historical account I can find relatively little to fault, and it has the right mix of specific detail and big-picture summary.
However. The book is poorly organized, dry as a bone, and often bogged down in the trivial. Kaiser can't decide if he's writing a biography of Gerald Cassidy, founder of one of Washington's first really big and successful lobbying firms, or telling the history of earmarks, campaign finances, and congressional dysfunction. He does a poor job juxtaposing the two narratives, although admittedly Cassidy does play an important role in the larger history and sometimes his characterization shines through. Just as often, however, the details of his life seem unrelated to the larger story of how money changed Washington. The historical sections are much better executed, although they do tend to the dry and stuffy. Overall I have to award a rating of "it was ok." I'm glad I read it for its information content, but I can't earnestly recommend it. There are probably better books out there on the topic.
If you can't be bothered to read it (I don't blame you), keep reading for my summary of the takeaway. Kaiser identifies several interconnected causes of our current dysfunctional legislative branch:
1) The acceptance of the earmark as a legislative tactic. Cassidy pioneered its use when it was still controversial, and it's surprising to hear speeches against the practice from that era. You can't imagine the same words being spoken by today's senators. Earmarks aren't bad because they're wasteful (although they often are) -- they only represent about 1% of federal discretionary spending. Rather, their award so absolutely occupies representatives that more important issues are simply ignored. Earmarks are given so much time and energy by representatives because...
2) The campaign season never ends. Besides spending roughly 25% of their time calling potential campaign donors ("dialing for dollars"), representatives are engaged in permanent political warfare where the act of legislation itself is subsumed in a sort of theater designed to ensure reelection. Earmarks are a primary tool in this strategy, since they bring home the bacon to the member's home district and can be campaigned upon. But just as important is repeating the right talking points and demonizing your opponent on cable news. Campaigning is so frantic because...
3) New technologies have enabled a more scientific approach to campaigning. These include accurate polling, television advertising, and an entire industry of campaign management and advice. Republicans certainly started with some of the nastier modern techniques, such as the television hit ad, but both parties have embraced them for one simple reason: they work. Airing television attack ads works. Avoiding complex statements of policy and focusing on easy-to-understand, emotionally charged issues works. Forming a platform based on opinion polling works. But these proven technologies and techniques are expensive and are a prime contributor to campaign costs, which have increased steeply every year since 1970, making representatives ever more reliant on campaign contributions to get reelected. Perhaps more importantly, they have changed the character of the sort of person who seeks national office. This is because...
4) Washington is now a place you go to get rich. After your term in Congress is up, you can probably make much more lobbying your ex-government, passing through the "revolving door" to K Street. But not just politicians get rich -- the money to be made advising campaigns and influencing the legislative process is simply staggering. In such an atmosphere of greed, corruption cannot but be endemic. The naked pursuit of money, once rare amongst congressmen, is now common. The system is self-reinforcing: it's broken because of the permanent campaign and special interest money, which continually frustrates reform attempts and wears down the optimism of reformers, driving away the people who could fix it -- a broken process that must be fixed via that same process. People who run for office in the hope of reforming the system usually lose because they try to articulate their own platform, rather than trusting in a P.R. firm to do it for them for a few million dollars. When they do make it in, they find that everyone is on the take and not eager to stop the gravy train. They ether burn out and quit or sell out to get reelected.
Finally, I'll mention that there *is hope* for the broken Congress. The Fair Elections Now Act would radically improve the situation, at least for a while:
http://www.publicampaign.org/node/38166
Sure, it's an arms race that tries to solve the problem of greed by throwing money at it, but short of a constitutional convention I think it's the best chance America has for remaining relevant in the 21st century.
Oh yeah, this book might depress you.
However. The book is poorly organized, dry as a bone, and often bogged down in the trivial. Kaiser can't decide if he's writing a biography of Gerald Cassidy, founder of one of Washington's first really big and successful lobbying firms, or telling the history of earmarks, campaign finances, and congressional dysfunction. He does a poor job juxtaposing the two narratives, although admittedly Cassidy does play an important role in the larger history and sometimes his characterization shines through. Just as often, however, the details of his life seem unrelated to the larger story of how money changed Washington. The historical sections are much better executed, although they do tend to the dry and stuffy. Overall I have to award a rating of "it was ok." I'm glad I read it for its information content, but I can't earnestly recommend it. There are probably better books out there on the topic.
If you can't be bothered to read it (I don't blame you), keep reading for my summary of the takeaway. Kaiser identifies several interconnected causes of our current dysfunctional legislative branch:
1) The acceptance of the earmark as a legislative tactic. Cassidy pioneered its use when it was still controversial, and it's surprising to hear speeches against the practice from that era. You can't imagine the same words being spoken by today's senators. Earmarks aren't bad because they're wasteful (although they often are) -- they only represent about 1% of federal discretionary spending. Rather, their award so absolutely occupies representatives that more important issues are simply ignored. Earmarks are given so much time and energy by representatives because...
2) The campaign season never ends. Besides spending roughly 25% of their time calling potential campaign donors ("dialing for dollars"), representatives are engaged in permanent political warfare where the act of legislation itself is subsumed in a sort of theater designed to ensure reelection. Earmarks are a primary tool in this strategy, since they bring home the bacon to the member's home district and can be campaigned upon. But just as important is repeating the right talking points and demonizing your opponent on cable news. Campaigning is so frantic because...
3) New technologies have enabled a more scientific approach to campaigning. These include accurate polling, television advertising, and an entire industry of campaign management and advice. Republicans certainly started with some of the nastier modern techniques, such as the television hit ad, but both parties have embraced them for one simple reason: they work. Airing television attack ads works. Avoiding complex statements of policy and focusing on easy-to-understand, emotionally charged issues works. Forming a platform based on opinion polling works. But these proven technologies and techniques are expensive and are a prime contributor to campaign costs, which have increased steeply every year since 1970, making representatives ever more reliant on campaign contributions to get reelected. Perhaps more importantly, they have changed the character of the sort of person who seeks national office. This is because...
4) Washington is now a place you go to get rich. After your term in Congress is up, you can probably make much more lobbying your ex-government, passing through the "revolving door" to K Street. But not just politicians get rich -- the money to be made advising campaigns and influencing the legislative process is simply staggering. In such an atmosphere of greed, corruption cannot but be endemic. The naked pursuit of money, once rare amongst congressmen, is now common. The system is self-reinforcing: it's broken because of the permanent campaign and special interest money, which continually frustrates reform attempts and wears down the optimism of reformers, driving away the people who could fix it -- a broken process that must be fixed via that same process. People who run for office in the hope of reforming the system usually lose because they try to articulate their own platform, rather than trusting in a P.R. firm to do it for them for a few million dollars. When they do make it in, they find that everyone is on the take and not eager to stop the gravy train. They ether burn out and quit or sell out to get reelected.
Finally, I'll mention that there *is hope* for the broken Congress. The Fair Elections Now Act would radically improve the situation, at least for a while:
http://www.publicampaign.org/node/38166
Sure, it's an arms race that tries to solve the problem of greed by throwing money at it, but short of a constitutional convention I think it's the best chance America has for remaining relevant in the 21st century.
Oh yeah, this book might depress you.
February 23, 2018
Horrifying, well written and detailed, but not particularly sexy. The reality of lobbying the U.S. government fits Michael Kinsley's aphorism: the scandal isn't what's illegal, the scandal is what's legal. Aside from a brief opening discussion of the Abramoff lobbying scandal that bilked Indian tribes out of millions of dollars, everything here is utterly permitted, which is why the title uses the word corrosion rather than corruption.
Kaiser makes the story duller than it has to be by focusing exclusively on one lobbying shop, Cassidy and Associates, and its rags-to-riches founder Gerald Cassidy. Kaiser tries to force a Gatsby comparison on Cassidy, which is an overdramatization. Yes, it's all very disgusting, and everyone's morals are being warped, but no one is getting shot or ending up dead in a pool.
What follows are passages I found quite interesting. Earmarks are special appropriations (funding) stuck into bills. Some real examples: $500,000 for the construction of the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, North Carolina; $15,000 to Florida Atlantic University to study how alcohol affects a mouse's motor function; and maybe the most famous of all time, $223 million towards a "Bridge to Nowhere", from mainland Alaska to an island with a population of fifty.(1) Congress enacted a temporary ban on earmarks in 2011 after President Obama said he would veto any bill that contained them. The ban is apparently still in effect. Does it really work? I have no idea. Paul Ryan would like to end the ban, and Trump recently voiced support for earmarks. This book's chronology ends in 2008. Earmarks were a huge and "routine part of Congressional business. Appropriations subcommittees required members to submit paperwork for every request, to rank their requests by importance to the member....the quest for earmarks became a consuming enterprise." A Democratic "staff director of the House Appropriations Committee from 1994 to 2004 explained what a distraction earmarks became."
"Can you imagine the amount of effort it took to put that [annual earmark] list together? There were probably six to ten requests for every entry on the list - each prepared in written form in members' offices. Members probably got three or four times as many requests from their districts as they passed on to the committees. Each one of those requests probably involved numerous communications with mayors, superintendents of schools, college presidents, representatives of community organizations - and of course lobbyists. We are talking about thousands of hours of meetings in each office. Then personal office staff call committed staff regularly to check on where their requests stand and to advise of changes in the priorities they assign to each potential project. Committee staff are completely overwhelmed simply by the job of logging in these thousands of proposals.
Meanwhile of course Congress didn't have a clue about how the Labor Department was handling out tax dollars, or what the rules of engagement were for contract security personnel in Iraq, or whether we really had a shot at holding together a government in Afghanistan. Members of Congress became so obsessed with how to direct the expenditure of one percent of the discretionary budget [the money spent on earmarks] that they completely lost track of what was happening to the other 99 percent."
Kaiser interviewed Bob Livingston, a former Republican member of the House who left to become a lobbyist.(2) "One of Newt's [Newt Gingrich, former Republican Speaker of the House] biggest mistakes was to tell members to leave their families at home. I think that so many of the problems today stem from that effort. Once they started doing that, they wanted to stay home not only on Saturday and Sunday, but on Mondays and Fridays, and then Mondays and Tuesdays and Fridays. They'd come into Washington Tuesday night, work Wednesday, and leave Thursday...So what you had was ninety subcommittees, and all of the political committees, and all of the leadership committees, all meeting Wednesday morning between nine and twelve. You can't run the Congress like that. You can't run any institution like that. And the institution broke down."
"Government doesn't work. The reason the executive branch doesn't work [he's speaking during the George W. Bush administration] is that Congress has abdicated its responsibility by not providing oversight to make it work. When Congress broke down, the executive branch broke down...They didn't have any oversight for six years on this administration. They deserved plenty of oversight."
Oversight requires experience and skill [writes Kaiser]. "The skill is lost," Livingston said, part of a general decline in capabilities of Congress. "Members don't show up, and you have the staff writing the bills...committee chairmen don't even know what's in the bills, let alone the members."
This is putting a positive spin on it: maybe staff write the bills a lot of the time, but lobbyists themselves write many of the bills. After all, many have bill-writing skills - they used to be congressional staffers.
A former Republican consultant says: "The intellectual quality of our politics, the capacity of our politics to deal with tough issues, is very limited. I just think the quality of our politics is at one level, and the severity of the issues is at another level altogether."
I learned:
- Bob Dole in 1964 was instrumental in getting President Johnson's nationwide food stamp program Senate support. File under: things that would never happen today...
- Georgetown University had many friends in Congress, and many earmarks went their way. In the 70s and 80s, members "of Congress whose wives were pregnant were offered free deliveries and care at the Georgetown University Hospital." One influential member of the House Appropriations Committee "was treated gratis for stomach cancer" there. The school's Jesuit fathers refused to speak about these favors publicly.
(1) According to USA Today, the bridge was to have been nearly as long as the Golden Gate Bridge which is 8,981 ft (2,737.4 m) long, and "higher than the Brooklyn Bridge." The bridge would cross the Tongass Narrows, part of Alaska's Inside Passage, so the bridge was designed to be tall enough to accommodate ship traffic, including the Alaska Marine Highway and the cruise ships that frequent Alaskan waters during the summer. It was projected to cost $398 million. The earmark was stripped from the bill, but then-Governor Sarah Palin kept the $223 million and spent it on other things, including $25 million on a "road to nowhere" - a highway which would have connected to the bridge, but now could not. (wikipedia)
This is not the bridge to nowhere, or the road to nowhere. It's a scary picture from Norway...
(2) Before you get too inspired by Livingston's inspirational comments, he resigned from Congress during the process of impeaching President Bill Clinton for perjury about an extramarital relationship - because he himself was having an extramarital relationship and was worried it might be exposed by Hustler magazine. Also he, like Paul Ryan and Trump, wants the ban on earmarks reversed.
May 17, 2021
The road to hell is paved with good intentions... or at least that is the portrait painted here. Told mostly through the story of Gerald Cassidy, one of the richest and most successful lobbyists ever, Robert Kaiser takes us on a slow walk through the recent history of how lobbying is currently practiced in Washington DC.
Cassidy was a pioneer, starting one of the first DC firms devoted strictly to lobbying without the fig leaf of a law practice. Working with cofounder Ken Schlossberg, Cassidy got his earliest contracts with universities. What started as a clever way of manipulating the system to get fat government appropriations for higher education eventually spun out of control. At first there was a pretense of public interest in special earmarks, handing out money that made lobbyist, client, and even members of Congress happy. Everyone was delighted.
But the nature of the lobbying business demanded new and more clients. Soon corporate America realized the advantages of having paid representation in DC so they could get a cut of the action too. In one of the most telling instances (told with far too little elaboration), Gerry Cassidy recognized an "opportunity" in Bill Clinton's promise to reform healthcare in the 1990s. He then proactively got a group of pharmaceutical companies to retain his firm and helped kill Clinton's proposal with a well-funded public relations campaign. Yecch!
The growth of the modern lobbying industry just happened to coincide with the spiraling political money race. It was a match made in hell. On one side you had incumbent politicians desperate to raise cash and on the other, lobbyists and clients all too willing to supply it. Thus was born a symbiosis that has since grown into a leviathan. Politicians are now completely dependent on lobbyist money. And the lobbying industry is completely dependent on paying retired politicians and staff huge salaries to bring in fat contracts. Nobody wants to change this system because all of the actors are completely dependent on maintaining it.
A well-told, if brutally dispiriting tale. Abandon all hope ye who enter here.
Cassidy was a pioneer, starting one of the first DC firms devoted strictly to lobbying without the fig leaf of a law practice. Working with cofounder Ken Schlossberg, Cassidy got his earliest contracts with universities. What started as a clever way of manipulating the system to get fat government appropriations for higher education eventually spun out of control. At first there was a pretense of public interest in special earmarks, handing out money that made lobbyist, client, and even members of Congress happy. Everyone was delighted.
But the nature of the lobbying business demanded new and more clients. Soon corporate America realized the advantages of having paid representation in DC so they could get a cut of the action too. In one of the most telling instances (told with far too little elaboration), Gerry Cassidy recognized an "opportunity" in Bill Clinton's promise to reform healthcare in the 1990s. He then proactively got a group of pharmaceutical companies to retain his firm and helped kill Clinton's proposal with a well-funded public relations campaign. Yecch!
The growth of the modern lobbying industry just happened to coincide with the spiraling political money race. It was a match made in hell. On one side you had incumbent politicians desperate to raise cash and on the other, lobbyists and clients all too willing to supply it. Thus was born a symbiosis that has since grown into a leviathan. Politicians are now completely dependent on lobbyist money. And the lobbying industry is completely dependent on paying retired politicians and staff huge salaries to bring in fat contracts. Nobody wants to change this system because all of the actors are completely dependent on maintaining it.
A well-told, if brutally dispiriting tale. Abandon all hope ye who enter here.
July 27, 2020
A necessary and digestible read about the power and mechanics of lobbying in Washington. I always assumed this was an inherent vice the nation was used to, but it's only relatively recently the scale, sophistication, and most surprising of all, the norms that used to insulate Congress from the power of lobbying interests have shifted the balance. Not the most entertaining but certainly a worthwhile read on the path to understanding US modern history.
December 21, 2012
Traces the rise of lobbying in D.C. through an in depth profile of Cassidy & Associates and a bigger picture analysis of trends.
The Cassidy narrative I didn't find particularly interesting.
But I thought the author did an excellent job describing factors that led to the massive increase in the scale of lobbying (~post 1970): the greater scope of the Federal government (more parties/industries are affected), complicated nature of modern legislation (easy to slip in an earmark), the "permanent campaign" (focuses congressmen on fundraising), among others.
The book shows that the corrupting influence is generally not in buying votes, but in buying access: companies pay money to lobby/donate to campaigns so that congressmen will have their concerns in mind when deciding what to include in an upcoming bill. This practice shifts priorities of legislators: their concerns are those of their funders, not their constituents.
Further, the sheer amount of time modern politicians spend raising money for campaigns suggests a second nasty effect: distraction. Eight to ten hours a week (from a knowledgeable source) "dialing for dollars" is a whole day lost to activity with no benefit to the populace.
I appreciate that the book flagged the above issues, but I would have liked the author to dive into them more; instead he stuck with his general narrative re Cassidy with asides into these systemic problems.
The Cassidy narrative I didn't find particularly interesting.
But I thought the author did an excellent job describing factors that led to the massive increase in the scale of lobbying (~post 1970): the greater scope of the Federal government (more parties/industries are affected), complicated nature of modern legislation (easy to slip in an earmark), the "permanent campaign" (focuses congressmen on fundraising), among others.
The book shows that the corrupting influence is generally not in buying votes, but in buying access: companies pay money to lobby/donate to campaigns so that congressmen will have their concerns in mind when deciding what to include in an upcoming bill. This practice shifts priorities of legislators: their concerns are those of their funders, not their constituents.
Further, the sheer amount of time modern politicians spend raising money for campaigns suggests a second nasty effect: distraction. Eight to ten hours a week (from a knowledgeable source) "dialing for dollars" is a whole day lost to activity with no benefit to the populace.
I appreciate that the book flagged the above issues, but I would have liked the author to dive into them more; instead he stuck with his general narrative re Cassidy with asides into these systemic problems.
January 1, 2011
Amazing book on how money has come to dominate politics in Washington. The books tracks the rise and fall of a young law school graduate who started his law career representing farm workers but ended up head of the biggest lobbying firm on K Street. After reading this book, I'd never look at politics the same way again.
March 20, 2010
Mainly focuses on one lobbyist, and is really hard to get into. The second half of the book is better, if you can make it through the first half. I should have stopped reading it, but I HATE not finishing books!
March 30, 2024
This is an engaging and informative history of lobbying from the post-Nixon reforms to today told through the history of the lobbying firm Cassidy & Associates which invented the earmark. As a person who has spent many hours attending DC fundraisers and "dialing for dollars" in the call suites at the NRCC, I can attest that this is a more or less accurate picture of how the "reciprocal altruism" of contemporary lobbying works, and doesn't. It is also interesting to read as much for what it does not say as for what it does. The book was written by a journalist for the Washington Post who, from my reading, is clearly a Democrat. Though he faults both sides of the aisle for the rise of the culture and industry of lobbying, he places specific blame on the 1994 GOP takeover of the House and makes the case, often remade down to this very day, that this was the birth of the dysfunctional culture in Washington.
Interestingly, however, in order to tell the full story of the birth of the contemporary lobbying business he has to start during the era of Democratic dominance of Congress. The birth of the earmark was for the construction of facilities at Tufts university, a Democratic client, of a Democratic firm seeking favors from the Democratically controlled appropriations committee in the Democratically controlled House. What's more, he has to point out that the first client of Cassidy and Associates was Ocean Spray who wanted to get its product into the federal school lunch program, and all the initial clients were food companies looking to profit from the Great Society programs, and that they have very much indeed profited from and do right down to this very day.
What becomes clear in the course of the book is that what the author, and most critics decry as the erosion of a culture in the House and Senate is really just the consequence of greater levels of political competition. Prior to 1994 Cassidy, that is for 20 years, and Associates had never employed a Republican and had never supported Republican candidates. Naturally, when the favor trading is all within the Democratic Party, the author thinks of this as a golden age of political gentility. It's only when this monopoly of power was broken up that things became "nasty." So what you really get here is the fact that there was no material change in the system pre and post 1994, but rather the ability of the Democratic Party to dominate it ended, and to partisans of the Democratic Party, this comes across as a coarsening of the political discourse. For Republicans and Independents, however, it's simply the opening of the system to them.
Despite the partisan issues raised in the debates over the 1994 takeover, I think the book does make a lot of interesting points though I think the book should be updated to take into consideration the massive shift that online fundraising has brought to the political system. Now, "the people" really can fund campaigns but the economics of digital fundraising are as or more corrosive to the legislative process than the explostion of PAC fundraising as the main drivers for online fundraising are fear and outrage and the recipients of millions of dollars in small donations are accountable to no one and have no responsibility other than to stay in the news.
Interestingly, however, in order to tell the full story of the birth of the contemporary lobbying business he has to start during the era of Democratic dominance of Congress. The birth of the earmark was for the construction of facilities at Tufts university, a Democratic client, of a Democratic firm seeking favors from the Democratically controlled appropriations committee in the Democratically controlled House. What's more, he has to point out that the first client of Cassidy and Associates was Ocean Spray who wanted to get its product into the federal school lunch program, and all the initial clients were food companies looking to profit from the Great Society programs, and that they have very much indeed profited from and do right down to this very day.
What becomes clear in the course of the book is that what the author, and most critics decry as the erosion of a culture in the House and Senate is really just the consequence of greater levels of political competition. Prior to 1994 Cassidy, that is for 20 years, and Associates had never employed a Republican and had never supported Republican candidates. Naturally, when the favor trading is all within the Democratic Party, the author thinks of this as a golden age of political gentility. It's only when this monopoly of power was broken up that things became "nasty." So what you really get here is the fact that there was no material change in the system pre and post 1994, but rather the ability of the Democratic Party to dominate it ended, and to partisans of the Democratic Party, this comes across as a coarsening of the political discourse. For Republicans and Independents, however, it's simply the opening of the system to them.
Despite the partisan issues raised in the debates over the 1994 takeover, I think the book does make a lot of interesting points though I think the book should be updated to take into consideration the massive shift that online fundraising has brought to the political system. Now, "the people" really can fund campaigns but the economics of digital fundraising are as or more corrosive to the legislative process than the explostion of PAC fundraising as the main drivers for online fundraising are fear and outrage and the recipients of millions of dollars in small donations are accountable to no one and have no responsibility other than to stay in the news.
March 30, 2020
The Government is ineffectual and corrupt. This is especially true in the United States where special interest groups rule the fray with millions of dollars in bribes. This has become the unfortunate reality now that it takes so much money to run a political campaign. So when a special interest group wants to have something done, they usually turn to a lobbyist or some other person who can grease the wheels, so to speak. So how did this situation come about in the first place? Did members of the Senate and the House of Representatives always have questionable moral values?
In the book So Damn Much Money author Robert G Kaiser discusses the events leading up to this current state of affairs through the life of one man. This man is Gerald S J Cassidy, and he built up a lobbying empire from almost nothing. Granted, he did kick out his original partner, but that is not all that important. I can only read about how someone wears three thousand dollar suits so much before I become sick to my stomach. The same goes for how a lot of Congressmen operate now. Rather than working for actual people, they only think of how to go and get money for their next campaigns.
In any case, Cassidy was born in New York City. He was born poor, and this instilled a powerful urge to prove himself and never have to go through being poor ever again. Since he wears specially tailored suits that cost several months of my paycheck, I can certainly say that he succeeded. While he is not the only one in town, lobbying has become the new normal for Washington as a whole.
While the book opens with the events of the Jack Abramoff scandal, it ends in the same story. Many Congresspeople lost their positions and a lot of politicians had to end their careers. He is out of prison now and wrote a book about the experience. All in all, this book is good, but it made me angry.
In the book So Damn Much Money author Robert G Kaiser discusses the events leading up to this current state of affairs through the life of one man. This man is Gerald S J Cassidy, and he built up a lobbying empire from almost nothing. Granted, he did kick out his original partner, but that is not all that important. I can only read about how someone wears three thousand dollar suits so much before I become sick to my stomach. The same goes for how a lot of Congressmen operate now. Rather than working for actual people, they only think of how to go and get money for their next campaigns.
In any case, Cassidy was born in New York City. He was born poor, and this instilled a powerful urge to prove himself and never have to go through being poor ever again. Since he wears specially tailored suits that cost several months of my paycheck, I can certainly say that he succeeded. While he is not the only one in town, lobbying has become the new normal for Washington as a whole.
While the book opens with the events of the Jack Abramoff scandal, it ends in the same story. Many Congresspeople lost their positions and a lot of politicians had to end their careers. He is out of prison now and wrote a book about the experience. All in all, this book is good, but it made me angry.
June 29, 2023
This book reviews the genesis and pervasiveness of lobbying in the United States. It blends a historical perspective as well as incorporating a narrative of an early participant in the business of lobbying.
Structured lobbying started out as a way to get projects funded by the government in the 70’s. At that time both major parties were more civil to each other and more interactive despite a long standing Democrat majority mainly born from the Great Depression in the 30’s.
Lobbyists assisted with the government process and reached out to other congressman that would benefit by a joint request. Notably, an early effort was for university medical research. This approach became successful and the government coffers became more accessible as lobbyists hired ex-congressman and government employees with more knowledge of the system.
This attracted more people to use government positions to gain money and power.
In the 90’s Republican Newt Gingrich began the fight against democrat majority and pushed a policy to not work with Democrats - you’re either with us or against us. This approach became adopted and enforced as politics became about winning majorities to control government institutions, in order to Maintain power and the flow of lobbyist dollars. This created a government no longer for the good of the citizenry and a great example of the “takers” as defined by Ayn Rand.
Republicans followed this partisanship and effectively blocked most democrat bills and appointments.
This created various dysfunction in government as those that seek positions of service do so for personal gain, do not address key issues facing the country (most key issues don’t generate revenue but have many immediate costs), refuse to communicate, debate, and be willing to change a position with opposite parties and with the actual citizenry they are supposed to represent.
Structured lobbying started out as a way to get projects funded by the government in the 70’s. At that time both major parties were more civil to each other and more interactive despite a long standing Democrat majority mainly born from the Great Depression in the 30’s.
Lobbyists assisted with the government process and reached out to other congressman that would benefit by a joint request. Notably, an early effort was for university medical research. This approach became successful and the government coffers became more accessible as lobbyists hired ex-congressman and government employees with more knowledge of the system.
This attracted more people to use government positions to gain money and power.
In the 90’s Republican Newt Gingrich began the fight against democrat majority and pushed a policy to not work with Democrats - you’re either with us or against us. This approach became adopted and enforced as politics became about winning majorities to control government institutions, in order to Maintain power and the flow of lobbyist dollars. This created a government no longer for the good of the citizenry and a great example of the “takers” as defined by Ayn Rand.
Republicans followed this partisanship and effectively blocked most democrat bills and appointments.
This created various dysfunction in government as those that seek positions of service do so for personal gain, do not address key issues facing the country (most key issues don’t generate revenue but have many immediate costs), refuse to communicate, debate, and be willing to change a position with opposite parties and with the actual citizenry they are supposed to represent.
January 2, 2025
if we're being honest, this should probably be required reading for all high schoolers. Forget the Schoolhouse Rock and Civics classes, if you want to teach kids how politics works, they should be reading this book. My issue with it is that Like anything political, it has a party bias, with the author ( a democrat) focusing more on Republicans while acknowledging Democrats do the same thing, but conveniently not talking as much about their actions. Beyond that very blatant bias, it's very accurate, very informative, and a very horrifying
April 14, 2025
Kaiser tells the history of money in American politics from the 1970s to 2008, using as his main vehicle the career of Gerald Cassidy, on of the most successful and influential lobbyists over that time. The book explains issues well, is thoroughly researched, and does not engage in soapbox speechifying. The only downsides are, first, the writing is slightly on the dry side, though not as dry as I had expected given its topic; and second, it several times raised my blood pressure. But the latter problem is the fault of Washington D.C., not of the book.
January 3, 2018
Very interesting insight into the inception of "big money politics" as well as the political games and ultimately polarization. After being two thirds of the way through the book however it begins to drag on, becoming nuanced and repetitive.
August 2, 2020
Kaiser is the 6 year old that knows he is smart. He knows it because mommy said so and mommy is always right. With the book it is the same story again. The government is good. The lobbysts are "corroding"? So I guess science was too much for this bright kid.
January 16, 2021
Fascinating, a bit gossipy and full of researched details that added to the length but not the story, but overall extremely readable and informative.
January 2, 2022
So good and exposes the fucked up side of lobbying and politics in America. Makes me depressed about our future honestly
July 16, 2022
Was gifted book by an old lobbying friend who was Chief Of Staff for Bill Lindsey
January 1, 2024
Oh boy
December 7, 2011
An overview of the growth of lobbying in Washington and how it undermines effective government, told mainly through the story of rise of Cassidy and Associates, a powerful lobbying firm. There’s a huge difference between being Caesar’s wife, beyond all reproach, and an amoral mercenary willing to sell anything to the highest bidder, but it’s clear which direction our House and Senate are going. If I looked at each chapter on its own as an isolated incident, I don’t think it would be a big deal. What’s wrong with allocating Federal money to build hospitals and university buildings? What’s wrong with giving smaller universities a voice when the peer review process is rigged in favor of a handful of select institutions? But when the dots are connected, it forms a depressing pattern of influence-peddling and gradual erosion of trust to the point where polls of approval ratings for Congressmen are at record lows. This conversation between Raymond Strother, a Democratic political consultant, and the John Stennis, at the time a six-term senator, illustrating the new reality of politics, broke my heart:
Strother broke the news to Stennis that he needed to raise $2 million. How, the old man, can he do that? . . . When Strother talked about this, he wrote later, Stennis would ‘just wring his hands. Finally, in desperation, I reminded the old senator that he was chairman of [the] Armed Services Committee . . . and had spent billions of dollars with the defense industry. What about LTV? I asked him. What about McDonnell Douglas [two giant defense contractors]?’ In other words, Strother was telling Stennis it was time to cash in some chits with the corporations that got rich on the Pentagon programs that Stennis had supported.
‘Would that be proper?’ Stennis asked.
Then he answered the question himself, addressing Strother the way he addressed most grown men, as sir: ‘I hold life and death over those companies. I don’t think it would be proper for me to take money from them.”
Personally, Strother agreed, but he told his client that this was ‘how all the other senators do it.’ His assurance ‘did not salve the feeling that it was wrong.,’ Strother remembered.
Stennis’s question ‘has bothered me for years,’ Strother said twenty-five years later. ‘I’ll never forget that conversation or the troubled look on his lined face. When I left his office he was looking at his folded hands on the table in his office that had once belonged to Harry Truman. It looked as though he was in prayer. I was very sad. I had just diminished something he held dear.
September 14, 2011
This book uses the career of Gerry Cassidy, a lobbyist in Washington D.C. who created and ran the lucrative firm Cassidy and Associates. It is very "inside baseball" as has been mentioned in reviews here, but it is a very important story. Cassidy, a former aide of George McGovern who started his Washington career as a congressional aid interested in poverty and hunger, became rich off of the idea of getting earmarked funds for his clients.
The books follows the rise of the importance of money in the political system, and it's not a pretty picture. Cassidy as well as many other important figures interviewed for the book openly admit that the general public has no way to get their voice heard among the PACs and corporate interests paying hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to firms like Cassidy and Associates to get their voices heard.
Kaiser also chronicles the rise of political figures like DeLay and Gingrich, figures that thrived on the idea of the constant campaign. The fraudster DeLay, of course, had a career that ended in disgrace. Don't get the impression that it's only Republicans that are the problem; Cassidy's firm at first was aimed at Democrats and they are by in large just as bad. The constant need for fund raising brought in a new type of politician to the scene, one that is constantly worried about fund raising (spending 8 or more hours a week on it as Kaiser notes) because they are reliant on television and other expensive mediums like Direct Mail. More money meant a tighter integration between Congress and lobby money. Since the release of this book in 2008, of course, the situation is even worse.
This is a good book to read if you wish to know the real processes of how Congress is working, however most people aren't even interested in how the official part of political process works or what is in the Constitution. Of course our politicians and the moneyed interests take advantage of that fact. Books like this on help to illustrate just how much of the political power has actually be taken away from the average taxpayer.
The books follows the rise of the importance of money in the political system, and it's not a pretty picture. Cassidy as well as many other important figures interviewed for the book openly admit that the general public has no way to get their voice heard among the PACs and corporate interests paying hundreds of thousands of dollars a year to firms like Cassidy and Associates to get their voices heard.
Kaiser also chronicles the rise of political figures like DeLay and Gingrich, figures that thrived on the idea of the constant campaign. The fraudster DeLay, of course, had a career that ended in disgrace. Don't get the impression that it's only Republicans that are the problem; Cassidy's firm at first was aimed at Democrats and they are by in large just as bad. The constant need for fund raising brought in a new type of politician to the scene, one that is constantly worried about fund raising (spending 8 or more hours a week on it as Kaiser notes) because they are reliant on television and other expensive mediums like Direct Mail. More money meant a tighter integration between Congress and lobby money. Since the release of this book in 2008, of course, the situation is even worse.
This is a good book to read if you wish to know the real processes of how Congress is working, however most people aren't even interested in how the official part of political process works or what is in the Constitution. Of course our politicians and the moneyed interests take advantage of that fact. Books like this on help to illustrate just how much of the political power has actually be taken away from the average taxpayer.
April 21, 2012
A dear friend sent me this book so I felt compelled to read it, if for no other reason than to delve deeper into my friend's inner being. I'm not normally a non-fiction reader, but I read this one and found the last 40 years of my life redefined by what's been happening in Washington...nothing surprising! All my life it's been par for the course to believe those in Washington are taking the public trough as their own. Nothing I read here changed that score, but I did feel sadness when certain names came up as less than stellar in the process. While my names may not be your names, have no fear, there's plenty of blame for all in this book.
Finding out how lobbying got its beginnings from our country's earliest days is one thing, but watching as the folks in D.C. polished up the process over the last few decades is galling. You know, if you concentrate on the process of causing another pain, you can raionalize your way out of the obvious result. It worked in Auschwitz and it works in Washington.
Willie Sutton said he robbed banks because "that's where the money is." That imperical logic is the driving engine for lobbyists, no surprise there, but the players involved are. Seeing how many of our finest academic institutions danced to the Devil's hornpipe, enabling the modern lobbyists' greatest successes is tragic. Enough.
Kaiser has written a well-researched book. I hesitate to call it an expose, because it's self-evident from the title. There is just "So Damn Much Money."
Finding out how lobbying got its beginnings from our country's earliest days is one thing, but watching as the folks in D.C. polished up the process over the last few decades is galling. You know, if you concentrate on the process of causing another pain, you can raionalize your way out of the obvious result. It worked in Auschwitz and it works in Washington.
Willie Sutton said he robbed banks because "that's where the money is." That imperical logic is the driving engine for lobbyists, no surprise there, but the players involved are. Seeing how many of our finest academic institutions danced to the Devil's hornpipe, enabling the modern lobbyists' greatest successes is tragic. Enough.
Kaiser has written a well-researched book. I hesitate to call it an expose, because it's self-evident from the title. There is just "So Damn Much Money."
April 8, 2009
Anyone who has followed American politics for a while knows the
outlines of the book's story, but the twists and turns have a lot to
teach us. Their are many villains in the book, but no one who had the
power to turn around the problem. Kaiser hands out blame to all sides
(Democrats and Republican, pollsters and campaign organizers,
lobbyists and aides) as even-handedly as the donors hand out money. I
don't buy every assertion Kaiser makes (for instance, did the turning
point in American politics really come in June 1976 with an idea
hatched by renowned chemist Jean Mayer?) but I respect his research.
He's also a consummate journalist who can merge human interest with
social and political observations. Luckily, we now have an opportunity
to fix politics that hasn't come since Watergate, or maybe since
Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.
outlines of the book's story, but the twists and turns have a lot to
teach us. Their are many villains in the book, but no one who had the
power to turn around the problem. Kaiser hands out blame to all sides
(Democrats and Republican, pollsters and campaign organizers,
lobbyists and aides) as even-handedly as the donors hand out money. I
don't buy every assertion Kaiser makes (for instance, did the turning
point in American politics really come in June 1976 with an idea
hatched by renowned chemist Jean Mayer?) but I respect his research.
He's also a consummate journalist who can merge human interest with
social and political observations. Luckily, we now have an opportunity
to fix politics that hasn't come since Watergate, or maybe since
Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.
July 9, 2013
An informative and distressing guide to the lobbying culture and its hidden control of our politics.
“Washington, never immune from the fashions and enthusiasms of American society, absorbed and then reflected the spirit of the go-go years. Commercial and residential real estate boomed as downtown Washington spread to the east and west of the traditional business districts. New stores and restaurants catered to a wealthy clientele. A building boom of mansion-style suburban housing transformed large sections of Fairfax County, Virginia and Montgomery County, Maryland, Washington’s two wealthiest suburbs.”
“Washington, never immune from the fashions and enthusiasms of American society, absorbed and then reflected the spirit of the go-go years. Commercial and residential real estate boomed as downtown Washington spread to the east and west of the traditional business districts. New stores and restaurants catered to a wealthy clientele. A building boom of mansion-style suburban housing transformed large sections of Fairfax County, Virginia and Montgomery County, Maryland, Washington’s two wealthiest suburbs.”
August 19, 2010
Found this book referenced in Lawrence Lessig's TED talk on "Fix Congress First" and Kindled it from curiosity. Now done, I feel thoroughly enlightened about the history of lobbying in the USA from colonial times to the present. Kaiser adeptly presents a candid and non-partisan exposé of "business as usual" in Washington DC. (Indeed, he makes it seem easy being non-partisan on this subject!) Kaiser has an effective facility with the abundance of research detail and its context, a swift pacing, and clear declarative sentence structure that made this book an adventure as much as an education.
July 14, 2009
This was a well researched book about the increasing amount of money and lobbying in government. It focuses on one large lobbying firm, Cassidy and Associates, and their rise within Washington business circles. The book splits its coverage between background of the politics at the time and Cassidy's rise. Very enlightening but frustrating read at the same time. Everyone's out to make a buck and this book illustrates that very well.
March 19, 2010
It was interesting enough, but it wasn't great as I had expected it. Most of the informations and opinions had been already laid out by numerous of publications but there were few insights that cued me into few of the issues that came up in the past few days. Its interesting enough if you are into, and used to reading political/economical books if not it might be hard for you to finish or get into the book.
May 29, 2013
I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book. Its mission was to show how the US congress changed from "money under the table" to bidding out the legislation in broad daylight. It accomplishes that task well. I learned a lot from the history in the book. I like its focus on a particular lobbyist firm. I like how it incorporates a lot of the federal government history as well. The book was very neutral in its views. It is a well-written book and worth your time.
March 25, 2009
Fantastic history of what we now know generally as 'lobbying' and 'earmarks'. The author is a 30-year+ veteran of the Washington Post and traces the evolution of D.C.'s lobbying culture from the 70s to the present. Very insightful look at how things got so bad and the mighty forces interested in maintaining the status quo.
December 7, 2009
This was really an eye-opener for me. The main point for me was how much the cost of campaigning for public office has increased in the last 30 years or so, and the impacts this has had on how, and whether, our legislators legislate. The focus is on the U. S. Congress, but the problems probably apply equally to state government.
September 28, 2009
This is a very good book that describes the rise of lobbying in DC from the late 60s to today. It is both an engaging book of political history and also very saddening on how our government works. I don't yearn for the Big Government politicians of a previous era but they at least had principled beliefs. Today's DC only cares about power and the money that will help they retain power.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 51 reviews