WASHINGTON — As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama said that in overhauling healthcare he would make the negotiations public, and even invite C-SPAN to air the talks on television.
Yet in recent months, lobbyists and health insurance company representatives have been meeting behind closed doors -- with the White House's knowledge -- in the office of Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) to debate options for a new health system.
As a candidate, Obama pledged to cut "earmarks" for lawmakers' pet projects to pre-1994 levels. But the president soon may sign a bill laced with more than 8,500 earmarks.
Transforming Washington's political culture is proving tougher than Obama may have envisioned.
"I don't think anyone who is familiar with the way Washington works was under any illusions about the ease in doing this," said Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics. "It's very different to make promises on the campaign stump than it is putting together an administration and running a government. . . . I don't think it's a given that it's possible to change the culture of Washington."
Obama's proposals keep coming.
On Thursday, the president laid out initiatives targeting earmarks and lobbyists. Obama's budget outline contains plans for websites that would show how much lobbyists are spending in pursuit of government contracts and which members of Congress are asking for earmarks.
Obama's commitment to an ethical tone and more transparent style is facing near-daily tests.
The latest involves earmarks. Last week, the House passed a $410-billion spending bill that watchdog groups say contains $7.7 billion worth of earmarks. A group of 10 Republican House members sent the president a letter Friday reminding him of his campaign promises and asking him to veto the bill, if it is passed by the Senate.
The bill, the lawmakers wrote, "openly defies your commendable objectives of fiscal transparency and accountability. It contains nearly 9,000 'airdropped' earmarks, most of which were not even considered in committee let alone on the House floor as is routine."
As the bill was being considered, the White House raised objections to the abundance of earmarks but gave no indication it planned a veto, a congressional official said Friday. The White House declined to comment about whether Obama would veto the legislation.
