In response to the news of the latest Wall Street meltdown, John McCain put out a statement that in part said:

Major reform must be made in Washington and on Wall Street. We cannot tolerate a system that handicaps our markets and our banks and places at risk the savings of hardworking Americans and investors. The McCain-Palin Administration will replace the outdated and ineffective patchwork quilt of regulatory oversight in Washington and bring transparency and accountability to Wall Street. We will rebuild confidence in our markets and restore our leadership in the financial world."

Perhaps he could start at McCain Campaign HQ. At least four of McCain's senior campaign aides--including Charlie Black, Rick Davis, and Wayne Berman have lobbied for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. And at least 20 of McCain's fundraisers have also lobbied for Freddie and Fannie. These folks were gaming the system for these now-discredited institutions. And now they are handing McCain his speech lines

McCain is surrounded by lobbyists. One hundred and seventy-seven, according to a report put out by the Democratic National Congress this past weekend. (Yeah, that's a biased source. But the paper trail is well documented.) Does McCain not understand that these lobbyists spend their days doing what they can to avoid making the legislative and regulatory processes in Washington more accountable and transparent. If McCain wants an open system, perhaps he would ask all those lobbyists helping his campaign to fill out reports explaining all their contacts with legislators, staff, and regulators--noting precisely what legislative changes, decisions and favors they are seeking.

In a new add, his campaign says, "Our economy in crisis Only proven reformers John McCain and Sarah Palin can fix it....No special interest giveaways." The guys and gals running McCain's campaign specialize in special interest giveaways. There is a whopping disconnect between what McCain says and what his top people do. If he doesn't see that, then he is, as the Obama crew says, out of touch.

At the Democrats' big shindig in Iowa on Saturday night--the annual Jefferson-Jackson Dinner--it took John Edwards about three nanoseconds (or maybe four) to come out blasting at Washington lobbyists. As he has been doing on the campaign trail, he decried "government for the lobbyists by the lobbyists." He exclaimed, "We do not believe in letting lobbyists write the laws." He asserted that Washington is "awash with corporate money" doled out by lobbyists to win their way with lawmakers in a system that is "broken" and "rigged." He said he would "beat those interests" if elected president.

Barack Obama, later in the (long) evening, also whacked at the influence-peddlers of that nation's capital. Poking (somewhat gently) at Edwards, he proclaimed,

I am in this race to tell the corporate lobbyists that their days of setting the agenda in Washington are over. I have done more than any other candidate in this race to take on lobbyists--and won. They have not funded my campaign, they will not get a job in my White House, and they will not drown out the voices of the American people when I am president."

What did Hillary Clinton say about lobbyists when it was her turn? Nothing. She did not mention the L-word. She did declare that she, too, is a fighter. She noted she had fought for kids, for families, for health care, for soldiers, and for first responders. But in her speech, her target was Bush and the Republicans. As was customary for her, she presented no critique of the system in Washington and castigated only Bush, the GOP, and their cronies. After all, her campaign is full of lobbyists who are assisting her with fundraising and strategy.

So while her two main challengers are raging against the (Washington) machine, HRC has nothing bad to say about it. The problem, as she describes it, is only with the Republican folks operating the machine. This may be the key distinction between Clinton and her leading challengers--especially since all three say they favor ending the war in Iraq. But as of yet neither Obama or Edwards has been able to turn this particular divide into an issue that stops the Clinton machine. Yes, there's still time. But given that HRC is fiercely bashing away at Bush and the Republicans, Democratic voters may not care (or even realize) that she's letting lobbyists off the hook. (See my colleague Jonathan Stein's interesting encounter on this point with one undecided Iowan here.)

Each of these three candidates insist he or she will be be fighting for you. But fighting whom? Only two of the three vow to challenge the corrupt institutional powers-that-be of Washington. In Iowa, though, Clinton's promise to headbutt the Republicans may well suffice for Democratic voters. If so, Washington's lobbyists won't have to worry.