One of Barack Obama’s hometown newspapers, the Chicago Sun-Times, chimes in with an editorial today inspired by Obama’s half-hour infomercial. The paper notes that the program was the product of the huge funding disparity between Obama (who opted out of public financing) and John McCain (who took $84 million in federal funds).

Most importantly, it joins other papers in calling for a fix to the system: “Public financing of campaigns can give lesser-known candidates a fair shot and, when it’s funded well – as a few states have done – produce more competitive races, more candidates and more newcomers. When Obama broke his pledge to take a public grant, he said he would work to overhaul the political finance system. On Nov. 5, whether or not he’s president-elect, we plan to hold him to that.”

Speaking of the Obama campaign, the New York Times takes a look at how it’s spending its money: 30 minute commercials aside, it spends it quite frugally, it turns out.

The Times joins the Sun-Times in calling for a fix to the system in an editorial that notes this campaign could wind up costing $2 billion. The paper calls for a more aggressive system for dispensing federal matching funds and calls on Congress to limit the power of joint state and national fund-raising committees, which still allow for the writing of huge checks (and granting the access that goes along with them).

Over at Slate, John Dickerson and Chris Wilson engage in an experiment to see how easy it would be for Obama to disclose the source of his small donations: They claim it’s not difficult at all.

Finally, just one reminder of who’s still working hard to pull strings in Washington, according to the Wall Street Journal: “Lobbyists descended on Capitol Hill to push for an economic-stimulus bill that could cost as much as $150 billion…”

Even though only five days remain until Election Day, reports are still coming out about questionable donors to John McCain’s presidential campaign. In The Chicago Tribune, Andrew Zajac, Ray Gibson and Bob Secter write about Shi Sheng Hao, “a virtual unknown in business and political circles.” Since September 2007, he has given $120,000, even though, before then, he had no record of making donations. Hao’s relatives have also given more than $269,000, almost all of it to McCain and the Republican Party.

In other news, a USA Today poll shows that Americans strongly come down on the side of reducing money’s influence in politics. By a 3-to-1 margin, Americans said too much money is being spent on the presidential race. The poll “finds wide support for public financing of presidential campaigns, including a third who say the current voluntary system should be mandatory.”

Finally, Politico’s Jeanne Cummings compiles a list of the best and worst finance decisions of the 2008 elections. Interestingly, No. 2 on the “best” list is John McCain’s finessing of the public financing system in the primaries. Yes, it made sense strategically, but it also raised plenty of legal questions.

The presidential candidates have now released their pre-election campaign finance reports, the last official, comprehensive look we’ll get at their spending and fundraising before Election Day. As the AP’s Jim Kuhnhenn reports, John McCain has been spending about $1.5 million a day and “likely has only $12 million to spend in the next 11 days before the Nov. 4 election.”

As for Obama, his fundraising appears to have slowed off the breakneck pace that allowed him to raise $150 million in September. In the first two weeks of the month, Obama raised $36 million. Still, when combined with money raised by the Democratic National Committee, Obama had $97 million on hand to spend, compared to $84 million for McCain and the Republican National Committee. (While the AP portrayed this as bad news for Obama, the Los Angeles Times’ Dan Morain saw it as further evidence of Obama’s dominance.)

Meanwhile, the Christian Science Monitor’s Linda Feldmann joins the chorus of reporters writing about the future of campaign finance in the wake of Obama’s blockbuster September. And the Baltimore Sun joins the chorus of newspaper editorial boards calling for the next president and Congress to fix a broken system.

Finally, CQ Politics’ Bart Jansen notes that watchdog groups, in the wake of Obama’s record-breaking haul, are “drafting ways to attempt in the next Congress to curb big-dollar presidential campaign bundlers without discouraging the wave of small-dollar contributions flowing in through the Internet.”

The furor over Sarah Palin’s $150,000 clothing makeover – courtesy of the Republican National Committee – continued on what was a fairly slow news day yesterday. Today, The New York Times’ Patrick Healy and Michael Luo report on how the spending spree may undercut Palin’s “hockey mom” image. Luo and Leslie Wayne also offer up a sidebar on Jeff Larson, the GOP consultant who appears to have been the one doing the actual shopping.

New York Magazine’s Peter Keating offers a primer on what Barack Obama’s money is buying him. The short answer: Tons of ads, an overwhelming advantage on the ground, the ability to fight off John McCain wherever, and whenever, he wants, and a growing sense of inevitability. Keating also assesses the impact of Obama’s $150 million September on the future of the presidential public financing system – he says the current system may effectively be dead, but that when “McCain weeps for campaign-finance reform, his are crocodile tears. For months, McCain has been funneling huge contributions to his campaign through state parties and the Republican National Committee… McCain and the GOP have been trying just as hard as the Dems to circumvent public financing. They just haven’t been as good at it as Obama.”

Finally, the Center for Responsive Politics (the source of much of the campaign finance data we use), offers up a projected final price tag for the 2008 election: $5.3 billion. That figure encompasses not only the presidential race, but also congressional contests. It’s a 27 percent increase over 2004.

Sarah Palin’s understated yet sharp fashion sense has won some attention since John McCain tapped her to be his vice presidential running mate. But it turns out that signature Palin look is courtesy of the Republican National Committee, which, as Politico’s Jeanne Cummings reports, has shelled out $150,000 to dress and accessorize not only Gov. Palin, but her family as well.

As Cummings writes, “The cash expenditures immediately raised questions among campaign finance experts about their legality under the Federal Election Commission’s long-standing advisory opinions on using campaign cash to purchase items for personal use.”

Meanwhile, it looks like the RNC’s main fundraising go-to guy, President Bush, is losing some of his potency. Politico’s Ryan Grim reports that Bush has pulled in “$40 million less than he raised last cycle and $4 million less than Barack Obama raised last month.”

Barack Obama’s $150 million September continues to attract coverage. Today, The Washington Post’s Matthew Mosk and Sarah Cohen point out that only a quarter of the $600 million Obama has raised actually came from people who have donated less than $200 – a reflection of the fact that big money is still essential for anyone seeking high elected office.

Finally, two editorial today – in the Philadelphia Inquirer and The Washington Post – both signal that Obama’s haul confirms that it’s time to fix the public financing system, and that it’s up to the next president to lead the way.

Even with two weeks to go until the election, yet another connection between John McCain and troubled mortgage giant Freddie Mac has come to light.

Word came out this weekend that Freddie Mac secretly paid Republican firm DCI Group to lobby GOP senators to oppose legislation that would have increased regulations on its lending.

Does DCI Group sound familiar? It might – it turns out that DCI Group’s CEO is Doug Goodyear, who was John McCain’s choice to organize this year’s Republican National Convention. And, as Newsweek reported in May, Goodyear’s firm also made money representing Burma’s brutal military junta.

As for McCain’s VP pick, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, The New Yorker has a lengthy article on the governor’s rise to prominence among the GOP elite – the very “Good Ol’ Boys Network” she so often decries. Part of that, the story mentions, was her quick desire to cozy up to powerful Washington lobbyists after she became mayor of Wasilla.

Of course, McCain spent Sunday questioning the legitimacy of Barack Obama’s staggering $150 million in September fundraising, saying on Fox News Sunday, “What’s going to happen, particularly if you’ve got an incumbent president, and we no longer stick to the … public financing, which was a result of the Watergate scandal?”

Sen. McCain might want to ask this question of himself, as “sticking to public financing” proved to be, well, a sticky point during the Republican primaries. You may remember that McCain opted into the public financing system for the primaries and then decided to change his mind once his campaign took off. Despite the questionable legality of this move, the FEC eventually let him off the hook.

Finally, The Dallas Morning News explores why an Obama administration, combined with a Democratic Congress, would likely result in new regulations on AT&T. As for a McCain administration, the story notes that “AT&T’s executives and lobbyists have longstanding ties to Mr. McCain,” including the company’s top lobbyist, Tim McKone, who has raised $500,000 for the GOP nominee. The article also points out that some of McCain’s “top campaign aides are former AT&T lobbyists, including Charlie Black and Rick Davis, Mr. McCain’s campaign manager. Some of Mr. McCain’s Senate aides later worked as lobbyists for AT&T.”

There were rumors last night – spread by top McCain surrogate Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC), as seen in this Los Angeles Times report – that John McCain use last night’s presidential debate to bring up Barack Obama’s decision to opt out of public financing. That never happened – perhaps the constraints of the format prevented the topic from coming up. But there’s still one debate to go, and one more chance for both candidates to talk about their views on the role of money in politics.

Speaking of Obama’s decision, it appears to be paying dividends in one place: the TV ad war. The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza reports that Obama is outspending McCain nearly 3 to 1, including “more than $20 million on television ads in 17 states.”

Obama was able to pull in a little more money for ads after the debate with a little help from Al Gore, The Swamp’s John McCormick reports. The post-debate event at Gore’s residence raised more than $900,000.

Finally, the Chicago Sun-Times’ Lynn Sweet reports that last night wasn’t the first time Tom Brokaw had lobbed questions at Obama. The two shared the stage at a private event at Goldman Sachs in 2007. No money was raised there, but perhaps the connections were made that resulted in Goldman Sachs employees topping the list of Obama’s campaign donors.

We begin today with a lead from The Associated Press that says it all: “Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin, a self-described government reformer, is dabbling in a little politics as usual.” Michael R. Blood goes on to report that John McCain’s VP running mate will headline a fundraiser later this month at the home of California software mogul Tom Siebel. For the low, low price of $50,000, you can get a photo taken with Palin and a seat at the head table.

You might have been wondering about the lobbying angle of the federal takeover of mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Bloomberg’s Jonathan D. Salant has the story. One of the biggest consequences of the takeover is an end to both companies’ powerful Capitol Hill lobbying operations, which cost $7.4 million in the first half of this year alone, and $174 million since 1998 – and included McCain bundler Alfonse D’Amato.

Yet even though D’Amato has raised at least $250,000 for McCain, the candidate and his running mate claim in today’s Wall Street Journal that they’ll stand up to special interests. All while taking money from those who represent those special interests, Sen. McCain?

Finally, The New York Times takes a look at how Obama and the Democratic National Committee are dealing with the candidate’s decision to opt out of $84 million in public financing for the general election – as it turns out, that decision has come with some unintended consequences.

If you’d heard any interesting tidbits about McCain’s lobbyists, we want to know! Send them to [email protected].