Larry Noble Quotations

She is a center of gravity in the Democratic Party with the ability to draw cash in by herself. Can you think of a bigger draw than Hillary? It's not Howard Dean.

One of the things people who are running for president try to do is keep their fundraising staff and political people close at hand. And one of the ways you can do that is by putting them in some sort of organization you run.

Right now, a number of members are betting on the public losing interest and getting away without any new reforms.

Businesses want to succeed. They want to make sure they get access and a hearing, regardless of who's in office. They're very bottom-line oriented.

If a party puts $4 million into a House race, it's really releasing a lot of guns. It shows the importance of the race.

There is a fine line between a political contribution and a bribe, but that fine line is the difference between returning to Congress and going to jail.

There is always the cliche 'a pox on both your houses.' But I do think the party in power does take extra heat on these things.

He clearly is aiming at the jury pool and aiming at voters, hoping to generate as much sympathy as he can. And it shows DeLay never misses a beat when it comes to fundraising no matter how dark things get.

I suspect most members don't know the right answer and they're just forced to make a judgment now in a very fluid situation.

I think it's a long shot, for anyone to think it will be passed in Congress.

I think they felt the way that many high-tech companies felt: that what happened in Washington didn't affect them and that they were outside the political realm.

I think everybody acknowledges its not working anymore.

You have to worry that allowing such income, especially when it is so closely associated with Pombo politically, is a reward.

You get this image that they are taking money out of one pocket and giving it to a charity while they are taking money from lobbyist-sponsored fundraisers with the other hand.

Criminally, I don't know if you can hold the campaign liable. But civilly, if you can show the campaign had reckless disregard for the law, you could go after them for that.

Criminally, I don't know if you can hold the campaign liable, ... But civilly, if you can show the campaign had reckless disregard for the law, you could go after them for that.

People expect further indictments before November, which may very well be at a lower level. Then prosecutors will see how high they can take it. This is a ticking time bomb and no one knows when it will go off or how far it will detonate.

You're essentially shutting down someone's right to run for office. It's done only if there are strong indications that, in fact, the campaign funds are being used for something blatantly illegal.

The whole culture is based on the ability to raise funds. Most of the ones who are running for the leadership are very well-connected in this fundraising community.

There is no way this is good for him. How bad it will be will depend on what else we see happen.

... They're connected because often the political contributions open the door that allow the lobbyist in. The check by itself doesn't have written on it the agenda. It's the lobbyist that follows those contributions that brings the agenda.

It's enticing for a lot of them to go over to that side.

It's a very big perk for members (of Congress) and a very big lobbying tool for companies.

It's a fine line and it really depends on what the contributor knew.

It's a perfect fit for the pharmaceutical industry. The fact they he shaped this bill adds to his cachet.

That is very unusual because, in effect, if you freeze or seize the account, you're stopping the campaign and most prosecutors won't do that without very good cause.

It's been growing in recent years as lobbyists have been closer and closer to campaigns.

They can speak at an event, and as long as the disclaimer is there, it seems like he (McCain) is following the law.

That's a major fight. It brings in a lot of the national security issues that the administration has been hammering. This is all the things they've been using as hot-button issues to motivate the base. But they've got a problem now.

Indian tribes have become a political force, and they have to be looked at that way with regard to political contributions.

In the end, what is going to be judged is whether there is enforcement of the laws. The key is disclosure and transparency.

If the justices uphold the law, it could mean a major change in how political parties operate,

It has to be seen for what it is. This is an industry group supported by the industry to put forward the views of the pharmaceutical industry on this issue.

The idea of 'cronies' has been around for a long time, ... Every president that comes in has a lot of political appointees that they can bring in with them.

The line between a bribe and a legal contribution is very thin, but it is that line that keeps you out of jail. The critical element is whether there was an understanding or agreement to take specific action in return for the money.

The reality is that it is mainly a Republican scandal for several reasons.

It will be interesting to see if they accept the idea that not only actual corruption in politics needs to be addressed, but the appearance of corruption as well, ensuring public confidence and all that.