In an interesting (political) analysis of the Enron fallout, The New Republic’s Noam Scheiber argues that any campaign finance reform that doesn’t take into account lobbying practices is destined to fail:

John McCain, for one, seems well aware of the role of lobbyists in corrupting the political system. On the campaign trail in 2000 the Arizona senator was fond of promising to ‘break the iron triangle of big money, lobbyists and legislation and take the government out of the hands of the special interests.’ But the legislation that bears his name doesn’t do anything about lobbyists. Which is why it probably wouldn’t have kept Enron from wielding its dastardly influence in Washington over the past few years, and why it won’t stop Enron’s would-be imitators from doing the same long after today’s scandal is a distant memory.

In short (Scheiber argues), influence — when it is successfully wielded — has much to do with prior private sector contacts and fierce lobbying, and little to do with political contributions.

In a representative government, legislation aimed at curtailing access to representatives (which is what any check on lobbyists would do — or at least, that’s how I assume it would be framed by advocates for lobbyists) would surely fail any first amendment challenge brought to bear against it.

All in all, quite a reform pickle, I’d say…