I’m the only candidate who doesn’t take money from corporate PACs and lobbyists, and I’m here to tell you that you can count on me to stand up for you after this election, just as I’ve been standing up for workers all my life.

Last fall, Barack Obama quietly slipped into the Miami headquarters of a major law firm scarred by the scandals of Jack Abramoff, its once-powerful Washington lobbyist who now sits in jail.

Arriving a little after 10 a.m. on Oct. 1, Obama spent the next three hours schmoozing, speaking in a video conference to branch offices and raising money at Greenberg Traurig, a billion-dollar firm with one of the biggest lobby shops here.

Obama has now raised about $125,000 from Greenberg Traurig employees -- nearly half of it at the time of the event -- more than from any of the other top law and lobby firms.

"It's kind of a distinction without a difference," Krumholz said. "As an industry geared for hire, both lawyers and lobbyists represent a special arena of influence in Washington."

Not all lawyers who influence government or advise others how to do it register as federal lobbyists, she said. And lawyers and partners in firms that also lobby benefit from the profits of lobbying work, and the access for their firm.

Clinton and Obama are slamming each other and the oil companies in dueling radio ads in Pennsylvania. Both ads exaggerate and twist the facts. Both ads say, in effect, that the opposing candidate is reluctant to offend oil companies due to campaign donations. The truth is they both propose energy plans that are similar, and which the oil giants won't like.

● Obama's ad claims, "Clinton's taken more from big oil and other PACs and lobbyists than any other candidate, Democrat or Republican." Actually, Clinton is fourth and Obama is a close fifth when it comes to donations from oil and gas industries.

● Clinton's ad says that "she's the one who will make oil companies pay" to support her clean-energy initiatives. In fact, both candidates propose to spend $150 billion for energy improvements over 10 years, and both propose to pay for some part of that through higher taxes on oil companies.

● Obama's ad says it is he who is "demanding higher gas mileage standards." Actually, both candidates voted for last year's increase in those standards and both candidates propose further increases in the future. Clinton's proposed increase is a bit higher than Obama's, in fact.

● Clinton faults Obama for voting for the 2005 energy bill, which she calls "the Bush Cheney energy bill." But the compromise Obama voted for was supported by most Senate Democrats and lacked many of the administration's original proposals. As we've said before, it resulted in a small net tax increase on oil companies.

● Obama's ad talks of "gas prices close to four dollars a gallon" in Pennsylvania. Actually, the statewide average for a gallon of regular gasoline is $3.32, according to the American Automobile Association.