By becoming a loud vocal critic of lobbyists, a politician is able to take greater control over the lobbying process and then use that control to an advantage.

Since we can’t see the intentions of others, it is difficult for the public to know when a politician’s rhetoric is part of a genuine effort to diminish the power of special interests, or a partisan effort to gain influence with special interests.

Two things came to mind while I read it. In our current way of electing political officials, we seem to left with special interest groups. Politicians are elected when they raise money for campaigns. Special interest groups give them that money. History shows that it almost always the politician who raises the most money that gets elected.

My next thought came from your Bastiat quote (that quote is from The Law if I remember correctly). In a society lacking in public virtue, citizens are left with the choice of self-interest. When self-interest is viewed as their only choice, the will always turn to legalizing plunder when times are tough. It’s one of the Darwinian views of human nature.

I’m still not completely sold that scaling back government would reduce corporate abuse, though we’ve already tread that ground which goes back to libertarian foundations and that isn’t really the point of this post. Uh… sorry to be the first to comment again :).