Unions: to whence, and for whom?

Gallup notes that for the first time since it started polling Americans on their approval or disapproval of labor unions, the approval rating dipped below 50%. Only 48% of Americans now say they approve of labor unions.

Hopefully this sort of data bodes ill for the Employee Free Choice Act and its related wranglings on the Hill. In any case, I find it unfortunate that unions have so effectively turned what was once the ultimate act of employee solidarity into a synonym for expensive, self-centered, self-destructive protectionism.

This Just In. Not really.

So with all the 2008 election hoopla about "change" and "hope" and "happy" and "sunshine" and "butterflies" and "kittens"...and "no more lobbyists influencing the government." Frankly, the kittens had a better chance of making real change in DC than any restrictions on lobbyists. As the Washington Post reported on Monday,

"President Obama ordered federal officials to disclose their contacts with lobbyists trying to influence how the government doles out money to jump-start the economy. Yet few such communications have been reported even though lobbyists say they are busier than ever with the multibillion-dollar stimulus.

Since the $787 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act passed in February, federal agencies have reported 197 contacts with lobbyists about stimulus grants. In August, the entire government reported only eight such lobbying contacts. The Pentagon, which controls about $7.4 billion in stimulus spending, reported just one lobbying contact so far this year. The Homeland Security Department, with at least $3 billion to spend, reported none."

Are there really many historical examples of political structures being run apart from money, relationships, and influence? I would argue non, simply because typically the end game of politics is power - the power to set priorities, the power to appoint people, the power to distribute resources. And power is going to attract those who stand to win or lose by the decisions made. So I'm not sure how 2008 voters, much less anyone who has worked in government, could envision a political discourse, in which, magically, everyone would stop caring about their interests and let "the government" proceed without "outside influence"? Thoughts?