I was at the Obama rally Oct. 2 at Adams Field. There, Obama spoke of the evils of special interest groups and lobbyists. The crowd cheered enthusiastically. A few minutes later, Obama said he would talk with the auto industry in order to help fix the problems with the Michigan economy. The crowd again cheered enthusiastically.

Meanwhile, I stood there, dumbfounded at the contradiction I’d just heard and wondering how short a politically savvy person’s memory has to be in order to not see the contradiction. When you meet with a group such as the American auto industry, you are generally meeting with their lobbyists, who come from their special interest groups. The role of an interest group is to meet with politicians and influence policy. Obama is essentially proposing meeting with interest groups and being persuaded.

I understand the general public doesn’t typically like special interest groups; however, I don’t truly understand the dislike. The main argument against them is that, through their campaign contributions, they are buying politicians so that they will vote the way that special interest groups wants them to vote.

The problem is that with the huge diversity in special interest groups, there inevitably are some interest groups that both support and oppose every piece of legislation. These interest groups oftentimes are incredibly well-funded and might have contributed money to many of the politicians, especially the ones who were already sympathetic to their cause. All people see, however, is an interest group financing a particular campaign so a politician will vote a certain way. Regardless of whether he or she did so, there is no indication the politician would have otherwise voted differently.

I also fail to see how people can be against every interest group. As I mentioned earlier, interest groups are incredibly diverse. Hating them all seems a little like hating food — you might hate many kinds, but inevitably you can’t hate them all. Even the “evil” corporate interest groups who push their own policies are not necessarily bad. Yes, it is true they are single-mindedly pushing their own agendas, but that doesn’t mean their interests cannot also be our interests. Even Obama recognized this fact, although he didn’t come out and say it. He, as well as most Michiganians, recognizes that what is in the best interest of the auto industry is many times what is in the best interest for Michigan as a whole.

This concept is not unique to the auto industry. An energy company may push for a grant to research alternative energies. Depending on your ideology, you might find it a good thing that oil companies are lobbying to allow offshore drilling or a radio station is lobbying for less censorship in the media.

The question remains: Why are people so afraid of interest groups? If people are so afraid their elected officials have such little integrity they are willing to auction off their ideology to the highest bidder, why do they keep electing them? The fact is, with the diversity in interest groups and the diversity of politicians receiving money from them, it is inevitable that it sometimes appears some are being bought.

Ultimately, politicians know who’s boss. While campaign contributions are nice, they know it’s their job they are ultimately worried about. Votes, not campaign money, keep them in office. Advertising can only win so many votes.

The problem has a simple solution: If you believe a politician has such a lack of integrity to be bought by interest groups with which you disagree, don’t vote for that candidate.

Alex Freitag is a State News columnist and a political science and history senior. Reach him at freitaga@msu.edu.