MccClatchy Newspapers’ Greg Gordon filed an interesting report yesterday that appears to debunk John McCain’s claim that, after the embarrassment of the Keating Five scandal, he never again pressured regulators on behalf of a friend. In fact, the story says McCain “promoted an Arizona land swap that would’ve benefited a former mentor and partner of the scandal’s central figure.”

The story details McCain’s efforts in the late 1990s to forge a land swap with the U.S. Forest Service that would have benefited the owners of the Spur Cross Ranch, which included a company controlled by former Charles Keating associate Carl Lindner Jr.

Gordon notes that, before the deal fell through, “McCain and an aide pushed for the exchange in more than a half dozen sometimes-testy letters and phone calls up and down the Forest Service’s hierarchy, according to former agency officials and correspondence. McCain’s office even circulated draft legislation that would have overridden the agency’s objection to surrendering national forest land.”

The New York Times’ Larry Rohter reports on a notable absence from McCain’s “economic roundtable” on Monday: lobbyist and former Sen. Phil Gramm. Gramm, along with former Hewlett-Packard CEO Carly Fiorina, has been “shunted off to Siberia, not because of policy disagreements but as the result of gaffes that reflected badly on the Republican candidate.” In Gramm’s case, of course, the gaffe was the infamous “nation of whiners” comment.

As has been noted, the Republican National Committee’s fundraising and spending is what’s really keeping McCain in the race at this point. Those of you interested in the nitty-gritty of how the RNC (and its Democratic counterpart) have been spending and raising money lately will appreciate this report from CQ Politics’ Greg Giroux.

National Journal has a new blog, “Under the Influence,” that focuses on the “lobbying and advocacy industry.” One of its first posts, by Alexis Simendinger, examines how lobbyists feel about being a punching bag in this year’s race. The lobbyists in this story call the focus on their profession “silly and arbitrary” and “at its core…political.” The new blog also offers up a PDF of how an Obama administration plans to deal with lobbyists.

Speaking of Obama, USA Today’s Ken Dilanian notes that business executives are warming up to the Democratic nominee. The story reports that among Obama’s donors, “5,845 list “CEO” or “chief executive” in their title, compared with 2,597 of McCain’s donors.” Interestingly, the executives quoted appear to be doing more than cozying up to a front-runner – their decision to give seems motivated by personal beliefs.

The furor over Sarah Palin’s $150,000 clothing makeover – courtesy of the Republican National Committee – continued on what was a fairly slow news day yesterday. Today, The New York Times’ Patrick Healy and Michael Luo report on how the spending spree may undercut Palin’s “hockey mom” image. Luo and Leslie Wayne also offer up a sidebar on Jeff Larson, the GOP consultant who appears to have been the one doing the actual shopping.

New York Magazine’s Peter Keating offers a primer on what Barack Obama’s money is buying him. The short answer: Tons of ads, an overwhelming advantage on the ground, the ability to fight off John McCain wherever, and whenever, he wants, and a growing sense of inevitability. Keating also assesses the impact of Obama’s $150 million September on the future of the presidential public financing system – he says the current system may effectively be dead, but that when “McCain weeps for campaign-finance reform, his are crocodile tears. For months, McCain has been funneling huge contributions to his campaign through state parties and the Republican National Committee… McCain and the GOP have been trying just as hard as the Dems to circumvent public financing. They just haven’t been as good at it as Obama.”

Finally, the Center for Responsive Politics (the source of much of the campaign finance data we use), offers up a projected final price tag for the 2008 election: $5.3 billion. That figure encompasses not only the presidential race, but also congressional contests. It’s a 27 percent increase over 2004.

Sarah Palin’s understated yet sharp fashion sense has won some attention since John McCain tapped her to be his vice presidential running mate. But it turns out that signature Palin look is courtesy of the Republican National Committee, which, as Politico’s Jeanne Cummings reports, has shelled out $150,000 to dress and accessorize not only Gov. Palin, but her family as well.

As Cummings writes, “The cash expenditures immediately raised questions among campaign finance experts about their legality under the Federal Election Commission’s long-standing advisory opinions on using campaign cash to purchase items for personal use.”

Meanwhile, it looks like the RNC’s main fundraising go-to guy, President Bush, is losing some of his potency. Politico’s Ryan Grim reports that Bush has pulled in “$40 million less than he raised last cycle and $4 million less than Barack Obama raised last month.”

Barack Obama’s $150 million September continues to attract coverage. Today, The Washington Post’s Matthew Mosk and Sarah Cohen point out that only a quarter of the $600 million Obama has raised actually came from people who have donated less than $200 – a reflection of the fact that big money is still essential for anyone seeking high elected office.

Finally, two editorial today – in the Philadelphia Inquirer and The Washington Post – both signal that Obama’s haul confirms that it’s time to fix the public financing system, and that it’s up to the next president to lead the way.

The biggest news of the day (at least that wasn’t from the debate) is something we wrote about last night – AT&T and Verizon setting up cell phone towers on John McCain’s ranch in what appears to be an example of McCain and his wife, Cindy, getting preferential treatment. McCain, of course, has been a friend to the companies on Capitol Hill and has many of their lobbyists serving his campaign.

Here’s the original Washington Post story. Also weighing in today is The New York Times.

Yesterday we mentioned Murray Waas’ story in Huffington Post about William Timmons’ connections to Saddam Hussein. As expected, McCain’s campaign is downplaying the story but now they’re also claiming they’ve “had no associations with any lobbyists – a claim MSNBC’s David Schuster isn’t buying, in this clip.

McCain’s VP pick, Sarah Palin, got a frosty reception yesterday when she trashed Wall Street… in front of a group of wealthy New Yorkers, even earning hisses and boos at some points of her speech. Fox News embed Mosheh Oinounou has the story.

The Wall Street Journal’s Mary Jacoby reports that McCain raised $87 million for the Republican National Committee in August and September. Unfortunately for McCain, it appears the RNC isn’t returning the favor, having pulled out of Wisconsin and Maine, the AP’s Jim Kuhnhenn notes.

Finally, USA Today’s Ken Dilanian and Matt Kelley look at the problems both candidates face in railing against corruption while relying on some questionable people for fundraising. It’s part of their ongoing “Price of Power” series examining the role of money in politics and is definitely worth a read.

An analysis piece posted on CNN.com yesterday goes after what might be the source of John McCain’s recent troubles: “In the end, it’s not relevant who holds what title in the McCain operation, because it is not being run by campaign professionals, but by the Washington lobbying class.”

The sentiment is not surprising, but the source may be: GOP strategist Ed Rollins, known most recently for managing Mike Huckabee’s overachieving presidential campaign.

At least McCain has the political professionals at the Republican National Committee helping him stay in the game. The New York Times’ Leslie Wayne notes that the RNC, “flush with cash,” recently made two $5 million ad buys.

That money from the RNC – which is allowed to take much, much larger donations than candidates themselves can – appears essential to keeping the spending wars competitive. As The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza notes, there is growing speculation that Barack Obama may have raised well over $100 million in September. That would shatter the earlier record set by… Barack Obama in August.

Overall, the presidential race appears to have crossed the $1 billion spending threshhold. As Agence France-Presse notes, “the total bill adds up to 1.3 billion dollars spent during the length of a marathon struggle which started back in early 2007.” And that figure doesn’t appear to include spending by outside groups.

Even the presidential debates aren’t immune from the effects of money, The New York Times’ Leslie Wayne reports. The Commission on Presidential Debates is largely dependent on cash and in-kind contributions from corporations like Anheuser-Busch and the International Bottled Water Association. But the most disconcerting part of this arrangement, as one critic noted, is that “sponsors receive tickets to the events allowing them to ‘hobnob with campaign staff advisers and managers who will be senior advisers in the next administration.’”

Finally, The New York Times’ Robert Pear looks at the health care and pharmaceutical industries’ political contributions and notes that the money is shifting toward the Democrats. The question, of course, is what impact that will have on health care policy in 2009. History suggests the industries’ investments will pay off.

The Republican National Committee made the news over the weekend by demanding a Federal Election Commission audit of Barack Obama’s political donations, citing concerns that the Democratic nominee was illegally accepting money from foreign nationals, the Wall Street Journal and others reported.

The Journal’s take notes that Republicans “didn’t provide evidence of widespread foreign contributions” and that any audit, if approved would take place after election day, two facts that have led to questions over the motives behind the RNC’s action.

John McCain’s VP pick, Sarah Palin, is facing an interesting week. The “Troopergate” report is scheduled for release on Oct. 10, and, according to the Anchorage Daily News’ Wesley Loy, seven state employees are set to honor subpoenas and testify in the legislative investigation. She’s also being sued by a Republican activist over two personal e-mail accounts, The Washington Post’s Matthew Mosk reports. Amid all that, she still managed to attend a California fundraiser on Sunday.

Agence France Presse notes that, even as lobbyists become a “whipping boy” on the campaign trail during the economic crisis, they’ve also come to be more relied upon than ever. But the story ends on an optimistic note for those worried lobbyists will roll back any regulations put into place: “”There is such an enormous popular reaction to what has happened that it will be more difficult than usual for lobbyists to turn back and craft legislation.”

No wonder President Bush was so eager to sign the bailout bill – turns out, according to The Associated Press, that he left for a fundraiser only 28 minutes after signing the legislation.

USA Today reports on Hillary Rodham Clinton as a fundraising draw for Barack Obama. She’s reportedly raised more than $8 million for her former rival for the Democratic nomination.

Speaking of Obama’s fundraising, Newsday turns up a good example of why a ban on lobbyist contributions may be well intentioned, but is prone to loopholes.