SUMMARY: Barack Obama says he is "refusing contributions from PACs and Washington lobbyists" but that is only true in the very strictest sense of the word. He takes money from a range of special interests.

Obama, a freshman senator from Illinois, has made lobbying reform a centerpiece of his presidential campaign. He wants to ban gifts from lobbyists to lawmakers and establish a two-year window for staffers between their government work and lobbying jobs in the private sector. He talks about the need to change the culture in Washington.

"Our leaders have thrown open the doors of Congress and the White House to an army of Washington lobbyists who have turned our government into a game only they can afford to play - a game played on a field that's no longer level, but rigged to always favor their own narrow agendas," he said in a June speech in Manchester, New Hampshire.

To change that, Obama says, his campaign accepts no money from Washington lobbyists or from Political Action Committees or PACs.

That's true, but in the narrowest interpretation of his pledge. He carefully specifies that his fundraising ban applies to those who are registered as lobbyists of the federal government. His campaign has returned $55,000 from registered federal lobbyists so far in 2007.

But Obama has left a few loopholes that allow him to fund his campaign much the way other candidates do -- with contributions from wealthy special interests. While railing against the "stranglehold that lobbyists and special interests have on our democracy," his campaign coffers are filled with money from people who work for corporations and law firms that lobby the federal government.

Some power players are not registered lobbyists, but advise their clients on how to talk to federal officials about policy issues.

For example, Tom Daschle, the former Senate Majority Leader, who endorsed Obama and contributed to his campaign, is a consultant -- not a registered lobbyist -- working with Alston & Bird, a business firm that earned nearly $7.1 million from lobbying in 2006. Obama has received tens of thousands of dollars from other partners in the same firm.

The Center for Responsive Politics, a non-partisan group that tracks campaign money, found that Obama accepted $55,019 from employees who work at lobbying firms but are not registered federal lobbyists. And the campaign accepts money from companies that are not classified as lobbying firms but have lobbying divisions.

Spouses of lobbyists also can give donations. One example: Ben Barnes, a federally registered lobbyist, has given contributions to Hillary Clinton, Bill Richardson, Joe Biden and Chris Dodd, but not to Obama or John Edwards.

However, Barnes' wife, Melanie Barnes, has given to Obama and Edwards on the same dates and in the same amounts as her husband's contributions to the other candidates. She lists her occupation as homemaker.

Citizens for Responsive Politics considers Melanie Barnes' donation to be a contribution from the lobbying industry because her source of income would appear to be from her husband.

CRP cites many other examples where the Obama campaign accepted donations from employees of firms that lobby.

Obama's campaign accepted $187,750 from his former law firm, Sidley Austin, which earned $4 million from lobbying activities in 2006. He got contributions of $112,650 from Skadden, Arps et al, which earned $1,220,000 in lobbying income last year.

Obama also distinguishes between federal lobbyists and state lobbyists, allowing him to accept the financial support of people in the influence industry -- outside of Washington.

South Florida lobbyist Russ Klenet and his wife will host a fundraising event in Broward County on August 25. Klenet represents state groups such as the Florida Association of Mortgage Brokers, but also companies such as Match.com and Election Systems & Software.

Members of Akerman Senterfitt, a legal and consulting firm with 500 lawyers and consultants in offices in Washington, DC and around the country, gave Obama $6,000. The firm did $3.4 million in lobbying business in 2006.

Obama did not receive any contributions from federally registered lobbyists at the firm, but a message to clients on the web site explains how the lines between state and federal lobbying efforts blur: "With an active, properly registered lobbying team in Tallahassee, a savvy and generous internal political committee and an involved Federal PAC, Akerman Senterfitt can provide government relations clients with an enviable level of access."

Jen Psaki, campaign spokeswoman, defends the distinction between federal and state lobbyists. "Federal lobbyists lobby the federal government on legislation that Senator Obama has jurisdiction over - which is why he does not accept their money. State lobbyists lobby the state government on legislation that Barack Obama has no jurisdiction over - which is why he accepts their money."

The other big element in Obama's stand against the world of special interests is his refusal to take PAC money. While this may be noble, experts say it isn't much of a sacrifice.

Massie Ritsch, Communications Director for the Center for Responsive Politics, says it is not particularly risky to eschew PAC money since it "amounts to only about 1 percent of the money in any presidential campaign. So you're not leaving a whole lot of money on the table when you say 'I'm not taking PAC money.'"

Anthony Corrado, a professor of government at Colby College and an expert on campaign financing, agrees that PAC money is of limited importance in a presidential race. "Generally, many PACs don't give to presidential candidates because giving $5,000 in the context of a $50 million campaign doesn't give the PAC much influence. Historically what the presidential candidates receive from PACs is not a major share of their funding."

Thomas Mann, Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution calls, Obama's policy on PAC money, an "inconsequential promise."

Obama acknowledges that his pledge has loopholes.

He told the Associated Press recently that he swims "in the same muddy water" that corrupts the political system. "My argument is not that we're perfect," he says. "I suffer from the same original sin of all politicians, which is we've got to raise money. But my argument has been and will continue to be that the disproportionate influence of lobbyists and special interests is a problem in Washington (and) in state capitals."

"Right now," says Public Citizens' campaign finance lobbyist, Craig Holman, "all of these presidential candidates are in an impossible situation. We are going to see a billion dollar campaign for the first time in American history. And in that kind of spending race, the idea that you can run a clean campaign by turning down dirty money is at best a fantasy hope."

Holman says Obama is "stuck in a very difficult situation of trying to campaign on cleaning up Washington and at the same time having to raise half a billion dollars from special interest groups that want favors out of him. He's doing the best he can."