Good point. My impression is that if the public knew all the different relationships and conflicts of interest that exist in all branches of government they would be shocked at just how deep and blatant this is - even if some of those involved don't think they're ‘being influenced’.
‘Dinners’ that raise huge cash are just one issue that comes to mind. It's clearly a way of influence peddling and gaining access that the average citizen who can't drop tens of thousands of dollars for ‘dinner’ is excluded from. From a NYT article in July of this year:
“In exchange for a check of up to $32,400, Hollywood Democrats will be able to hear President Obama speak later today at the Los Angeles home of Shonda Rhimes, the producer of the ABC show “Scandal.””
“When he appeared last week at a similar event for the House Majority PAC, at a private home on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, the group insisted that the event wasn’t a fundraiser because there were no tickets or cost of admission.
“The president is appearing at the event only as a featured speaker and special guest, and is not asking for funds or donations,” a PAC official said in a statement to the White House press pool.
But the PACs do ask the guests for money after the president leaves. Everyone understands how it works: You get to mingle with the president, and shake his hand, and then a bit later you bring out your checkbook and write some very big numbers. The Seattle dinner cost $25,000 a person, but no one was prevented from giving ten times as much.”