President Barack Obama returned to Springfield, Illinois, on Wednesday, nine years to the day after he kicked off his first presidential campaign there, and, just like in 2007, spoke passionately about his desire to reduce the influence of big money in politics.

In 2007, Obama said, “The cynics,¬†and¬†the lobbyists, and the special interests [have]¬†turned our government into a game only they can afford to play. … They think they¬†own this government, but we’re here today to take it back.”

On Wednesday,¬†Obama¬†told the Illinois legislature, “We have to reduce the corrosive influence of¬†money¬†in our politics that makes people feel like the system is rigged.”

This time, of course, Obama is president and could actually do something about it. There are many actions¬†he could take on his own, without approval from Congress or the courts. In particular, he could¬†issue an executive order¬†requiring federal contractors to disclose any ‚Äúdark money‚ÄĚ contributions to politically active nonprofits.

Obama did mention dark money in his speech,¬†saying that it “drowns out ordinary voices.”

He also mentioned the general concept of taking presidential action on his own, but only for comedic value:¬†‚ÄúI don‚Äôt pretend to have all the answers. …¬†If I did I would have already done them through executive action! That was just a joke, guys.‚ÄĚ

Activists have delivered over 1 million signatures to the White House demanding that Obama sign an executive order on dark money. A similar petition set up via the White House website’s system passed the 100,000 signatory threshold requiring the Obama administration to respond.

The White House recently¬†posted a desultory answer to the petition that quotes Obama as saying that “We have to reduce the influence of money in our politics” ¬†— but doesn’t acknowledge¬†the petition’s demand that¬†Obama, not “we,” take specific action. Kurt Walters, campaign manager at Rootstrikers and one of the petition’s organizers, called the response “offensive to the millions of Americans demanding an end to secret money influencing elections.”

In retrospect, Obama’s speech nine years ago¬†was full of foreshadowing. “I understand the skepticism,” he said. “After all, every four years, candidates from both parties make similar promises. … But too many times, after the election is over, and the confetti is swept away, all those promises fade from memory, and the lobbyists and the special interests move in, and people turn away, disappointed as before, left to struggle on their own.”

Related: