Watchdog Blog

Abramoff, the man and the mentality

Jack Abramoff has become a household name over the past year.   All one needs to do is mention him in order to bring attention to the scandalous ethics abuses which have involved bribes, lies, Indian casinos, lavish trips to golf courses in Europe, and secretly funneling illegal contributions through charities.

While most of the media has focused on these stories, not much attention has been given to looking into the personality and character of the man who created a massive web of corruption throughout Washington D.C. and the rest of the country.  Who is Jack Abramoff?  What type of person is able to justify these actions to himself?  How does his mind work?

We get a glimpse inside that mind in the recently released 357-page report of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee, which details Abramoff's personal email conversations with his colleagues.  The Hill writes about two in particular, which show an astounding level of disrespect and even contempt for his clients - clients he was busy ripping off at the time.

In one email, Abramoff told a friend he was unable to go to lunch because he had a lunch with “the Gabon guys,” referring to representatives from the small, West African country.  When asked, “What is Gabon,” Abramoff offered a racial slur.

In another email, Abramoff labeled an Indian tribe he was working with as “troglodytes,” who were a “lower form of existence.”

Such deplorable bigotry and racism against anyone is disgusting, but in these cases Abramoff was actually speaking about his own clients. Should it surprise us that this same person was only too willing to subvert our democracy?

-Daniel Werner

One more down... how many to go? White House aide found guilty in Abramoff scandal

Today's conviction of former White House aide David Safavian, on charges that he lied and obstructed justice in the investigation of his dealings with disgraced former super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, is a breath of fresh air. (See today's headlines, below.) While a number of players in the wide-ranging corruption probe, including Abramoff himself, pled guilty to charges, today's conviction follows the first trial coming out of the Abramoff scandal.

Every once in a while, justice is served.

The larger and more important question, though, is who will follow? Safavian was found guilty on one count for lying about the infamous Abramoff-organized trip to St. Andrew's golf course in Scotland in 2002. Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) was on that trip, and Ney's former chief of staff Neil Volz (who has pled guilty), testifed against Safavian. Will Ney be the next one indicted? What about other inductees in our Hall of Shame, many of them under scrutiny for their ties to Abramoff? Given that Safavian was the top White House procurement officer, will his conviction once again raise the question of Bush's ties to Abramoff?

The even larger question, of course, is whether additional convictions of current lawmakers will bring about changes in the way Congress does business, including better ethics rules and lobbying reform than the toothless jokes Congress offered up this spring. And if not, will that failure then lead to a reaction by the electorate in November...and a new crop of legislators more interested in doing the people's business rather than the business of their campaign contributors and lobbyists?

-Gordon Clark

Personal reflection on DeLay's last day

Tom DeLay: "I exit, as always, stage right."

... and he leaves us with a canned closer that has been used many times before. Oh well, originality was never one of DeLay's strong points -- winning at any cost is what DeLay shall be remembered for in the history books.

DeLay epitomizes the very worst, and dangerous, attributes of a person attempting to rise in power, partly for the sake of ideology but also for the sake of attaining power itself. DeLay is an outspoken ideological conservative, but his tactics reveal just as much love for power.

He was one of the architects of the "Republican revolution" in 1994 to sweep out corruption and the stranglehold on democratic procedures in the House that the Democratic majority at the time personified. But he swiftly rose up the ranks of power by embracing -- and taking to new heights -- those same strategies of corruption and authoritarianism in the House.

All of us are familiar with the corruption Tom DeLay represents when it comes to money and politics. Less known, but of even greater concern, is the strict authoritarianism in the House of Representatives that DeLay ushered in and is leaving us with. He has re-written the rules of procedure by solidifying unitary control over committee leaders and the Rules Committee.

Under the autocracy that DeLay built, never before has floor debate in Congress been so silenced. Most bills now have closed or restrictive rules attached to them, which means that debate and amendments cannot be considered. When companion bills from the House and the Senate are sent to conference committee to be ironed out, DeLay's autocracy would frequently lock out all the Democrats and even dissenting Republicans from discussions, allowing the autocracy to write the final legislation, insert any earmarks it chose and then push the bill for a final vote with no opportunity for amendments.

Even when the House ethics committee rather timidly "admonished" DeLay in 2004 for his unethical behavior, DeLay's autocracy had three disloyal Republican members on the committee fired and replaced with those who were known to be loyal to DeLay.

Sometimes this ability to win at any cost is misconstrued as effectiveness. It is far more dangerous than that. It is a deep-seated disdain for democracy, for the democratic procedures and civil liberties that get in Tom DeLay's way.

At least today democracy won.

Good riddance DeLay -- though I know your hostility to American democracy will continue to be felt as you enter the world of K Streetlobbyists.

Mr. Smith goes to Paris... and Italy, and Hawaii, and...

While on tour last year, popular HBO comedian Bill Mahrer remarked on the revelations of lavish congressional junkets emerging at the time, many of them connected to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff.  Mahrer noted that if someone took him to Las Vegas, and paid for the travel, food and booze and a nice room, he would be awfully grateful to that person. He might even be inclined to do them a favor in return.

Just how many legislative favors, I have to wonder, did members of Congress do in return for the 23,000 trips that were given to them by corporations and other private interests between January 2000 and June 2005 - trips worth nearly $50 million, and which included corporate jet rides, $500-a-night hotels, and exotic destinations including Paris, Hawaii, Italy, and, of course, that golf course in Scotland?

These numbers were discussed in The Washington Post's coverage of the new Center for Public Integrity study on Congressional travel (see Corruption News Roundup, below). House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) promised in the wake of Abramoff's guilty plea to ban such privately funded travel, but those promises turned to dust, and Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) won election as House majority leader on the specific promise not to ban such travel. (Not surprisingly, his office was one of the biggest recipients of the privately-funded trips.)

Kevin Madden, Boehner's spokesperson, was quoted in the article as saying that such travel "’leads to greater understanding of the issues' at no cost to taxpayers." While an objective observer might reasonably ask how discussing Social Security at a Colorado ski resort leads to "greater understanding" than discussing it in a Washington office, the assertion that these junkets come at "no cost to taxpayers" is just flat-out wrong.

It is wrong because these freebies that members of Congress, their families and staff receive from corporate America are part of a system of legalized bribery, a system that persuades members to approve multi-billion dollar subsidies for the corporations that pay for the trips, or to pass monstrous corporate giveaways such as the $500 billion-plus Medicare prescription drug bill – all of which cost the taxpayers dearly.

No reform of Congress will be complete until such trips are banned or severely restricted.

In the meantime, though, I certainly understand the desire to go to Paris or Hawaii. Regular Americans like to go to beautiful and exotic places like that too, and we have a word for such trips: vacation. Members of Congress might want to look that one up.

-Gordon Clark

All heck breaking loose in Congress

It seems that the FBI's weekend raid of Rep. William Jefferson's (D-La.) congressional office has done what months and months of scandal could not: it has caused the leadership of the House to respond in a bi-partisan fashion.

Regrettably, the joint letter from House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), was not a clarion call for members of Congress to clean up their act, nor was it a joint admission that the recently passed "reform" legislation doesn't even begin to go far enough. Instead, it was a demand that the FBI immediately return all the files seized from Jefferson's office. (See Corruption Headlines, below.)

This is not to say that there aren't legitimate separation-of-powers questions here. But the raid would likely never have happened were it not for the rampant corruption which exists in Congress today, and the complicity of Congressional leadership, as they turn a blind eye with a nonexistent ethics process amid spreading allegations of wrongdoing.

ABC News has reported that Hastert is "in the mix" of the corruption probe, and certainly former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) and his staff were at the center of the Abramoff scandal. And the House ethics committee just got around to announcing an investigation of Jeffersion this month, even though he's been under a dark cloud of suspicion for more than year - the $90,000 stash in his freezer was discovered in a raid of his home last August.

It is also interesting to note that this Congress seems all too willing to allow the Bush administration's questionable infringements on Americans' civil rights, from the Patriot Act through the NSA wiretapping, yet when one of their own has his office raided, then stop the presses, it's suddenly time to stand up for privacy rights. As Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) noted, the electorate "will come to one conclusion: that congressional leaders are trying to protect their own from valid investigations."

If members of Congress don't want the FBI cleaning out their offices, maybe they should consider cleaning house themselves. Or will this be a task left for voters in November?

-Gordon Clark

FBI raids Rep. Jefferson's congressional office

The ethical questions surrounding Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) reached a fever pitch over the weekend as FBI agents raided his congressional office.  CNN reported that the search, which lasted nearly 18 hours, marked the first time the FBI has ever investigated a lawmaker’s Capitol Hill office.

The search coincided with the release of court papers stating agents found $90,000 in cash in Jefferson’s freezer last August.  There’s nothing illegal about keeping your savings in “various frozen food containers,” however odd that might be.  But the serial numbers on the bills matched those from bills in the $100,000 payment Jefferson took from undercover FBI agents, with the exchange captured on videotape. (Jefferson actually joked on tape about the possibility of being under FBI surveillance.)

The office raid comes on the heels of iGate CEO Vernon L. Jackson and staff aide Brett M. Pfeffer’s pleading guilty to charges of bribing the congressman.  Jefferson has maintained his innocence all along and promised to fight the allegations.  But after Jackson admitted he “directly and indirectly, corruptly gave, offered and promised things of value” to the congressman, it’s becoming more difficult to believe Jefferson’s blanket denials.

Like every American, Rep. Jefferson deserves the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in court.  However, the dark cloud hanging over the congressman makes it impossible for him to fairly represent his constituents – and given that he represents New Orleans, his constituents need strong representation in Washingtonnow more than ever.

On April 27, Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) took to the House floor to decry the weak lobbying reform bill, declaring the American people “expect and deserve better.” She promised if Democrats retook control of the House, they would pass stronger reforms and end the “culture of corruption in this House of Representatives.”

The growing scandal around Rep. Jefferson provides Ms. Pelosi with a unique opportunity to demonstrate the sincerity of her call for ethics reform.  If Democrats are serious about cleaning up Washington, they could start by cleaning up their own house.  Nothing would send a stronger statement to voters that Democrats are serious about ethics than Nancy Pelosi standing in front of the Capitol urging a Democrat to step down.   At the very least Jefferson should recuse himself from any debate or votes which are directly or indirectly related to the matter under investigation – as Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-W. Va.) did when he stepped aside from the ethics committee’s pending resolution of an investigation into his finances.

It’s easy to criticize your opponents when they go astray. It takes true leadership to acknowledge mistakes within your own party and work to correct them.   If Minority Leader Pelosi wants to be Majority Leader or House Speaker Pelosi she needs to show that she can hold her party to the same ethical standards she demands of others by calling for William Jefferson to step aside at this time.

-Collin Jergens

The Bush/Cheney "Ethical Sleaze" Tour

The late, great Washington Post columnist Mary McGrory once wrote that the Bush administration has a habit of "using shamelessness as a political weapon."

While she wrote that during earlier, more carefree days for the president, it continues to characterize an administration that has rarely seen an ethical problem worth its concern, let alone its condemnation. Oh, and what the heck - why not just go ahead and actually raise a little money in the midst of all those ethical improprieties?

That is, incredibly enough, exactly what Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney are doing during the next several days, as the president travels first to Kentucky, home of recently indicted Republican Gov. Ernie Fletcher, to do a little fund raising. Not to be outdone, the vice president will travel next week to California where he will do fund-raisers for Republican Reps. John Doolittle and Richard Pombo, both of whom face unexpectedly tough races, largely due to ethics scandals swirling around them. (Doolittle in particular has numerous close ties to Jack Abramoff, but both gentlemen are inductees in our Hall of Shame.) For good measure, Cheney will also do a fund-raiser for Brian Bilbray, the Republican candidate to replace imprisoned and disgraced former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham.

Any chance Bush and Cheney will focus on the need to clean up corruption during their fund-raising pitches? Probably about as much as there is of Cheney giving the names of those oil company executives he met with to formulate energy policy, or of Bush admitting that yes, actually, he does know Mr. Abramoff rather well.

There actions could, however, unintentionally assist those of us who are fighting corruption. Just by following their fund-raising tours for the rest of this election year, it could be easy to tell who has the biggest ethics problems in Congress...

-Gordon Clark

The ethics committee returns - but will it do any good?

The House ethics committee has opened three different investigations - after nearly 16 months of inactivity. Most notably, this marks the first time in a year and a half the committee has acknowledged the flurry of ethics scandals which have overrun the Capitol.

The Clean Up Washington campaign has been critical of the moribund ethics committee for some time now. Just to be sure I was giving the ethics committee a fair chance before writing this blog, I went to their website to read up on their work investigating the Jack Abramoff scandal. Even without having launched any formal investigations, surely the ethics committee would have looked into the largest congressional scandal in years, one that involves multiple members and staff and millions of dollars. So what does the House ethics committee website have to say about the scandal?

“0 documents match your search Jack Abramoff”

Click here to see it for yourself or go to their homepage and find out what else the ethics committee hasn’t been investigating.

I don’t want to minimize the importance of the ethics committee opening investigations into corruption allegations against Reps. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) and William Jefferson (D-La.), as well as the ever-widening bribery investigation around the now-imprisoned Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.). This is an important first step, even if it should have been taken long, long ago. It’s just difficult to have much confidence in a committee that worked so hard to resist even holding a meeting. Without profound changes to the congressional ethics process it seems unlikely the just-announced investigations will result in anything more serious than “letters of admonition,”  such as the ones sent to then House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) in 2004. Sadly, even those letters proved too harsh a punishment for a member of the House, as Republican leaders responded by relieving the committee chairman of his duties and stocking the committee with party loyalists.

It has become abundantly clear that politicians cannot police politicians. How many more members and their staff must be indicted or plead guilty before Congress enacts real reform? The plethora of congressional scandals shows once again the need for an Office of Public Integrity, at an absolute minimum, to establish independent enforcement and restore public credibility to the ethics enforcement process. If Congress doesn’t start making real changes now it looks more and more like voters will in November.

-Collin Jergens

Another Day, Another Scandal - On the "High Ethical Standards" of a Republican Operative

While we have noted in this blog that there are at least a few Democrats embroiled in ethics scandals, a fact that has partially undercut their ability (or willingness) to attack what they call the Republican “culture of corruption,” one can hardly read the news on any given day without coming across yet another example of Republican operatives or elected officials who are neck deep in corruption – and apparently don’t see anything wrong with it.

Today’s example is the sentencing in a U.S. District Court today of former Republican National Committee regional political director James Tobin, who was found guilty of criminally violating federal communications law for his participation in the scheme to disrupt Democratic party phone lines during the 2002 New Hampshire election. According to the Washington Post, that (illegal) effort helped Republican John Sununu win his Senate seat by a margin of 19,151 votes.

What is most remarkable about this is not simply that the illegal scheme happened at all, but that the Republican National Committee went on to pay at least $2.8 million for Tobin’s legal defense. Could there be any connection between these payments and evidence brought up during Tobin’s trial showing that he made no less than 22 phone calls to the White House on election day, starting just two hours after the illegal phone jamming was shut down?

The RNC has denied any complicity in the illegal activity, but they have also been unwilling, in the Post article or in any other this author has read, to categorically denounce the phone jamming scheme or distance themselves from those involved. As Craig Shirley of the Republican public affairs firm Shirley & Bannister wrote in a Washington Post commentary, by covering Tobin’s legal fees, “the GOP appears to sanction and institutionalize corruption within the party.”

You can say that again.

Federal prosecutors are seeking an 18-24 month prison term for Tobin, but his lawyers argue that he has suffered enough already, saying – and I’m not making this up – that “Mr. Tobin is a man with high ethical standards…. Seeing his reputation destroyed… and a profession [politics] he loves made unavailable to him has caused him great pain.”

High ethical standards? Great pain? There was no mention, of course, of the pain caused to voters who were unable to vote because of Tobin’s illegal activity, or the pain of Granite State citizens in knowing that the democratic process was undermined in their election.

Apparently, according to some Republicans, simply getting caught is punishment enough. I hope they’ll excuse me if I decline to hold my breath while waiting for Bush, the RNC or Republican congressional leaders to condemn Tobin for his crimes.

-Gordon Clark

Corruption Nation

The New York Times reported today that the FBI's focus on public corruption now includes more than 2,000 - that's two thousand - investigations. "I don't think anybody recognized the number and quality of cases we would generate," said Chris Swecker, an FBI criminal enforcement official.

The Times believes that "the results suggest that wrongdoing by public officials at all levels of government is deeply rooted and widespread"... something much of the American public seems to have already figured out.

While this large total involves investigations at all levels of government, the list includes very high-profile targets, such as the wide-ranging probe into L'Affair Abramoff, and the rapidly expanding federal look-see into the bribery scandal centered on former (and now imprisioned) Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.)  (See the Corruption Headlines below for new developments in that story.) The Times does generously note, however, that "not all high-profile cases involve Republicans."

Most amusing of all, the paper calls the initiative "one of the Bush administration's least known anticrime efforts." I'd venture to guess that it's one of the least known within the Bush Administration itself. After all, what are the chances that this administration has been actively pushing criminal investigations into the activities of the Republican-controlled Congress, investigations which are not only leading to indictments and prison terms but which might also cost them dearly in the mid-term elections? Certainly this was not Karl Rove's brainchild.

As FBI director Robert S. Mueller III remarked, "... you come to realize first of all that public corruption tears the fabric of a democratic society. You lose faith in public officials, it leads to cynicism, it leads to distrust in government."

You can say that again, brother.

-Gordon Clark

Another aide bites the dust. How long can DeLay, Ney and others maintain their innocence?

Rep. Bob Ney's (R-Ohio) former chief of staff Neil Volz pleaded guilty today to charges stemming from the Justice Department bribery and corruption investigation of convicted former Republican superlobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Like Tony Rudy and Michael Scanlon, two former top aides to Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) who have also entered guilty pleas in the wide-ranging investigation, Volz went to work for Abramoff after leaving his government job - further cementing Abramoff's reputation as a one man revolving door operation between Congress and K Street.

With this latest guilty plea from a top aide, it increasingly beggars the imagination to conceive how members of Congress such as DeLay and Ney who were deeply invovled with Abramoff can continue to maintain their innocence. Their own legal problems aside (DeLay is under indictment in Texas for money-laundering and Ney is acknowledged to be "Representative #1" in the Justice Department's investigation), how is it possible that so many of their top aides can plead guilty to engaging in criminal conspiracies - with indications that the conspiracies might have been hatched while they worked in Congressional offices - and yet their bosses knew absolutely nothing about it?

Perhaps it is the case - only time and further investigation will tell. But even if it is, should these members (and others who are in the investigation's crosshairs) not then humbly resign for gross incompetence? How can the American people expect them to run our country when they cannot even run their own offices?

-Gordon Clark

What does a $2800 dinner buy?

How about a $10 million government contract?

This latest glaring example of official corruption involves Rep. Katherine Harris (R-Fla.), the "Queen of Recount" from the 2000 Presidential election, and Mitchell Wade, the disgraced defense contractor who has already pled guilty to bribing convicted former Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham, and also to making $32,000 in illegal contributions to Harris' 2004 campaign.

According to an article in the Orlando Sentinel, Wade then started wooing Harris for a $10 million contract for his company with a $2800 dinner at one of Washington D.C.'s more expensive restaurants. Over dinner he promised to organize a fundraiser for her 2006 Senate race, and simultaneously asked her if she would submit his contract request in the appropriations process. Harris complied, even thought the request was weeks late for the appropriations deadline and poorly written. And when her staff demurred, Harris, according to their statements, adamanently insisted that it be forwarded to the defense appropriations subcommittee. (The subcommittee ultimately rejected the request.)

In her defense, Harris told the Tampa Tribune in July of last year that she "knew little" about the $10 million project and insisted she had taken no special action to support it. As for the ultra-expensive dinner, she insisted for months that she had paid for her own food, only admitting recently that Wade had picked up the tab. She called this an "oversight" on her part and proceeded to contribute $100 to a Jacksonville ministry, saying that amount would "more than adequately compensate for the cost of my beverage and appetizers." (My goodness, but that Mr. Wade must eat and drink a lot!)

So Rep. Harris gives $100 as her share of a $2800 dinner with a convicted bribe artist, at the same time she's willing to stick taxpayers with a $10 million tab for an unnecessary defense project. Sounds to me like someone is bucking for inclusion in our Hall of Shame - and/or an indictment from the Justice Department.

-Gordon Clark

Abramoff-White House meetings to be revealed - and corruption news goes international

We at Clean Up Washington can barely contain ourselves. As reported in today's top story, below, the Secret Service will release records of when convicted superlobbyist Jack Abramoff's visited the White House - and with whom he visited. This should be an interesting test for new White House spokesperson Tony Snow....

And if you thought the effort to control lobbyists in the U.S. Congress is running into some rough sledding, just take a look across the pond. The European Union, where lobbyists seem to be proliferating (many from the U.S., and many of them starting to adopt U.S.-style lobbyist practices), is also slowly backing away from the problem. In an interview about the EU's stance on the issue, Estonian Commissioner Siim Kallas explains that "to start legislation with compulsory registration [of lobbyists] would face enormous legal difficulties. We would not achieve anything until after the end of our mandate, that is quite sure." Currently there is no registry at all of lobbyists in the EU, and Kallas justified his proposal for a voluntary registration system on the grounds that the lobbying firms were preparing to challenge a mandatory registration system every step of the way.

Lastly, for a fairly thorough summary of the scandals and resulting lack of action here in the U.S., check out "U.S. Grapples with Corruption and Loses" in - of all places - the Tehran Times. (Yes, that Tehran.) They seem to have a pretty good bead on the situation after interviews with our own Legislative Representative Craig Holman, Public Citizen's lobbyist on ethics and campaign finance legislation, who concludes by noting "today Capitol Hill is being run by and for corporations. The motive here is profit and it has nothing to do with what is good for the country." My goodness - even repressive theocracies feel emboldened to rub our government's nose in our own corruption....

-Gordon Clark

The Post agrees: Rep. Doolittle's fundraising stinks

You might remember our blog post from last week, in which we pointed out the astoundingly questionable fundraising practices of Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif).  Not only does Doolittle pay his campaign fundraising company on commission - a practice that violates the ethics codes of national fundraising associations because it encourages opportunism - but the company just happens to employ his wife, and only his wife... and it operates out of their suburban Virginia home!

In a strongly-worded editorial on Friday, the Washington Post agreed that Doolittle's fundraising practices "couldn't smell more," and that they amount to the congressman and his wife skimming 15% off the top of all campaign contributions to enlarge their own personal bank account.

We thank the Post wholeheartedly for agreeing with our condemnation of Doolittle's unethical practices. And members of Congress still wonder why the public doesn't trust them....

-Gordon Clark

All In The Family - Rep. Doolittle's family, that is

Poor Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) has a lot of ethics issues on his hands these days.

He is already under investigation by the Department of Justice for his multiple connections to - and legislative favors apparently performed for - convicted former superlobbyist Jack Abramoff. He also helped pass $37 million in contracts the military did not request to the contractor who bribed fomer Rep. (and now federal inmate) Randy "Duke" Cunningham. (You can read all about Rep. Doolittle's tainted record in our Hall of Shame.)

Now his campaign fundraising practices - specifically, the 15% commission his wife earns on every contribution raised by her company - is raising a few eyebrows.

While he insists that it's all legal and "standard practice," the national Association of Fundraising Professionals fired off a letter to let him know that, in fact, commission-based fundraising is clearly prohibited by the long-standing ethics code of their association and is definitely NOT standard practice in the industry. (They have learned from experience that paying commissions for fundraising tends to place the incentive on personal gain for the fundraiser rather than the best interest of the client.) "This is a big deal for us," said Association head Paulette Maehara.

The one-person fundraising company, Sierra Dominion, which is run by Doolittle's wife Julie out of the couple's suburban Virginia home, has collected $180,000 from Doolittle's campaign since September of 2003. This includes a percentage of the $70,000 that Doolittle accepted from clients of Jack Abramoff, contributions that he has refused to return, and from businesses associated with the Cunningham bribery scandal.

While continuing to defend the clearly unethical practice, Doolittle added in a February interview with the Sacramento Bee that "some [people] just don't like the family being involved in this."

Well, can you imagine that? I mean, who could possibly have a problem with a member of Congress raising money from lobbyists and businesses later convicted for bribing public officials, and feathering his own nest by passing along thousands of those dollars to his own wife working out of his own home - and through a fee arrangment viewed as unethical by industry experts, no less?

With ethics acumen like that, it's surprising the Republican party hasn't tried to make Rep. Doolittle chair of the House ethics committee.

Of course, he has hinted lately that his wife might be willing to consider changing the arrangement. Perhaps the Justice Department will remind him of some changes he needs to make in his other professional practices as well....

-Gordon Clark

He works hard for the money...

As reported in the Houston Chronicle, Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) raised approximately $500,000 - more than a third of his current campaign warchest of $1.4 million - in the six weeks before he announced his pending resignation from Congress.

DeLay can use the money for a number of purposes, including adding it to his legal defense fund - see our previous blog - for which he has already separately raised more than $2 million since 2000. (Goodness, now how would he have guessed way back in 2000 that he would need a legal defense fund??)

Remarkably enough, DeLay's campaign website was still soliciting campaign contributions as of yesterday, with the statement "To continue to win, I need your help and your most generous contribution today" incongruously posted along with his resignation statement.

Some of those recent contributors quoted in the article claim they have no problem with DeLay using the money as he sees fit. While he will indeed have plenty of legal expenses on his hands, with a pending trial on money laundering charges in Texas and the federal Abramoff investigation still unfolding, is it possible that some contributors still expect to buy some favors from DeLay in his next political reincarnation - after jail if necessary?

-Gordon Clark

Irresponsible Leadership

Even as Congressman-turned-lobbyist Vic Fazio (D-Calif.) asked the audience at a recent Washington lobbyists' dinner to "rededicate" itself "to integrity," the bigger buzz was which high-powered lobbying firm might hire one of the other attendees that night: the recently resigned Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.). Said Charles R. Black Jr., chairman of BKSH & Associates, a lobbying firm, "Tom DeLay has been the greatest strategist for getting legislation through the House in his generation," adding, "he could come over here and be my boss if he wanted to be."

The fact that DeLay was admonished four times by the House ethics committee for his "strategies" of arm-twisting, threats and selling access to corporate lobbyists, or that he is under indictment for money-laundering in Texas, or that he is under investigation in Washington for his involvement in the wholesale bribery efforts of his "dear friend" Jack Abramoff, seems of little consequence to the special interest lobbying world. All they know is that Tom DeLay can get their legislative priorities through Congress, and how he does it is apparently of little consequence.

Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised. While there are certainly corporate CEOs who display genuine impulses of social responsibility, you don't find them represented too often in the world of high-powered Washington lobbyists.

But would it be too much to ask for more leadership on ethics from members of Congress - even Democrats?

Maybe so. While the Democratic members of the House have been (rightly) decrying Republican plans to offer their milquetoast "reform" package without the opportunity for debate or amendment, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's (D-Calif.) spokesperson said last week that Rep. Pelosi saw no need for a special Office of Public Integrity to independently investigate possible ethics violations. She thinks most Democrats believe the House ethics committee should be able to do this work on its own - even though it has become clear over the past year to all but the most obtuse observers that partisan deadlock on the committee makes this all but impossible.

We hope that many House Democrats will prove the minority leader wrong when the OPI comes up for a vote later this month. But how could a Congressional leader like Rep. Pelosi be so blind on this issue? As respected ethics expert Norm Orenstein of the American Enterprise Institute diplomatically notes in his current Roll Call editorial, "When it comes to ethics, most House Members of both parties have their heads set so far up their posterior orifices they are unlikely ever to see the sun shine again."

-Gordon Clark

The sweet victory of Tom DeLay's exit - thanks to you

Tom DeLay's resignation last week was a sweet victory for those of us fighting corruption in Congress - and it had everything to do with public pressure generated from activists like you!

Listen to Clean Up Washington Field Director Gordon Clark's "One Minute Analysis" of DeLay's departure, and the next steps in the fight to take back our government, at

http://www.citizen.org/audio/DeLayDepartureTY_56k.mp3

We also urge everyone to bring the issue up with their Representatives while they are back in your districts during this Congressional recess, which lasts through April 24. Check out the Action Center for sample questions you can ask, and a brief but thorough guide on how to hold your Rep's feet to the fire while they're at home.

Thanks again, for everything that you do!

-Gordon Clark

Tom DeLay - the next Pat Robertson?

Reports of DeLay's political death are greatly exaggerated, if a number of recent news stories are any indication.

DeLay, who has long worn his conservative religious beliefs on his sleeve, (his understanding of ethics resides elsewhere), is now claiming that he resigned from Congress not because of indictments, a federal probe, or the possibility of losing an election, but because "God wanted him to… and that He has bigger plans for DeLay," plans that apparently involve reshaping the federal government to meet his fundamentalist Christian worldview.  An op-ed in the Washington Times agrees DeLay is heading in this direction, noting that he “might be just the fellow to organize a genuine grass-roots conservative evangelical political movement with the clout to advance its issues within the GOP,” whether the Republicans like it or not.

DeLay is now planning to hit the pulpits (and bank accounts) of conservative evangelical congregations around the country, and his sketchy past, problems with his own family, and record of ethical misconduct (if not actual crime) in Congress seem to be no impediment. As the Rev. Rick Scarborough, DeLay's pastor, said while introducing him to a Christian conference just last week – we kid you not – “This is a man, I believe, God has appointed ... to represent righteousness in government."

For a somewhat lighter take on the DeLay-as-religious-leader story, check out the op-ed in Pennsylvania’s York Daily Record, the title of which expresses this blogger's thoughts exactly: “Tom DeLay as Jesus? Oh-My-God”

-Gordon Clark

Why We Need Ethics Reform, Reason # 135

The Wall Street Journal ran a story today on an investigation by federal prosectors into Rep. Allan Mollohan (D-W.Va.), specifically a pattern of Congressional earmarks totalling $178 million that he has channeled to a group of non-profit organizations in his state. Prosecutors are allegedly examining political contributions from employees of those same non-profits, and personal financial dealings, including real estate investments, that Rep. Mollohan and his wife have pursued with some of the individuals involved.

Rep. Mollohan has not been accused of any wrongdoing at this time, and he has welcomed the review.  "We operate transparently," he said, adding "every one of the earmarks is held to the highest standards of accountability" and publicly disclosed.

We all know by now that Congress does a lot of its appropriating through earmarks - $53 billion worth in 2004 - and that the use of earmarks has exploded over the past several years. We have no doubt that many of them are used as rewards for campaign contributors in the "pay-to-play" culture that has enveloped Congress recently. Of course, some (perhaps many) of them are for perfectly legitimate purposes, and do not represent legislative favors for contributors.

What makes this investigation particularly interesting is that Rep. Mollohan just happens to be the ranking Democrat on the House ethics committee. And while he declines to suggest political motivations for this investigation at this time, it's also interesting to note that he is facing the first serious Republican challenger in many years, one who has the backing of the White House.

Following today's news, House Speaker Dennis Haster has called for Mollohan to step down from the ethics committee, with none-too-subtle accusations of the ranking Democrats motivations. "I was wondering why [Ethics Committee Democrats] were dragging their feet on this whole ethics thing," Hastert said. "I don't know if that has anything to do with it or not, we'll see." Added National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Thomas Reynolds (R-N.Y.) "It is no wonder that Mr. Mollohan and Democrat leaders have stalled for so long in getting the Ethics Committee up and running."

Of course, such accusations paint a highly self-serving and wholly inaccurate picture of the problems with the House ethics committee. Whatever the Democrats other faults in not pushing for ethics investigations, the reality is that the Republican leadership has actively worked to eviscerate the committee since it admonished then House Majority leader Tom DeLay in the fall of 2004 - first by replacing the committee chair with someone more compliant, then firing the investigative staff, then changing the rules - and that Mollohan has stood in their path every step of the way, winning several of these battles. Could that be why he's in the crosshairs today?

Whatever the results of this latest dust up and investigation, it is just one more conclusive piece of evidence as to why we need an independent, non-partisan agency, such as an Office of Public Integrity, to investigate ethics violations in the Congress - and not a committee that is used for partisan attacks or whitewhashing, or deadlocked in inaction because of it.  And we hope that Rep. Mollohan will continue his advocacy of real and effective ethics enforcement in Congress.

To send your Representative a message on the need for real ethics reform, including an Office of Public Integrity, just go to our Action Center.

-Gordon Clark

Tom DeLay - Nasty to the bitter end

I blogged previously that DeLay's resignation from Congress this week was not an act of selfless devotion to his party or his supposed causes, but rather another example of "The Hammer" looking out for himself. Emerging news analysis would seem to support this bold contention, and they further paint the picture of DeLay as a, um... not terribly pleasant and cuddly individual.

DeLay Resigns from Congress!

There aren't many sweet moments when one is toiling against corruption in Congress, but this is one of them. Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas), "The Hammer," is resigning from Congress.

Those of us working at Clean Up Washington would like to thank you for this important moment. Today's announcement is the culmination of a long term struggle that we started together in the fall of 2004, and everyone who sent an email, made a phone call, gave a contribution or wrote a letter to the editor helped build the pressure that made this victory inevitable.

Today's Washington Post gives a good synopsis of DeLay's resignation announcement, which follows his initial loss of the House majority position last September, when he was indicted for money laundering in Texas. (A loss, btw,  that you and thousands of fellow corruption activists helped engineer when you shamed the Republicans in the House of Representatives, in January of 2005, to reinstate the rule that indicted members of their caucus could not hold leadership positions.)

The Post article cites sources close to DeLay who claim that he took his action for the good of the party. I say don't bet on it. Tom DeLay took this action for the same reason he took every ethically questionable action in his long career - for the sake of Tom DeLay, his power and his bank account. By resigning now he saved himself from a bruising reelection fight that he was increasingly likely to lose. (Polls showed him well behind his Democratic opponent.)

Another big reason which you don't see mentioned in the Post article is money. DeLay is allowed, under law, to take the $1,295,350 in his campaign coffers and transfer it to his legal defense fund. You can bet that weighed heavily on the mind of the former power-broker who is looking at a long and nasty legal battle - and possible jail time. He'll need every penny he can lay his hands on for what promises to be a long year ahead.

But this is, all those points notwithstanding, an important and satisfying moment. Post a comment below to share how you intend to celebrate this victory!

Just as important, we need to use this opportunity to press our demand for reform. Click here to send a message to your Representative, demanding that they respond to DeLay's resignation with REAL ethics and lobbying reform. The fight continues with lobbying reform legislation in the House and an upcoming candidate accountability project scheduled for this summer. Stay with us, friends - together we can Clean Up Washington!

-Gordon Clark

Ethics Committee Deadlocked...What Else is New?

Brace yourself. What you're going to read next may come as a total shock.

Rep. Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.) said today that the moribund House Ethics Committee has once again found itself in a deadlock on what cases to pursue. After a year and many months of inaction, we wouldn't be surprised if staffers had spotted tumbleweeds blowing through the cavernous meeting room of the committee.

"Today the committee met for six hours to consider potential investigative matters, and the sole action that the committee agreed to take was to continue an investigation that was initiated in 2004, at the end of the last Congress," said Rep. Mollohan. "This result falls far short of the committee's obligations in the current circumstances." [Congress Daily]

-Jess Kutch

Breaking News: Former DeLay Staffer Pleads Guilty

Former Deputy Chief of Staff to Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas), Tony Rudy, pleaded guilty this morning to charges of conspiracy to corrupt public officials and defraud his lobbying clients. Rudy has also offered his cooperation in a federal probe that could extend into the halls of Congress, and right through the doorway of Rep. DeLay's office (or so we giddily hope).

SourceWatch reports that Rudy worked for DeLay's office until 2001, when he left for a job alongside Jack Abramoff (thanks to those rapidly turning revolving doors).

"The purpose of the conspiracy was for defendant Rudy and his coconspirators to unjustly enrich themselves,'' Justice Department prosecutors stated in the filing.

Did someone say "coconspirators"?

-Jess Kutch

Jack Abramoff is sentenced to jail

Breaking news from the Miami coutroom: admitted felon and former super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, along with his former business partner Adam Kidan, has been sentenced to 5 years and 10 months in jail, for the guilty plea to charges of conspiracy and wire fraud in their purchase of the SunCruz fleet of gambling boats. The two have also been ordered to pay $21 million in restitution.

The sentence was the minimum allowed under the plea bargain Abramoff made with authorities. He will not begin serving his sentence until he is finished working with federal prosecutors in Washington on the wide-ranging scandal probe that could involve up to 20 members of Congress.

-Gordon Clark

Abramoff the Saintly

We can't resist reveling for just a moment in our lead story from the Corruption and Reform News Roundup (below), an LA Times report on the more than 250 letters of support that have been mailed to a U.S. District judge in Miami, asking for leniency in the sentencing of admitted felon and former super lobbyist Jack Abramoff. His family, friends, former colleagues, lawyer associates and even one member of Congress have written to Judge Paul C. Huck, describing him as a man characterized by acts of generosity, his devotion to family, and his deep religious faith.

To give just a few examples....

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif), the only member of Congress who chose to write, described Abramoff as a "selfless patriot" for his ardent anti-communism during the Cold War. (And it's worth noting that Abramoff had no qualms at all about working with Russian oil interests after the Cold War to advance their agenda in Washington - patriot that he is.)

A top aide on a Senate committee vouched for Abramoff as a "caring, pious, and generous man...."

Monty Warner, a GOP media strategist, said that Abramoff gave away "hundreds of meals" at his Washington restaurant Signatures. (Presumably in between all the meals where he was arranging bribes to members of Congress.)

Benigno R. Fitial, an Abramoff client and governer of the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas Islands, who hired Abramoff to help preserve the abusive sweatshop labor conditions for foreign workers on his island, lauded the criminal who "championed our cause of democratic self-government and economic opportunity...."

Others noted how Abramoff invited 14 children and a rabbi to his sky box for a hockey game, opened a kosher restaurant in Washington "at great personal sacrifice" so observant Jews could have lunch or dinner "in comfort," or covered the medical bills of a rabbi's daughter injured in a car accident.

And Abramoff's 16-year-old son, Alex, added this tear-jerking appeal to Huck: "I personally do not know a lot about you or your morals, but I know that if you were to take a look into how my father leads his life, you would see that he is not the kind of person that should be sent to prison."

Goodness gracious, how did such a saintly man ever get in such trouble with the law? Is this perhaps some terrible mistake?

Of course the letter writers made no mention of the Indian tribes that Abramoff bilked out of millions of dollars, (the funding for his exemplary "generosity"), or the workers in the Marianas he helped keep in near slave-labor conditions for years, or the fact that he helped subvert our democratic system of government, and no doubt aided in the misappropriation of hundreds of millions if not billions of taxpayer dollars, thanks to his no-holds-barred, pay-to-play, blatantly illegal version of lobbying.

And while Abramoff can undoubtedly quote the Torah better than I can, I do happen to know that the Jewish religion contains more than a couple pieces of advice about leading an ethical life, teachings which Jack seemed to somehow miss along the way.

As part of his plea bargain, Abramoff agreed to a sentence of between 70 and 87 months in prison. No word yet on whether the outpouring of support for this moral giant will help reduce his sentence at all....

-Gordon Clark

DeLay's Friends in High Places

Rep. Tom DeLay’s (R-Texas) parade through the Texas legal system continues tomorrow as prosecutors seek to have charges of conspiracy and money laundering against the former House Majority Leader restored.  But if anything about DeLay’s legal situation has become clear, it’s that conflicts of interest shadow every step of the process.

You may remember that DeLay’s lawyers cried foul about the supposed liberal bias of the first judge assigned to the case last fall, eventually forcing District Judge Bob Perkins to recuse himself. (He had committed the grievous sin of making a contribution to MoveOn.) And then Administrative Judge B.B. Schraub, who replaced Perkins, recused himself when prosecutor Ronnie Earle raised bias questions about him: Schraub was appointed by Texas Governor Rick Perry, who was a strong DeLay ally in the Texas congressional redistricting that was the original raison d’etre for the alleged money-laundering.

Now the Houston Chronicle is raising questions about the political ties of the judges who sit on two different three-judge panels that are considering the potentially prosecution-ending appeals in DeLay’s case and that of his co-defendents, Jim Ellis and John Colyandro.

According to the Texas Ethics Commission Justice Alan Waldrop, who sits on both panels, worked as a paid lobbyist for Texans for Lawsuit Reform (TLR) in 2002.  And surprise, surprise, it turns out that TLR worked closely with DeLay’s now infamous Texans for a Republican Majority PAC (TRMPAC) in order to affect the outcome of the elections for the Texas House that year. Better yet, Judge Waldrop actually worked with a TLR consultant who has been a grand jury witness in the cases involving DeLay, Ellis and Colyandro.

Normally this strong appearance of bias by a judge would be enough to raise doubts in a case, but not for DeLay.  Having strong connections to only one judge deciding his political future would be a disappointment for someone who has set the bar for corruption and unethical conduct so high.

A second judge who sits on one of the panels hearing the appeals, Justice David Puryear, gave $250 to a Republican candidate in the 1996 election.  This seems harmless enough, except that the Republican candidate Puryear gave money to, Shane Phelps, had been hand-picked by the GOP to run against none other than prosecutor Ronnie Earle – the same Ronnie Earle who will argue the case against DeLay in front of Puryear’s panel.

And just to complete the web of eyebrow-raising political connections, both Puryear and Waldrop – as well as Justice Bob Pemberton, a third judge serving on one of the two panels – were all appointed by Gov. Perry – the same issue that forced Judge Schraub to remove himself from the case several months ago!

So it would seem that DeLay and his allies were busy gaming the Texas judicial system at the same time the former majority leader was perfecting the strong-armed, influence-peddling, behind-closed-doors methods he used to run the U.S. House of Representatives. He has lost his position of power in the latter, or course, but it remains to be seen if his influence in the former will yet save him from a possible conviction in Texas.

Stay tuned to the Clean Up Washington blog for new developments in the ever-shifting legal case of our first and finest inductee into the Ethics Hall of Shame, Rep. Tom DeLay.

-Collin Jergens

Renaming a Corruption Haven

Signatures restaurant, the Washington, D.C., fine-dining establishment formerly owned and operated by admitted-felon Jack Abramoff, is currently seeking suggestions on its Web site for a new name. That’s not surprising, given the fact that Signatures is now inextricably linked to Abramoff, whose reputation has tainted everything the former lobbyist touched. According to the Signatures Web site, the Wall Street Journal once accorded the restaurant as being “DC's Meeting Spot for Movers and Shakers.”

We here at Clean Up Washington would like to offer a few ideas of our own. Below are some staff suggestions:

“The Trough” Belly up where Ney & company did

“Quid Pro Quo”

“Tommy's” Where fundraising is made easy

Have any of your own?

-Jess Kutch

The Abramoff Investigation and Lobbyists' Home Cooking

Two items in this morning’s Roll Call worthy of mention.

Item #1: File Under “Abramoff”

The Department of Justice requested the personal financial records of at least nine members of Congress and at least seven former congressional aides last year, Roll Call [subscription req.] reports.

The newspaper notes that many of the requests appear to be related to the Fed’s widening investigation into the Abramoff scandal. The list includes the usual suspects – Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas), Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mont.), Reps. Bob Ney (R.-Ohio) and John Doolittle (R-Calif.) – all of whom made our “Ethics Hall of Shame,” as well some surprises: Reps. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), Earl Pomeroy (D-N.D.), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), John Sweeney (R-N.Y.) and Del. Eni Faleomavaega (D-American Samoa).

It’s not clear yet why these lawmakers, who have never before been publicly linked to the ongoing Abramoff investigation, were among those whose records were pulled. We’re just relieved that someone is looking into this, and that the investigation is progressing.

Item #2: Lobbying Goes Underground

Gone are the days when members of Congress could treat fifty of their closest friends to a skybox reception at the MCI center. That’s because these lavish, champagne toasts alongside professional sports games are now too risky and too ripe for the picking by enterprising journalists. Rather than hold public fundraising events, some lobbyists are opting for the privacy afforded by their own dining rooms, Roll Call [subscription req.] reports.

“A lot of lobbyists have talked about doing more events out of your house,” a Democratic lobbyist said. “We’re all looking around the corner and thinking about how are you going to preserve the relationships you have and also grow them so you have the ability to talk more extensively with staff. I’ve heard people talk about maybe [having people] host different dinners in their house.”

I guess that means Jack Abramoff’s old Signatures restaurant won’t be hosting many fundraisers this year. The former fine-dining establishment was once a highly regarded fundraising spot by Washington’s political elite. Even House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) used the restaurant; in June 2003, Hastert held a fundraiser at the restaurant that raised $21,500 for his Keep Our Majority political action committee from Abramoff’s firm and tribal clients. Now that public fundraising events are too…er…public, don’t be surprised if Washington-area caterers see an up-tick in business.

-Jess Kutch

"What are you benching, buff guy?"

This is too good to pass up:  Talking Points Memo's Muckraker reports that the April issue of Vanity Fair (due on stands next week) includes a nine-page spread on former lobbyist and admitted felon Jack Abramoff, the man at the epicenter of the scandals now rocking Washington. The magazine scored a rare interview with Abramoff, who is reported to have discussed his ties to GOP all-stars President Bush, Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman, and other heavy lifters who have denied having a personal relationship with Abramoff.

TPM and Raw Story reports that during the interview Abramoff recalls Bush once joking with him, "What are you benching, buff guy?"

Of course, Abramoff's account doesn't even come close to indicating Bush's relationship with the former lobbyist. The President probably addresses muscle tone with everyone he meets. And really, who doesn't?

Although President Bush has denied knowing Abramoff, the White House refuses to release photos of the two men together, as well as a list of meetings between Abramoff and administration aides. A Washington Post-ABC News poll found that 76 percent of Americans say Bush should disclose these meetings; only 18 percent disagreed.

Help us put an end to this nonsense. You can take action and demand that Bush release photos taken of himself with Abramoff.

-Jess Kutch

From Fixing Elections to Fixing Government Contracts

The Empress of Elections herself, Rep. Katherine Harris (R-Fla.), just can’t seem to stay away from controversy.

In 2000, it was her role as secretary of state overseeing Florida’s presidential balloting that made her controversial. Today, it’s ties to a Congressional bribery scandal. Last Friday, Mitchell Wade, former president of the defense contractor MZM, pled guilty to bribing Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.).  In addition, Wade admitted to making illegal campaign contributions to Harris and Rep. Virgil Goode (R-Va.).

Harris received $50,000 from MZM employees and the company’s political action committee during 2004, making them the largest source of contributions to her re-election campaign.  Of this $50,000, $32,000 was illegally funneled through employees by reimbursing them for individual donations.  Only two weeks ago did Harris return the illegal contributions, months after the allegations came to light.

Like other lobbyists involved in the recent wave of ethics scandals, Mitchell Wade and MZM didn’t donate to Harris out of the kindness of their hearts.  Following MZM’s largesse in 2004, Wade took Harris to dinner in early 2005 to discuss holding a fundraiser for her and to ask for federal funding to build a Navy counterintelligence facility in Florida.  Soon after, in April, 2005, Harris submitted a $10 million defense appropriations request for the project - an "earmarked" request.  While the proposal was ultimately rejected, questions continue to swirl around the former Ruler of Recounts.  Roll Call is reporting today that Harris’ scheduler, Mona Tate Yost, job left her position and took a job with Wade at MZM in May 2005.

Nor is this the first time Harris has faced questions about her fundraising.  During her 1994 campaign for state senate, Harris received $30,000 from a Floridacompany that was later investigated for violating campaign finance laws.  According to a 1997 interview, Harris expressed regret at being unaware of the questionable contributions and added that, “when it comes from one corporation, I think there's always a problem of perception."

As Talking Points Memo points out, this problem of "perception" can only increase when Rep. Harris lies about the contributions to the media, as some columnists in Florida are accusing her of doing. And just when you think the whole affair couldn't get any more rank, consider this: in the middle of the media's Abramoff/lobbyist reform feeding frenzy, Harris promised to disclose all of her earmark requests. Except, apparently, this earmark request. Her spokesman says it's "privileged information" and they're not handing it over.

Why are we not surprised?

Come back to the Clean Up Washington blog for updates on this juicy scandal, and all the latest in corruption and reform news....

-Collin Jergens

National Call Out Corruption Day - TODAY!

Concerned citizens across the country are flooding the Senate with phone calls TODAY. Join them.

The Abramoff scandal is only the tip of the corruption iceberg in Congress, as a system of legalized bribery by special interest lobbyists has overtaken the will of the people in determining legislative priorities.

The U.S. Senate is debating reform measures THIS WEEK. Go to our Action Center for the information to join our coalition partners and thousands of concerned citizens across the country by flooding the Senate with phone calls TODAY, demanding real reform now.

And when you have made your calls, come back here and post a comment to share with activists around the country what you heard from your senators offices!

-Gordon Clark

Doolittle Epitomizes the Rot in the System--But Here's a Way to Clean it Up

We’ve been chronicling the ethical travails of Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) on our Watchdog Blog since its inception, as you can see here. Doolittle is under increasing media scrutiny, especially in California, for his close ties to disgraced former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham’s “business” associates and his close friendship with admitted-felon Jack Abramoff. In fact, there have been so many reports of Doolittle’s questionable dealings that we’ve decided to add him to our Ethics Hall of Shame. Check back tomorrow when he makes his inauspicious debut.

There is some good that could come out of the mess with Doolittle, Abramoff and all their friends in hot water here in Washington: it looks like Congress is moving towards passing ethics reform legislation this year. You Californians, especially, should join in our National Call-Out Corruption Dayscheduled for tomorrow, because Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) is on the Senate committee that will be looking at such legislation this week.

But, back to Doolittle: Shortly before announcing his bid for re-election this week, Rep. Doolittle sat down with staffers at The Auburn Journal for an in-depth interview on his ties to Abramoff, Cunningham and others.

After a round of softball questions and wilted rebuttals, staffers at the Auburn Journal got straight to the point:

How much money did you receive directly from Abramoff and through his other sources?

Doolittle’s answer was, in essence, “I don’t know.” When asked “How come?” Doolittle replied, “Because it is really of no concern to me…All I know is that I try to raise as much money as possible.” Wow. Now that’s chutzpah.

Why is Doolittle so brazen in his apathy over lobbyist-directed campaign contributions? For starters, the practice of accepting lobbyist contributions is completely legal. Lobbyists can butter-up members of Congress with generous, out-of-pocket donations without any fear of retribution – and have been doing so for years. The result is a Congress beholden to special interests, not the public interest. While Public Citizen’s Craig Holman Ph. D. and others are working hard to change the rules governing lobbyist contributions, activists can help by participating in our National Call-Out Corruption Day tomorrow, February 28th.

-Conor Kenny

Defense Contractor Pleads Guilty to Illegal Campaign Contributions

This news is just coming out: defense contractors Mitchell Wade, who bribed former Rep. (and current member of our Ethics Hall of Shame) Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.), has just pleaded guilty to making at least $78,000 in illegal campaign contributions to Reps. Katherine Harris (R-Fla.) and Virgil Goode (R-Va.), reports the Washington Post. To avoid contribution limits, Wade apparently gave checks to his employees and then had them cut checks to the representatives in the hopes of getting defense appropriations. After receiving the contributions, a Goode staffer reportedly confirmed to Wade that a defense appropriations bill would include $9 million for his company and Harris tried but failed to secure funding beneficial to Wade.

Prosecutors said there is no indication that Harris or Goode knew the contributions were illegal but said the investigation was ongoing and refused to say whether the representatives were targets.

Tellingly, a Harris spokeswoman said, "this case demonstrates the perils of a process in which candidates are sometimes asked to determine the intent of a contributor." We couldn't agree more -- it's time to change the political fundraising system. If you'd like to help Public Citizen clean up that system, we've got a national call in day on Tuesday when the Senate will be debating two potentially landmark ethics reform bills. Click here for more details or click here to become a Citizen Watchdog.

-Conor Kenny

Will Gonzales protect Bush from the Abramoff scandal?

We’ve blogged several times on the Bush administration’s cover-up of its ties to corrupt former Republican super lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Mr. Bush has refused to release photographs of himself with Abramoff, or any records of Abramoff's dealings with the White House, despite initial promises to the contrary by administration mouthpiece Scott McClellan.

Now, the story has taken a new twist, as 31 Senate Democrats have asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to remove himself from the Justice Department investigation of the Abramoff scandal. “FBI officials have said the Abramoff investigation ‘involves systemic corruption within the highest levels of government,’ ” the Democrats wrote in a letter to Gonzales. “In light of your previous service as White House Counsel and your close connection to many Administration officials, the appearance of conflict looms large.”

Gonzales’ response was the same as this White House’s answer to so many Congressional requests: No.

As head of the Justice Department, it’s not clear how Attorney General Gonzales might influence the work of the DOJ's famously independent Public Integrity division, which is leading the investigation.

But we do know that Mr. Gonzales is a long time friend of Mr. Bush, and is extremely loyal to him. As White House Counsel Gonzales helped develop the legal “rationale” (if you can call it that) justifying torture, and Sen. Feingold (D-Wis.), along with others, has accused him of misleading Congress while defending another one of the administration’s most controversial programs, the warrantless domestic wiretapping. We also know the administration has disrupted the Abramoff investigation by appointing one of the lead investigators to a federal judgeship, thus removing him from the case. (Funny, isn’t it, how this administration will never publicly comment on ongoing investigations, but will gladly remove the investigators who are conducting them?)

And now, with the President refusing to release information on his relationship with Abramoff, his good friend Alberto Gonzales is refusing direct requests to remove himself from the investigation, for what would appear to be a potentially strong conflict of interest.

If you want to get to the bottom of this as much as we do, take an action today by urging your senators to demand release of all records regarding the White House’s relationship with Abramoff. If Republicans are suddenly so big on disclosure, following the Congressional corruption scandals, how about a little of the same from the White House?

-Gordon Clark

Rep. Richard Pombo, feathering his own nest

Rep. Richard Pombo (R-Calif.) chose an interesting way to start as chairman of the House Interior Committee: by taking his family on a taxpayer-funded RV adventure to some of America’s most beautiful national parks.

Rep. Pombo has already distinguished himself as a notable practitioner of the sleazy, self-serving political maneuvering that makes it difficult to think about Congress on a full stomach. As outlined in our Hall of Shame Pombo has intervened in federal regulatory matters when his family’s income might be affected, and he paid his wife and brother more than a quarter-million dollars out of his campaign treasury in 2003 and 2004, in some cases for unspecified duties. He also ranks 8th on the list of members taking money from admitted felon and former Republican super lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and he has gone to bat for clients of “Team Abramoff” – even when those clients happened to be on the other side of the country from his congressional district.

The latest allegations, reported in the Los Angeles Times , focus on a trip he took in 2003 after becoming chairman of the influential Interior committee. The official purpose of the trip was to visit parks under his jurisdiction and speak with federal officials there. And what better way to do that than by renting a $4,935 RV at taxpayer expense and taking your family along?

Pombo’s spokesman said the trip lasted 10-12 days, and ran through five states and ten national parks, where his staff set up meetings with local park officials. A funny thing happened on the way to the forest, though – apparently Pombo didn’t always make it there. "We had set up camping for him and gone to a lot of work, and then he did not show," said Pam Livermont, secretary for the park superintendent at Badlands National Park in South Dakota. “We never heard another word from him. We were disappointed." Same thing from officials at Joshua Tree National Park in southern California, although in their (lame, if you ask us) defense, Pombo’s staff said their boss showed for the meeting but park officials “weren’t there.” Did anyone mount a search party?

For good measure, on a separate issue two Democratic House members are accusing Pombo of "questionable use of a significant amount of taxpayer funds," for allowing his committee staff director to live in Stockton, Calif. and charge taxpayers $87,000 for commuting to Washington… with none of the expenses properly reported.

Steve Filson, a Democrat running for Pombo's seat in this fall's congressional election, has asked the House Administration Committee to investigate the family vacation. If that panel finds a problem, it could refer the matter to the House ethics committee. Given that the House Administration committee was until very recently run by Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio), who was forced to step down from that position after he was identified as “Representative #1” in the Abramoff indictments, and that the ethics committee has been moribund for more than a year, we’re not holding our breath for any action.

But in the meantime, Pombo is more than justifying his induction into our Hall of Shame. Keep at it, Mr. Pombo, and you might even earn bonus points!

-Gordon Clark

Is the Bush-Abramoff cover up unraveling

New revelations cast additional doubt on President Bush’s assertion that he does not know admitted felon and former Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

As reported by several sources (see our headline roundup, below), Think Progress revealed the existence of emails from Abramoff claiming he met with Bush nearly a dozen times, in a variety of settings. Kim Eisler, editor of The Washingtonian and the journalist who first received the Abramoff emails, refuted President Bush’s claims during a CNN interview last night, saying that Bush "definitely knows" Abramoff. Eisler also confirmed he has seen photographs of the two together at settings other than White House holiday functions – the only place Bush says such photos could have been taken – including a photo in the Old Executive Office Building, where Abramoff took some of his clients to shake hands with Bush. (There are also photos of Abramoff’s wife with First Lady Laura Bush.)

But as we have blogged several times in the past few weeks, how could Mr. Bush possibly NOT know Jack Abramoff, a famously connected Republican lobbyist who raised more than $100,000 for the President in his last election campaign, and who is – or at least was – a close friend and associate of Karl Rove and Grover Norquist.

Yet in response to these new revelations, White House mouthpiece Scott McClellan says the President’s claim he does not know Abramoff "still stands."

When will the stonewalling on Bush’s relationship to Abramoff end? What is the White House trying to cover up?

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) is intending to offer a "sense of the Senate" amendment urging the administration to release all information regarding the Bush administration’s dealings with Abramoff. Click here to tell your senators they need to support Boxer’s amendment, and demand that White House come clean.

Many Republicans are responding to the snowballing corruption scandal by urging further disclosure, saying that "sunshine is the best disinfectant." Shouldn't a little of this same light shine on the White House’s relationship with Jack Abramoff?

-Gordon Clark

Ethics Hall of Shame

We've updated our website to include an Ethics Hall of Shame. The list includes such notorious ethics-evaders as Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Calif.), but you may be surprised at who else made our list. The press release is available here.

Another victory over DeLay… but it’s still all about the money, stupid!

Yesterday’s election of Rep. John Boehner (R-Ohio) as House Republican majority leader, over Rep. Tom DeLay’s protégé, Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), was a startling rebuke to the legacy and leadership of DeLay, the indicted former majority leader. Going into the vote, most observers had expected Blunt to win - including Blunt himself, who had arrogantly boasted “'If anyone can count the members of the House, I can.”

Boehner’s upset victory shows that Republicans are well aware they’ve suffered from being so closely tied to lobbyists and political corruption, and that they know Blunt, who has been one of the party's key "money machines" in maintaining close financial ties with the K Street lobbying community, would be a problematic leader for them. For this victory over the DeLay team, substantial credit goes to you and the thousands of other activists around the country who have been pounding Congress on this issue. It wouldn’t have happened without that public pressure!

But it will likely be only a shallow victory for those hoping the Republican party will reform itself, or the Congress overall. Boehner is himself a product and proponent of the systemic problem of influence-peddling that afflicts the federal government.

For example, here are a few unsavory highlights of Boehner's record:

(1) He recently characterized House Speaker Dennis Hastert’s plan to ban privately funded travel as “childish” and dismissed the need for a ban on gifts from lobbyists to members.

(2) He has taken more than $157,000 worth of free trips, placing him seventh among 638 current and former members of Congress, including senators, in the value of privately funded travel accepted between 2000 and 2005, according to American Radioworks.

(3) In one infamous incident from 1995, he was caught handing out checks from tobacco company PACs to colleagues on the floor of the House – and during a vote on the issue, no less.

(4) He preceded DeLay as head of the “K Street Operation,” the  Republican effort to coordinate policy and fundraising  with well-heeled lobbyists, which has since been dubbed the “K Street  Project.”

Congressional Republicans were wise to reject Blunt, but not wise enough to reject the system of cronyism and corrupt influence-peddling that has cast a pall over the Republican Party and all of Congress.

Please join us in demanding that Boehner deliver real reform - or suffer the consequences - by writing a letter to the editor about the new House majority leader. Together, we are showing that we CAN make a difference, but the battle is far from over!

What is the sound of one hand clapping?

As one of the few Americans who stayed awake or tuned in long enough to see the Democrats’ response to President Bush’s State of the Union address last night, I was not particularly bowled over. And that’s putting it mildly.

There was one striking aspect of the speech by newly elected Virginia Gov. Tim Kaine, but the problem is that it was striking only by its conspicuous absence. Kaine didn’t mention the word “corruption” a single time - not once. Nor, for that matter, did the word “Abramoff” cross the governor’s lips.

Did the Democrats think there was a shortage of material on this subject? If so, here’s a quick review of just the past six months, which might help jog their memories and get them back on message:

• Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) was forced to step down from his majority leader position after being indicted for money-laundering in Texas.
• Former Republican superlobbyist Jack Abramoff, a close friend and colleague of Tom DeLay as well as Bush’s political guru, Karl Rove, has pled guilty to bribery and related crimes in the largest corruption scandal to hit Washingtonin decades.
• President Bush is stubbornly refusing to discuss the many meetings Abramoff had within the White House.
• Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif.) had to resign after admitting he took up to $2.4 million in bribes, and is probably facing jail time as a result.
• Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) has been identified as “Representative #1” in the Abramoff indictment, and has been forced to step down as chair of the House Administration Committee while the federal investigation continues.
• David Safavian, the Bush administration's top federal procurement official, was arrested and charged with lying and obstructing the criminal investigation into Jack Abramoff's dealings.
• Vice President Cheney’s chief of staff, “Scooter” Libby, was indicted for lying to a grand jury in the investigation of who leaked the identity of former CIA undercover agent Valerie Plame.
• Members of Congress are taking trips to lavish resorts courtesy of special interests and their lobbyists.
• Lobbyists are raising millions of dollars for the very members of Congress they lobby.
• The House ethics committee has failed to launch a single investigation into any of this.
• Millions of senior citizens are failing to get basic medicine under the new Republican Medicare drug plan, a $500 billion monstrosity written to benefit drug companies and the HMO/insurance industry…and states are having to pick up the tab, to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
• Oil companies like Exxon-Mobil are making record, profits -- $10.7 billion for Exxon-Mobil in just the last quarter of 2005 -- while you pay record prices for gas and heating oil… yet the energy bill passed by Congress last year delivers billions in taxpayer subsidies to these same oil companies.

All this, and the Democrats did not see fit to mention the word “corruption” in their official response…not even once? Not to sound clichéd, but where’s the outrage?

-Gordon Clark

Bush-Abramoff Records

President Bush continues to stonewall on releasing the records and photos of meetings with admitted-felon/super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff, despite pressure mounting from all corners, including Republicans. On Sunday, Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) said Bush should release the Bush-Abramoff records, but not the pictures; Rep. Mike Pence (R-Ind.) said Bush should release all Bush-Abramoff phone calls, correspondence and meetings; and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.) said Bush should release it all, reported the AP.  Bush advisor Dan Bartlett, meanwhile, rejected Democratic calls for an independent prosecutor, saying, “we’re going to let the career prosecutors do their job, and I'll bet they get to the bottom of it.” This is despite the fact   Bush effectively removed the prosecutor who was handling the Abramoff investigation, by appointing him to a federal judgeship, as we blogged about on Friday. Reports are unclear whether Bartlett managed to say that with a straight face.

Some Republicans aren’t so courageous: Rep. Bob Beauprez (R-Colo.) and Rep. Tim Johnson (R-Ill.) aren’t giving straight answers on whether they think Bush should release the records. We here at Clean Up Washington are asking readers to email their member of Congress and demand action on this ethical issue. See our previous blog posting for more.

The Village Voice covers the small saga of how an event photography company has mysteriously removed Bush-Abramoff photos from its website. [Via TalkingPointsMemo]

-Conor Kenny

What is Bush hiding? The Abramoff scandal widens…

We have previously blogged on it, and President Bush has now admitted it – that photographs exist of him with disgraced felon-lobbyist Jack Abramoff. What do these photographs show, and what exactly is the president’s relationship to one of the most notoriously corrupt lobbyists in Washington history?

Clearly, Mr. Bush does not want us to know. At a press conference yesterday he made clear he will not authorize  release of any photographs, calling them “not relevant,” explaining tersely that “it's part of the job of the president to shake hands with people and smile.” He then refused to discuss any details of the meetings Abramoff reportedly attended with White House staffers, although he said that federal prosecutors are “welcome” to look into the matter if they want to.

Most outrageous of all, though, is the president’s assertion, when asked whether he had ever been personally lobbied by Abramoff. "I, frankly, don't even remember having my picture taken with the guy. I don't know him….”

President Bush doesn’t even know him?? We are talking about the most connected Republican lobbyist in Washington during the Bush administration. A man well known by every Republican power-broker in town. A man who has long-standing personal ties with top Republican operatives like Grover Norquist and Bush’s primary political advisor, Karl Rove. Someone who attended meetings with White House staffers, and successfully placed his own associates in executive branch jobs. Someone who bundled more than $100,000 in contributions for Bush in his last campaign, earning the title of "Pioneer." And President Bush claims to not even know him… and then flat out refuses to discuss the matter or release any information??

If we are ever going to get to the bottom of the current corruption scandal, President Bush must be compelled to release all records of his administration’s dealings with Abramoff. In a new poll by ABC News and the Washington Post, more than three-quarters of those asked - 76% - agree that Bush should release all the records of his meetings with Abramoff.

The stonewalling and cover-up in the Abramoff affair must end. Look for more on this hot story in the days to come.

-Gordon Clark

I'll gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today!

In the wake of disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s fall, the atmosphere for lobbyists is getting positively chilly here in the nation’s capital. Some of the top people in the profession were hauled in front of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee yesterday to try to explain the current sordid state of affairs.

Distinguishing himself first was John Engler, former Republican governor of Michigan and current head of the National Association of Manufacturers. As noted in the Washington Post, Engler claimed that having a lobbyist pay for "working lunches" was perfectly OK. After all, he said, "A hamburger, I don't think, is going to change the mind of members of this committee." Perhaps not. But why then, we are emboldened to ask, do members of Congress have such a hard time outlawing the practice, if it makes no difference to them? Are we expected to believe that they cannot afford lunch on their salaries? And how many of those $10 hamburgers are eaten while discussing the thousands of dollars in campaign contributions the lobbyists will funnel their way?

Beyond such trifles as a free lunch, though, the lobbyists testifying went to great lengths to warn Congress against going too far with any reforms. "Whatever occurs, it is imperative that you do not overreact," intoned Engler. Then the president of the American League of Lobbyists, Paul Miller, shared his perspective: "Members of our profession are as disgusted and appalled by what Mr. Abramoff has done as you are." (No doubt they were completely shocked as well.)

Miller went on: "But we should not allow the actions of a few unscrupulous operatives to paint our entire profession as 'crooks' or unscrupulous scoundrels who will stop at nothing to have their way with members of Congress....Our government is not 'corrupt.' Lobbyists are not 'bribing' people; and members of Congress are not being 'bought' for campaign contributions."

There you have it – straight from the lobbyists’ mouths. Everything is fine. Thank goodness they finally set the record straight. We can only hope that members of Congress don’t buy this bilge water as they continue to debate desperately needed reforms.

-Gordon Clark

If it walks like a duck…

Sen. Conrad Burns just can’t seem to get his reform act together.

You’d think the guy who took more money from clients of felon-lobbyist Jack Abramoff than any other member of Congress would be a little bit circumspect about consorting with lobbyists, but apparently not. Because, to celebrate his 71st birthday, the Montanan has agreed to allow himself to be feted at a fundraiser sponsored by – you guessed it – a D.C. lobbying firm!

Call us wild-eyed idealists, but in the midst of the largest congressional corruption scandal in decades, we believe this kind of behavior just doesn't cut it any more. So Public Citizen is challenging the senator to live up to some of his own expressed reform ideas. We are further calling on him to move beyond those modest proposals, and recognize that his birthday fundraiser highlights some of the most deeply entrenched problems that have brought on the current lobbyist corruption scandal.

In particular, we are calling upon Burns to honor the spirit of the lobbyist reform legislation he himself has sponsored, by promptly disclosing the amount collected at the fundraiser and how much is being contributed by individual lobbyists, as well as disclosing which of the lobbyists attending have come through the “revolving door” between government and lobbying firms. The firm sponsoring the event, Cassidy & Associates, has been the top pure lobbying firm in D.C. for three years running. And it has made its business by exploiting revolving door connections to the hilt: 48 of its 49 current lobbyists once held jobs in the federal government, including folks like Gregg Hartley, a former top aide to Acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt of Missouri. (It’s also worth nothing here that two of Burn’s staff actually left his employ to work for Abramoff.)

We are also calling upon Burns to limit the amount of money he accepts from lobbyists – this is one of the key reforms demanded by the new ethics coalition here in Washington – and to remove lobbyists from senior positions in his fundraising operation. Currently, three top Burns fundraising spots are held by lobbyists, including his campaign chairman and his campaign finance and fundraising co-chairman. Mere disclosure of such links is all well and good, but it doesn’t change the fact that lobbyists and lobbying firm PACs who make donations or raise money still expect favors in return. So it is precisely this nefarious nexus between politicians, money and lobbyists that must be broken if there is to be any real reform – and Burns, his proposed reform legislation notwithstanding, continues to be one of the most glaring examples of the problem.

(We also encourage any Montanans reading this blog to contact Sen. Burns at 202-224-2644, and let him know he needs to clean up his act!)

Burns is also getting bashed back home, as Montana   newspapers and his Democratic opposition continue to hammer on his Abramoff connections. (For a good round up, check out today’s Daily Kos.) One story that stands out: a piece in the Missoulan on  Burns’ interesting voting record when it comes to the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. territory and a hellhole of abusive labor practices that avoided Congressional reforms by paying Abramoff more than $1 million to “lobby” Congress. (Our old friend, Rep. Tom DeLay, figures prominently in this story as well.)

As it turns out, Burns met with a Marianas official, who was working closely with Abramoff, in the weeks before Burns received an Abramoff-related $5,000 contribution -after which, Burns reversed himself on a bill to vote with Abramoff clients who wanted to defeat the legislation. (And talk about peeling back layers of the onion: The Los Angeles Times has reported that the Marianas official in question, who is now cooperating with federal prosecutors in the corruption probe, won his bid for speaker of the Marianas House with the help of Abramoff's lobbying partner, Michael Scanlon, who has himself pled guilty to charges of bribery.)

In any event, Burns claims that his shifting votes had nothing to do with the money he received through Abramoff’s clients.

Just to be clear, as of this moment Burns has not been charged with a crime in the corruption probe. And we are not claiming to know that Burns sold his vote on the Northern Mariana Islands issue. Or that his numerous, intimate ties with lobbyists constitute outright corruption, or that he is offering quid pro quos in exchange for all the money they are raising for him.

But for goodness sake, Senator, people are entitled to draw a few conclusions without benefit of a criminal conviction. Someday a jury may get a chance to render its opinion, but for now, in the court of public opinion, if it walks like a duck and looks like a duck….

-Gordon Clark

A picture is worth a 1,000 words… or $100,000.

As the Congressional lobbying scandal deepens, the White House is having to play some defense of its own, as over the weekend both Washingtonian and Time magazines reported the existence of a half dozen photographs showing President Bush in the company of disgraced felon-lobbyist Jack Abramoff." 

Purely "coincidence," say the White House spinmeisters. Abramoff was simply invited to a few large holiday gatherings at the White House, and according to White House counselor Dan Bartlett, “any suggestions by critics or anyone else to suggest the president is doing something nefarious with Abramoff is absurd." President Bush has said he doesn’t recall ever meeting Abramoff, and Bartlett added that Bush “doesn’t have a personal relationship" with Abramoff, who recently pled guilty to several charges in a wide-ranging corruption probe.

You'd think that if someone raised more than $100,000 for you – Abramoff was a Bush campaign “Pioneer” in the 2004 election – and helped push your legislative agenda through Congress with his extensive lobbying efforts, you’d at least be kind enough to say you remember meeting them. Maybe there was just too much lobbyist-bundled money flowing through the White House for Mr. Bush to remember little details like who it all came from? Regrettably, that might well be his answer.

Mr. Bush did send $6,000 contributed to his campaign by Abramoff, his wife and an Indian tribe he represented to the American Heart Association just days after Abramoff pled guilty. No response yet to our request that the president account for the other $100,000 the corrupt lobbyist raised for him, though….

-Gordon Clark

Headlines: Corruption in the News, Jan. 23rd, 2006

The Washington Post reports on Public Citizen's expose of how lobbyists are using the "non-profit" Ripon Society to launder millions of dollars used to ferry Republican lawmakers around the globe.

The LA Times provides a lengthy profile of embattled Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) and his extensive ties to Jack Abramoff and other Washington lobbyists. However, Ney says that “if I'm indicted, I'm running,” reports the Hill.

Former Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Aurthur Levitt, Jr. published an oped in the Washington Post today that reveals that several members of Congress threatened his independent agency with budget cuts in order to scuttle SEC actions on behalf of lobbyists. He calls for reforms including stopping the revolving door between Congress and lobbying, extensive new disclosure rules for lobbyists, a travel and gift ban, limited public financing and an independent ethics commission, all reforms that Public Citizen supports. See here for Public Citizen’s complete reform agenda.

The Houston Chronicle reports that the Republican governor of Texas, Rick Perry, has paid more than $1 million in state money to two Washington lobbying firms connected to Reps. Tom DeLay (R-Texas) and Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) and admitted felon/super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff. Perry is the first Texas governor to ever award such contracts, which some are calling redundant in light of the existence of a state office specifically tasked to lobby for the state. Democratic representatives from Texas also note that the lobby firms have never contacted them.

The LA Newspaper Group profiles just how pervasive lobbying has become in Washington.

The Orlando Sentinel says that even lobbyists acknowledge the system needs reform.

Some members of Congress appear not to have gotten the memo: several flew to Detroit last week for the big auto show at the expense of the auto industry, the Hill reports.

The AP notes that Republican activists are concerned about how the Abramoff scandal is going to hurt their 2006 fortunes. [Via TAPPED]

However, while the season of scandal may take down Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Texas), a sign of our corrupt times is that his aides can expect cushy lobbying jobs if and when he is booted out of office, the Hill reports.

The Washington Post reports that the RNC led the DNC in fundraising $102 million to $51 million in 2005. However, it also notes that the DNC has been putting some major investments into its local and state level organizations (and fails to note that Dean has been turning over a lot of the money raised in local appearances directly to those organizations).

Knight Ridder reports on the competing Democrat and Republican ethics proposals and notes that Sen. Rick “K Street Project” Santorum (R-Penn.) has been tapped to lead the GOP effort. It also points out that even some lobbyists admit that unless the issue of lobbyists performing fundraising for politicians is addressed there will be no reform (public financing, anyone?). The Washington Post’s Jeffrey Birnbaum also rounds up the competing proposals and also notes the need for fundamental fundraising reform. He quotes former Rep. James Blanchard as saying “If Congress doesn't reform fundraising, lobbying reform will be meaningless.”

Speaking of the public financing of elections, George Skelton of the LA Times, wrote a good piece on why it’s the only way to truly clean up politics and points to Gov. Schwarzenegger as example #1.

For more on this subject, see James Carville and Paul Begala’s new plan, currently outlined in the Washington Monthly.

Roll Call reports that Sen. Ken Salazar (D-Colo.)is replacing Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii) on the Senate ethics panel. Is there more to this story than meets the eye?

-Conor Kenny

The More Things Change…?

Yesterday’s Roll Call [subscription required], pointed out a remarkable and little-noted fact in the battle for Republican leadership of the House: even as the Republicans struggle to distance themselves from the Abramoff lobbyist scandal that forced out former Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), those struggling to replace him are themselves relying heavily on networks of lobbyists to win the majority leader post.

According to Roll Call, "lobbyists are sharing information with Members and their staffs, strategizing on how to rustle up more votes, feeling out uncommitted lawmakers, and trying to plant damaging stories about the competition in the media."

Does this sound like a party that’s ready to break its ties with the K Street crowd?

The reality, unfortunately, is that even with the current storm of bad press for lobbyists, they remain deeply entrenched in the leadership teams of both parties in Congress. And whatever members of Congress say publicly about reforming the system, those vying for leadership of the House Republicans – a race that includes Reps. Roy Blunt (Mo.), John Boehner (Ohio), and John Shadegg (Ariz.) – are more than ready to use lobbyists to help them win. Boehner and Blunt, in particular, are frontrunners precisely because of their heavy support from the lobbyist community. (Shadegg, for his part, told a Fox news show that he is the right person for the job because his "level of taint" is "dramatically different" than his opponents. How’s that for a positive message?)

For instance, Gregg Hartley, a former senior Blunt staffer who is now a top lobbyist at the firm of Cassidy & Associates, has been seen roaming frequently through Blunt’s leadership and communications offices in recent days. One anonymous Republican aide quoted in the article notes, "he’s there a ton, I can tell you that…. He’s still heavily involved in Blunt’s PAC stuff and fundraising." Another aide notes that Hartley "has been in and out of the Capitol constantly" since the majority leader race began. "He just doesn ’t meet with Blunt, he meets with staff." Hartley declined comment for the article, but all of this is just further evidence of why Blunt is not fit for leadership  – a conclusion reached in a comprehensive Public Citizen report on the congressman.

But as the battle for reform goes back and forth in the nation’s capital, we need to give a tip of the hat to the Montana Wyoming Tribal Leaders Council, which took the most ethical action we’ve heard about regarding the snowballing corruption scandal. According to NBC News, the council actually refused a donation of $111,000 from Sen. Conrad Burns (R-Mon.), calling it "tainted money" that needs to be returned to the Native American tribes that originally gave it to him. (Burns, like many of his colleagues in Congress, has been rushing to give away the large sums of money donated to him by disgraced felon-lobbyist Jack Abramoff as quickly as he can, and he tried to give the $111,000 to tribes in his home state.)

People refusing contributions they consider unethical?! What a radical idea! Would I be the first to suggest that one of the council leaders challenge Sen. Burns in his upcoming re-election battle? We could sure use some of their wisdom and spirit here in this den of corruption on the Potomac….

-Gordon Clark

Headlines: January 20, 2006

Bloomberg:  U.S. Lawmakers Flock to Tropics as Montego Bay Trumps Abramoff. Amidst calls to ban privately funded travel for lawmakers, several members of Congress continue to enjoy lavish trips funded by private interests.

New York Times:  Senator Apologizes for Attack on Payments to Republicans. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has apologized for releasing a document singling out thirty-three Republican members who received contributions from criminal lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Houston Chronicle:  Subpoenas seek DeLay links to San Diego firm.   Prosecutors have requested financial records from a defense contractor in the criminal case against former majority leader Tom DeLay.

Washington Post:   GOP Contest Prompts Yawns Outside Beltway. Many voters around the country seem uninterested in the upcoming House leadership election.  The Post gives an update on the race.

-Jess Kutch

Headlines: Jan. 19, 2006

USA Today: The congressman & the hedge fund. Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Cal.) reportedly accepted $110,000 from a fundraiser held by a New York investment group, one day before a defense spending bill was approved containing a $160 million project of critical importance to the group - a project actively protected by Lewis.

San Francisco Chronicle: Dems unveil plan to curb lobbying. The Democratic Party has come forth with a proposal to address corruption in Washington, two days after Republicans unveiled a strikingly similar set of demands. Both parties have been criticized for failing to outline a cogent system for executing any new rules or for punishing violators.

LA Times: Justices Weigh Limits Put on Campaign Ads. On Tuesday, Chief Justice John Roberts questioned the constitutionality of certain campaign finance limits placed on groups by the 2002 McCain-Feingold legislation.

-Jess Kutch

Report from the Front

All the hoopla aside, it's been a pretty lousy week for reform here in Washington, DC.

Responding to the snowballing corruption scandal centered around felon-lobbyist Jack Abramoff – there’s nothing like the threat of indictments to prompt members of Congress to action – both Republicans and Democrats raced to offer their own competing proposals to clean up Washington. Problem is, the proposals don’t look all that different – and neither addresses the root cause of the problem, which is the rot of special interest money in our political system, and the use of lobbyists as conduits for that money.

The Republicans took the first swing on Tuesday, and offered up a particularly weak cup of tea: a group of proposals that would ban some (but not all) lobbyist-sponsored or organized travel for members of Congress; restrict lobbyists from giving gifts (above a certain value) to members and their staffs; prohibit special access privileges for ex-members who become lobbyists; and, ever so slightly, slow down the revolving door between Congress and K St. (Incredibly, fully 43 percent of members leaving Congress for the private sector since 1998 have gone on to become lobbyists.)

The devil is still in the details, though, and as the Washington Post noted, the Republican proposals appear to have loopholes large enough for Jack Abramoff to drive a truck-load of cash through.

The Democrats had their turn on Wednesday, and with tremendous fanfare and pageantry, they announced… pretty much the same thing. They did a wonderful job of naming all the problems after Republicans, and this is not undeserved. The particularly close and ever-growing relationship between corporate lobbyists and Congress that we’ve witnessed over the past several years is no accident, but rather the very essence of the "K Street Project" that was created and pushed by former majority leader (and indicted) Rep. Tom DeLay of Texas, and Republican operatives such as Grover Norquist. The Dems also announced proposals to foster openness and participation in a legislative process that Republicans have all but closed to them, especially in the House. Fair enough.

Conspicuously missing from both sets of proposals, however, is any prohibition on campaign contributions or political fundraising by lobbyists. Huh? Two-thirds of Americans in a recent poll would outright ban campaign contributions from lobbyists, realizing that this is at the heart of the problem, yet both parties still refuse to even acknowledge the lobbyist-money-politician link. What’s the point of banning a lobbyist from giving a fancy dinner to a member , or an even fancier golf junket, if the lobbyist can still give thousands of dollars to the member – or better yet, run their PAC and bundle tens or even hundreds of thousands for them?

The other critical reform barely mentioned by either side is the need for an independent ethics watchdog to monitor and enforce the rules. At a time when the House ethics committee has failed to launch a single investigation, in the midst of the largest corruption scandal in decades, it is beyond comprehension that members of Congress still want to make believe they can police themselves. Quite obviously they cannot, and it’s time to end that farcical pretense once and for all.

A Public Citizen comparison of the two proposals, as well as related ethics legislation in the House and Senate, can be seen here.

The most encouraging thing this activist saw in Washington all week on the reform front was a vocal protest in front of Norquist’s downtown office during his weekly meeting with lobbyists. About 80 activists gathered in a drenching rain to demand an end to corruption, with a bevy of cameras to record the protest. Now, as always, it is citizen pressure that will make Congress do what it needs to do, and the Abramoff corruption scandal offers us a golden opportunity to do just that.

Want to help us push Congress to raise the ante, and start a bidding war on who can go further with reform? Go to our Action Center, and give your members of Congress a piece of your mind!

-Gordon Clark