THE DAILY DELAY

DeLay won't seek re-election, will resign from Congress

2006-04-03T23:00:00.000-05:00

Tom DeLay will not seek reelection, according to TIME. A year and a half ago, we came to the conclusion that Tom DeLay was not fit for public office. His fundraising excesses led to numerous Ethics Committee violations in early October 2004. We asked our members, "Should we engage in a public education campaign in Tom DeLay's district? And they responded resoundingly "Yes!"

And we, together, began that campaign. At the time, Washington insiders thought we were crazy. In October 2004 we were told, Don't waste your money, don't waste your time; DeLay will never lose that seat, nor will he ever relinquish it.

But our members told us then, If we don't take on Tom DeLay's arrogance and Tom DeLay's big money agenda, then why do we , as an organization, exist?

So together we fought DeLay's big money agenda before it was self-evident to do so. We had some allies, like Democracy for America. We set up a blog called the Daily DeLay before he became one-and-the-same with the culture of corruption. We ran advertisements in DeLay's backyard before progressives found out that Tom DeLay was a good "fundraising tool." And, along with Josh Marshall, we led the charge against the DeLay rule when Republicans tried to give him a get out of jail free card. More allies were with us then, including MoveOn. We're proud of our work, and the work of others along the way, in blazing a trail of accountability.

Tonight, TIME magazine's Mike Allen, who did some of the best reporting on DeLay, along with many others, in an exclusive interview, that Tom DeLay will not seek reelection and will resign from Congress.

The story tonight is that a politician reached too far, broke too many rules and laws, and people had enough. They had enough around the country and they had enough in his district.

Let's be honest: DeLay is in legal trouble because of his own actions. But he is in political trouble because we wouldn't sit back and let the chips fall, and because we wouldn't just write off a district, despite the odds.

DeLay hints that he'll be back fighting from the outside. I think we ought to keep our eyes on that. This man, with his corrupt ways should have no part in the publi cpolicy arena. Keep him away from our taxdollars, thank you very much.

One last note: If we don't go after the DeLays of the world, regardless of electoral or partisan considerations, shame on us. If we don't fight DeLay-ism, we sentence ourselves to a repeat of history.

More later.

New Blog. Come Visit.

2006-03-13T16:48:00.000-05:00

We've moved the Daily DeLay entries over to a new blog today. At the new blog, you can read that which would normally be posted here, and much more.

Please join the conversation. We've just posted something about a potential investigation into DeLay's ARMPAC at the new site.

Changes

2006-03-10T14:01:00.000-05:00

Next Monday, we’ll be launching a new website, with a new blog. Because DeLay-ism is so ingrained in the big money culture of Washington, we’ve come to decide that the Daily DeLay’s reporting, commentary, analysis, and community should take this bigger view, too.

In fact, we’ve been doing just that over the last six months. We want to clearly identify and consistently promote opportunities to address the corruption DeLay brought upon our nation’s capitol, and weave together the stories from other breaking and emerging scandals.

So, come next Monday, March 13th, what we would nornally be posting at the Daily DeLay will be posted at Public Campaign Action Fund’s new website. We will be "tagging" these posts so that those of you who only want to get the latest news on Tom DeLay can easily access just that. But we also want you to have an opportunity to weigh in on the new design, new tools, and broader focus, so poke around a bunch.

Our next post on Monday morning will provide you with the new URL for the broader new blog.

Please be assured that the passion to hold DeLay accountable, and the laser-like focus on DeLay’s big money, unethical agenda will continue unabated. I said this in 2004 when we first took on the powerful then-Majority Leader in his home district, at a time when no one else thought he was vulnerable, and I'll say it again today:

If we don’t fight to hold Tom DeLay accountable, then why do we exist?

But I also think that the politicians and special interests who engage in the legal corruption that happens everyday in the corridors of power in Washington and state capitals around the country need to be held accountable, too.

The new blog at the new site will tell this story and give citizens a chance to engage in a debate, offer ideas, learn more about their own elected officials, and take action. The power of many people acting together to take on big money is the only way to change it. DeLay is the brashest symbol of the problem, but the focus has to be on DeLay-ism...

So keep coming back, and when the new site is up, let us know what you think. Thanks!

Retired Justice Sandra Day O'Connor blasts Tom DeLay

2006-03-10T13:17:00.000-05:00

On NPR this morning, Nina Totenberg covered a speech by retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor in which she took DeLay to task, not by name but by deed. Here's a partial transcript, courtesy of Raw Story:

And then she took aim at former House GOP leader Tom DeLay. She didn’t name him, but she quoted his attacks on the courts at a meeting of the conservative Christian group Justice Sunday last year when DeLay took out after the courts for rulings on abortions, prayer and the Terri Schiavo case. This, said O’Connor, was after the federal courts had applied Congress’ onetime only statute about Schiavo as it was written. Not, said O’Connor, as the congressman might have wished it were written. This response to this flagrant display of judicial restraint, said O’Connor, her voice dripping with sarcasm, was that the congressman blasted the courts.

Another Brick In The Wall

2006-03-10T11:24:00.000-05:00

Peter Cloeren, who himself has pleaded guilty to violating campaign finance laws, has been issued a subpoena by Travis County prosecutor Ronnie Earle. Earle wants records of contributions made by Cloeren's Citizens United Political Victory Fund to Tom DeLay.

From The Orange Leader in Orange, Texas:

" In an affidavit signed in 1998, Cloeren said DeLay urged him to evade campaign finance laws and funnel more money than legally allowed into the Babin campaign. DeLay denied the accusation, according to the AP."

It's amazing how many things DeLay denies.

one of my closest and dearest friends, Jack Abramoff...

2006-03-09T13:02:00.000-05:00

Check out Think Progress for a reality check on DeLay's friendship with Jack Abramoff. DeLay continues to try to distance himself, but his own words give him away again and again.

DeLay's prospects down-graded

2006-03-09T09:56:00.000-05:00

Congressional Quarterly agrees with our take.

My two cents about DeLay's 'victory' yesterday

2006-03-08T16:15:00.000-05:00

I know Rick wrote about this earlier, but I wanted to add my two cents...

In 2004, in the general election, DeLay received 55% of the vote. Yesterday, in a low turnout, only-the-faithful-voting primary election, he got 62%, only slightly better than where he was among all voters, Democrats included, a year and a half ago.

I don't believe any spin on this race coming out of DeLay's camp. DeLay is in Trouble, with a capital T.

Hotline Running Snippets of Vanity Fair Interview With Abramoff

2006-03-08T11:17:00.000-05:00

Courtesy of the DailyKos, the Hotline Blog is posting snippets of an interview with Jack Abramoff that will be printed in Vanity Fair. From the blog:

"According to the Vanity Fair article, Pres. Bush once teased Abramoff about his muscular build. 'What are you benching, buff guy?'"

What do you think McClellan will say when asked about these new allegations that Jack and W. are closer than the White House has let on?

UPDATE: From ThinkProgress.org, you can read an advanced copy of the article here.

Circle The Wagons: DeLay and Lampson Will Vie For Seat

2006-03-08T11:08:00.000-05:00

DeLay was able to secure the GOP nod in TX-22 (he received 62% of the vote) but not by the margin expected from a sitting incumbent in a Republican leaning district. DeLay remains as vulnerable as people have been saying he is. Cal Jillson, a political scientist at Southern Methodist University in Dallas, said:

"DeLay will have to capture two-thirds of the vote in order to claim he's out of trouble."

DeLay came up just shy of that magic number and that's not good news for DeLay.

In 2004 Bush took 64% of the vote in DeLay's district while DeLay himself only got 55% and he was running against a weak Democratic challenger (not to mention that that election was pre-indictment and before the Abramoff scandal broke).

DeLay can celebrate today but he's going to have a fight on his hands in the coming months. With lower support, a cloud of controversy surrounding him, and something he hasn't seen in a long while, a well funded opponent with a bone to pick, DeLay will be fighting for his political life in the coming months.

Election returns

2006-03-07T21:07:00.000-05:00

You can get election returns as they are reported at the Texas Secretary of State's website.

For TX-22 GOP primary, go here.

For TX-28 Democratic primary, go here.

Abramoff to be sentenced in Florida fraud case March 29

2006-03-07T16:17:00.000-05:00

Why is this important?

Well, to get a lighter sentence, Jack Abramoff has to show that he's cooperating with authorities. Abbe Lowell, his lawyer, says,

We will name names. We will provide the public with evidence of what is going on out there," Lowell said. "It seems to me that is not in the interest of law enforcement."

Get your popcorn. The caged bird is about to sing.

While Voters Vote...DeLay Parties With Lobbyists in D.C.

2006-03-07T13:21:00.000-05:00

Tom DeLay won't be in Houston for today's primary. Instead he's partying in D.C. at a fundraiser hosted by lobbyists Bill Paxon and Susan Molinari, both former lawmakers from New York. See the CNN report here.

Could there be better proof that DeLay cares more about his cash constituents than his those folks back in Sugarland?

The Big Buy: Coming to a house party near you

2006-03-07T10:34:00.000-05:00

A couple of Texas filmmakers have produced a movie called "The Big Buy: How Tom DeLay Stole Congress," and Robert Greenwald and his Brave New Films (Outfoxed, the Walmart movie, etc.) are on tap to promote and distribute it.

The New York Times writes it up in this morning's paper.

I had the good fortune to see an early rough cut last fall, and it's not your typical political movie. While the rough cut tries hard to squeeze everything into the "cops and robbers" framework, I understand a few more political moments are added -- including a clip of convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff telling a crowd of College Republicans that Tom DeLay is someone they should be like when they grow up as an introduction to the Majority Leader.

You can purchase a DVD or sign up to host a screening at their website... I just signed up myself...

Today is Primary Day

2006-03-07T10:29:00.000-05:00

Here is Bloomberg with a round up on DeLay's primary race today, in which he confronts three Republican challengers. Stay tuned--we'll update as the news rolls in.

In Day Before Primary, DeLay Keeps His Head Low

2006-03-06T15:09:00.000-05:00

DeLay's Republican base is a little uneasy the night before the primary...according to the Washington Post.

I don't think there is any doubt that DeLay will win the primary. The big question is if he can retain his seat come this November.

Houston Chronicle endorses Campbell for TX-22 primary

2006-03-05T14:02:00.000-05:00

Here's the endorsement.

How confident (and tone deaf) is DeLay?

2006-03-03T12:55:00.000-05:00

From the Wall Street Journal (no link):

Former Majority Leader DeLay, girding for November defense of his House seat, plans fund-raiser Tuesday hosted by lobbyists Bill Paxon and Susan Molinari.

Next Tuesday is the primary election in Texas. Nice message to voters in Sugarland, and everywhere, huh?

DeLay: It's primary election day and I'm spending it raising money from lobbyists.

DeLay' laying the ground work for the Fall

2006-03-02T14:11:00.000-05:00

I'm not writing off the primary challengers. Who knows? But it's not likely any of them will knock him off.

What is clear though, is that DeLay is running a smart campaign on the ground.

He’s using a relatively new, innovative micro-targeting approach to ID’ing voters and determining which message moves which voter by compiling significant amount of information from and on voters, matching that commercially available data, and grafting it on to, I assume, analytic public opinion research.

The Chronicle story linked above gives a window in, and the reporter, Samantha Levine, grasps the technique relatively well. DeLay’s campaign is state of the art, and expensive, but it means that every dollar he spends on voter contact from now on is very efficient. Unless Lampson is doing the same or is able to raise massive amounts of money for boatloads broadcast, this is a sign of trouble.

Here's one example of how to read between the lines. The last part of the story:

The next phase for DeLay, who's favored in the primary, is a "long and sustained voter education" program. That will include comparing Democratic candidate former Rep. Nick Lampson to Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the Californian who leads the Democrats in the House and is a lightning rod for Republican ire.

When asked whether voters in the 22nd District know who Pelosi is, [DeLay campaign manager Chris] Homan said he knows they do.

"I've done polling on her," he said.

It’s not that all voters know about Pelosi. No way. That's the wrong question. It's which voters care about Pelosi. DeLay’s team, through polling and regression/discriminate analysis, have likely identified key voting blocs in Lampson’s base who move when they hear a message tying Lampson to Pelosi.

This window into DeLay’s campaign shows that this old dog learned some new tricks and that he’s willing to give over the campaign to pros. And it lends itself very well to someone who has to rehabilitate his imagewith voters, particularly because of his personal betrayal of them.

Picture says a thousand words, indeed

2006-03-01T13:02:00.000-05:00

Now appearing in Tom DeLay's district.

(Our online petition version.)

Thanks to Daily DeLay reader BK.

Update: This picture apparently comes courtesy of Juanita's -- credit where credit's due -- but I can't find a direct link to it.

Happy 48th Birthday...

2006-02-28T10:27:00.000-05:00

Jack Abramoff.

Breaking: Wade bribed two more members

2006-02-24T14:34:00.000-05:00

Update I: Okay, the headline here is not exactly right -- it was written after I first heard the news but before I read the entire plea agreement. New Headline: Wade Made Illegal Contributions to Two Members.

Mitchell Wade of MZM -- the guy who bribed Duke Cunningham -- apparently made illegal campaign donations to two other members of Congress. More soon.

--

Update II: CNN has the AP story. Key paragraph:

Wade, former president of defense contractor MZM Inc. in Washington, also acknowledged making nearly $80,000 in illegal campaign contributions in the names of MZM employees and their spouses to two other members of Congress, who were not identified. The lawmakers apparently were unaware the donations were illegal, according to court papers.

And San Diego Union-Tribune (their reporting has been amazing on this story) has more:

In a summary of the prosecution's case, Assistant U.S. Attorney Howard R. Sklamberg disclosed that Wade made about $80,000 in illegal campaign contributions in 2004 and 2006 to two members of Congress he did not name. The lawmakers were targeted because they had the potential to steer federal contracts to MZM.

Color me naive. How do you not know when this many fraudulent contributions come in? We're not talking about a donation here or there. Who are these members? Katherine Harris? Virgil Goode? John Doolittle? Others?

But the real question is, what did these members promise in return for the contributions?

DeLay's Pre-Primary Report

2006-02-24T10:17:00.000-05:00

Tom DeLay had to file his pre-primary fundraising and expenses with the FEC.

What do you see of note?

Here are some interesting notes:

No media expenses I can tell.

DeLay spent $92.01 for pest control on 2/8/06. I guess those cockroaches follow him everywhere, like homing pigeons.

He spent $3895 on rent in January and February. That seems very high.

He spent about $14,000 on telemarketing. Is this a fundraising expense, or voter conact?

He bought a dataset -- targeted voters -- from the NRA. Is the $962.01 fair market value? And another $2900 to Texas Right to Life PAC for list expenses.

He paid $110,000 to McGuirreWoods for legal fees. Why not the legal defense fund for this expense?

He spent more than $16,000 on direct mail and thousands more in postage -- I guess that's the 8-page letter.

Bill Moyers' Speech: Saving Democracy

2006-02-24T09:08:00.000-05:00

Bill Moyers has been barnstorming California on an eight-day speaking tour focusing his considerable intellect and voice on the scandals in Washington and what we can do to clean up politics.

Public Campaign's (and Daily DeLay's!) very own Nancy Watzman and Micah Sifry helped in the drafting of the speech, and we are proud to post it on our affiliated site over at Public Campaign.

Read it here.

Please forward it to friends, family, colleagues, and associates right away.

Here are some snippets:

On the urgency of the fight to clean up politics:

The great progressive struggles in our history have been waged to make sure ordinary citizens, and not just the rich, share in the benefits of a free society. Yet today the public may support such broad social goals as affordable medical coverage for all, decent wages for working people, safe working conditions, a secure retirement, and clean air and water, but there is no government 'of, by, and for the people' to deliver on those aspirations. Instead, our elections are bought out from under us and our public officials do the bidding of mercenaries. Money is choking democracy to death. So powerfully has wealth shaped our political agenda that we cannot say America is working for all of America.

On Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff:

DeLay was a man on the move and on the take. But he needed help to sustain the cash flow. He found it in a fellow right wing ideologue named Jack Abramoff. Abramoff personifies the Republican money machine of which DeLay with the blessing of the House leadership was the major domo. It was Abramoff who helped DeLay raise those millions of dollars from campaign donors that bought the support of other politicians and became the base for an empire of corruption. DeLay praised Abramoff as 'one of my closest friends.' Abramoff, in turn, told a convention of college Republicans, 'Thank God Tom DeLay is majority leader of the house. Tom DeLay is who all of us want to be when we grow up.'

On the cost of corruption and sacrifice:

There are, as I said, no victimless crimes in politics. The cost of corruption is passed on to you. When the government of the United States falls under the thumb of the powerful and privileged, regular folks get squashed.
This week I visited for the first time the Museum of the Presidio in San Francisco. From there American troops shipped out to combat in the Pacific. Many never came back. On the walls of one corridor are photographs of some of those troops, a long way from home. Looking at them, I wondered: Is this what those Marines died for on the Marianas – for sweatshops, the plunder of our public trust, the corruption of democracy? Government of the Abramoffs, by the DeLays, and for the people who bribe them?
I don't think so.

Read the entire speech – it will take you a little while, but it's worth it. And then get back to work to fight against the greed and for real reform.

Here's the URL

http://www.publicampaign.org/savingdemocracy/

If this speech moves you, tell your member of Congress to support the Clean Elections-style public financing Moyers advocates for in his speech.

The power of these words can shape the debate. I'm certain of it.

DeLay's Letter to Constituents

2006-02-23T14:40:00.000-05:00

Think Progress has a copy of DeLay's handwritten letter to his constituents in TX-22 (primary only a few weeks away!) with this image being the most incredulous part:

Like A Free Ride When You've Already Paid

2006-02-23T10:55:00.000-05:00

Texas Joe Barton (R-TX) is down right mad at Citgo. He's mad because while oil prices are at an all time high, Citgo had the gaul to start a program that offered heating oil to the poor in the Northeast at rates up to 60% below market price. That's right, Citgo, and only Citgo, started an oil-for-the-poor program so those less fortunate than others could heat their home this winter.

And he's is so mad that he's demanding, according to the New York Daily News, that the company produce by tomorrow all "all records, minutes, logs, e-mails and even desk calendars related to Citgo's novel program of supplying discounted heating oil to low-income communities in the United States."

Barton want this information and anwsers to these questions:

"'how and why were the particular beneficiaries of this program selected' and whether the program 'runs afoul of any U.S. laws, including but not limited to, antitrust laws.'"

It's no surprise to learn that Barton is second only to Tom DeLay in receiving oil industry money.

So while all the other oil companies are raking in record profits and consumers are wondering if they are price gouging us, Barton goes after the one company that offered discounted oil to those who needed help the most this winter.

Isn't it ironic...

New Report: America For Sale

2006-02-22T14:20:00.000-05:00

Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) just released a new report called America For Sale: The Cost of Republican Corruption (pdf). It's 118 pages of meticulously researched examples of how money in politics corruption costs you every day of the week in higher gas prices, higher prescription drug prices, higher interest rates on student loans, and so on.

The length makes it a weighty report to read (I would have broken it down into volumes, myself), but it pulls no punches.

There is a cost to the corruption DeLay and Co. have perpetrated upon us. It impacts our wallets, our economic health, our environment and public health, our security, and, importantly, our trust in all of our public servants, be they Democrats, Republicans, or have some other affiliation. The GOP Congressional leadership and the White House ought to be held accountable for all the examples outlined in Rep. Slaughter's report and for lowering our collective expectations of political leaders. They have damaged public trust in Congress as an institution and they ought to pay a price.

Our work over the next nine months will be to educate voters about who is at fault.

The legacy of the cost of corruption is real and it can be measured in dollars, lives, and dashed dreams.

Yesterday was not a good day if your last name starts with an S, ends with an M, and has the letters "antoru" in the middle

2006-02-22T13:30:00.000-05:00

Sen. Rick Santorum's (R-PA) $500,000 five year mortgage on his home in Leesburg, VA is in question. The loan came from a small Philadelphia bank (who also happens to be a major financial contributor to Santorum's political interests) even though the loan is contrary to the Bank's stated policy to "make loans only to its 'affluent' investors'" of which Santorum is not. From the Philadelphia Daily News:

"Philadelphia Trust advertises itself as an independent private bank for 'affluent investors' - who have liquid assets of at least $250,000 - and for institutions. On its Web site, it states that its "[b]anking services are available only to investment advisory clients whose portfolios we manage, oversee or administer."

Santorum does not meet these requirements which, if true, means he may have violated Senate ethics rules.

And how much cash has the bank given Santorum?

"Officials with Philadelphia Trust have been generous supporters of Santorum's campaign since the private bank opened its doors in late 1998. Federal records show the company's executives, directors and their spouses have donated $24,000 either to the senator's campaign or to the America's Foundation PAC. Of that total, $13,000 came from the man who signed the mortgage papers - Philadelphia Trust CEO Michael Crofton - and his wife.
"Crofton also has been chairman of the board of advisers for Operation Good Neighbor, and records show the bank has donated at least $10,000 to the senator's charity."

Unfortunately for Santorum, the story doesn't end there. The Philadelphia Daily News also calls into question contributions and spending by the Senator's PAC.

Abramoff Sentencing May Be Put On Hold

2006-02-17T17:17:00.000-05:00

ABC News reports that prosecutors and defense attorneys for Jack Abramoff are asking for a delay in his Florida sentencing while Jack helps D.O.J. investigate broader government corruption allegations.

This news has got to rattle a few cages (and some nerves).

Abramoff and Rove: Two Peas In A Pod

2006-02-15T16:58:00.000-05:00

Los Angles Times story outlining Abramoff's relationship with the White House and Karl Rove with particular detail to an Abramoff client, the country of Malaysia. And as with almost every scandal story that comes out today, DeLay and his associates are connected to Abramoff's web of deceit.

Feds Subpoena U.S. Family Network

2006-02-14T13:04:00.000-05:00

Remember the U.S. Family Network? This is the operation run by by Ed Buckham, formally Tom DeLay's chief of staff, that reporteldy received most of its funding in the late 1990s from clients of Abramoff.

Now federal investigators have issued a subpoena for documents relating to the group, reports the National Journal.

Of special interest to the investigators is the $15,600 that the group paid to Liberty Consulting in 1999. That firm was run by the wife of Tony Rudy, who was DeLay's deputy chief of staff before he became a lobbyist at Abramoff's firm. Rudy is one of the two former Hill staffers mentioned in Abramoff's plea agreement who offered legislative help after receiving gifts and other favors. According to the National Journal,

The subpoena asks for U.S. Family Network documents relating to Abramoff; Tony and Lisa Rudy; DeLay and his wife, Christine; Buckham and his wife, Wendy; and several dozen other individuals and groups that have been linked to Abramoff by investigators and news reports. Others mentioned in the subpoena include Ralph Reed and Grover Norquist, two of Abramoff's longtime friends who played roles in some of his lobbying activities for his Indian casino clients.

The whole gang!

Of course the U.S. Family Network is also the same group that received $1 million reported to come from Russian energy executives to influence DeLay's vote on an issue related to funding from the International Monetary Fund to help the troubled Russian economy and its business elites.

We told Houstonites about all this in an ad several weeks ago. View it here.

Hastert Gets Unwanted Attention

2006-02-14T12:01:00.000-05:00

Over at The Washington Post, today there is a report on how House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) could become a new focus of scrutiny. While he has largely escaped attention as scandal engulfs Tom DeLay and other members of his party, the fact that he has repeatedly stood up for DeLay could come back to haunt him:

As DeLay's legal peril mounted, Hastert backed him at every turn, attempting to change House rules to allow an indicted leader to stay in power and even altering the leadership of the ethics committee, which had been exposing misconduct by the majority leader....

Then when Earle began an investigation of the fundraising associated with DeLay's campaign to pass the redistricting plan, Hastert became increasingly involved in efforts to protect DeLay -- both out of loyalty and out of deference, former leadership aides said.

In June 2003, Jack Abramoff's Washington restaurant, Signatures, was the site of a fundraiser for Hastert. Several days later, Hastert signed a letter to Interior Secretary Gale A. Norton, asking her to reject a request from a tribe for a new casino. Abramoff's client was a tribe with rival interests.

Stay tuned.

DeLay Challenger Goes to Utah In Search Of Campaign Cash

2006-02-14T11:54:00.002-05:00

Tom Campbell, who is challenging DeLay for the GOP nod in TX-22, headed north to Salt Lake City in search of campaign cash. Campbell, who is self-declaring himself a "reformer," attended a fundraiser held by Sen. Orrin Hatch's son. Entry fee to the event varied from $250 to $1,000.

When asked about his campaign, Campbell said "the bottom line is: It runs on money."

Spoken like a true "reformer"....

Texas redistricting

2006-02-10T12:31:00.000-05:00

Lu Dubose, co-author with Jan Reid of The Hammer Comes Down: The Nasty, Brutish and Shortened Political Life of Tom DeLay, has a good piece over at TomPaine.com summarizing the DeLay Texas redistricting debacle.

He reminds us that the U.S. Supreme Court will be reviewing the redistricting plan next month, with arguments on March 1. That day attorneys representing civil rights groups and a Texas county wiill question the redrawing of district lines three years after the census. They will argue that the new plan diluted minority votes, violating the Voting Rights Act.

Last week, White House submitted an amicus brief supporting the Texas plan. As Dubose writes, this is no great surprise given how closely DeLay worked with Rove and others in the Bush administration on the redistricting scheme:

Because the Bush team worked hand in hand with the majority leader. DeLay known for the intimidating and at times thuggish behavior that earned him the name “the Hammer”—did the heavy lifting in Texas. The president and his advisers applied the pressure in Washington. Bush senior adviser Karl Rove did much of the work, but the campaign extended beyond the White House. The president’s political appointees at the U.S. Department of Justice helped out, suppressing a legal opinion that found the DeLay plan in violation of minority voters’ rights.

It depends on what the definition of a "friend" is

2006-02-09T11:02:00.000-05:00

Tom DeLay just sent a nine-page letter to his GOP constituents, claiming that it is "absolutely untrue" that he was a "close personal friend" of Jack Abramoff's. Hmmm...all those trips, all those gifts (remember the Three Tenors concert)? We suppose it's all in the definition of what Tom DeLay considers a friend...

The Roll Call article reporting on this letter (text available with subscription) goes on to talk about the tough reelection fight DeLay faces, and how he is trying to raise as much as $9 million, which could make the race the most expensive in history. DeLay has already ramped up his grassroots organizing and fundraising, and hopes to get much of his cash from conservatives nationwide. He has also hired a bunch of fundraising pros with deep ties to the Republican party, President Bush, and Karl Rove.

The story also quotes a "top House Republican leadership aide, saying:

No one knows what the next shoe to drop [on DeLay] is going to be...He's not radioactive, not yet, but if there are indictments handed down, then it will be tough to be seen with him...

How to succeed in Congress

2006-02-09T10:46:00.000-05:00

What is Tom DeLay's reward for bringing disgrace and scandal to the House of Representatives? A coveted seat on the House Appropriations Committee, that's what. And, get this--DeLay will sit on a subcommittee overseeing the Justice Department which has jurisdiction over the Justice Department. That's right, the same agency that is now investigating the Jack Abramoff scandals. Read the AP story here.

And why is there a vacancy on the Appropriations Committee? Because Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA) resigned after pleading guilty in November to accepting bribes in return for government business and other favors.

We couldn't make this stuff up.

Meet the old boss, same as the new boss

2006-02-08T17:06:00.000-05:00

We've already said it, but now the Palm Beach Post is saying it in an editorial detailing how the election of Rep. John Boehner (R-OH) is not exactly a breath of fresh air. After going through Boehner's history of passing out tobacco checks, the paper notes:

Just as Republicans thought they might have been venting the stench from the Abramoff lobbying scandal, Rep. Boehner settled for spraying some deodorizer. He announced on Sunday that he saw no reason to ban two of the most egregious abuses: free travel for congressmen paid for by private groups, and "earmarks," often inserted secretly, that set aside money for pork barrel projects...Democrats can thank Rep. Boehner for keeping the Abramoff issue alive.

DeLay fights for his political life

2006-02-08T16:50:00.000-05:00

That's the headline from this story from the Star Telegram. Boehner's election has shifted the balance of power in Congress. Some select quotes:

[I]t is a diminished DeLay who is fighting for his political life.

The only perk he's got left of his leadership life is his security detail...

People close to DeLay say that he is frustrated by his evaporating ability to act and distracted by his re-election battle.

"We think Tom DeLay is dead," said Craig McDonald, director of Texans for Public Justice. "He's dead politically."

Mr. DeLay Goes To Austin

2006-02-06T16:46:00.000-05:00

DeLay is heading to Austin in search of campaign cash (how ironic): From KXAN.com news brief:

"Congressman Tom DeLay of Sugarland returns to Austin, not for another court appearance, but for two fundraisers. The former U.S. House Majority Leader denies any wrongdoing as he faces money laundering charges related to Texas Legislative races back in 2002."

The Enron E-Mails

2006-02-03T10:38:00.000-05:00

Back in 2003, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission released some 1.5 million email messages that it collected as part of its investigation of Enron's price-gouging of California consumers. The press pounced on some of the choicer bits, but this is truly the gift that keeps giving.

For example, here is Ralph Reed, former head of the Christian Coalition, then on retainer to Enron, writing to company VP Richard Shapiro, who was one of its in-house lobbyists:

From: ralph@censtrat.com
To: rshapiro@enron.com
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: 19 Dec 2000 15:19 PST
Subject: abramoff

Rick, good to see you today. excited about the prospects of the new office, kitchen cabinet/advisory team, etc.

as we discussed, jack abramoff is joining barry richards' law firm, Greenberg Traurig, on january 1. richards was just named lawyer of the year by the American lawyer while abramoff is arguably the most influential and effective gop lobbyist in congress. i share several clients with him and have yet to see him lose a battle. he also is very close to Delay and could help enormously on that front. raised $ for bush. until december 31 he can be reached at 202-661-3851. he assistant is Susan Ralston. [Emphasis added]

Ralston went on to be Karl Rove's personal assistant, by the way. And here's one that shows how Enron spread its money around and made sure several Members of Congress could take credit for its donations to the RNC. But note at the bottom where DeLay is described asking Enron for $100,000 in corporate and individual contributions to his federal PAC, ARMPAC, and where it is explained that the money will be used, in part, on the redistricting effort in Texas.

From: Carolyn Cooney
To: Rosalee Fleming , steven.kean@enron.com
Cc: tori.wells@enron.com, Richard Shapiro , Linda Robertson
Bcc: tori.wells@enron.com, Richard Shapiro , Linda Robertson
Date: 01 Jun 2001 04:06 PDT
Subject: The President's Dinner, June 27th In Washington, DC

May 31, 2001

To: Ken Lay
Steve Kean

From: Rick Shapiro
Linda Robertson

Subject: The President=01,s Dinner, A Congressional Salute Honoring Preside=nt=20 Bush and Vice President Cheney, June 27, 2001 in Washington, DC

This memo is a follow up to your phone conversation with Roger Enrico=20 regarding Enron contributing $250,000 to The President=01,s Dinner. The=20 President=01,s Dinner is a joint fundraising effort by the National Republi=can=20 Congressional Committee (NRCC) and the National Republican Senatorial=20 Committee (NRSC). We contacted both Congressman Tom DeLay and the House=20 Senate Dinner committee to ensure that Enron could fully participate in The==20 President=01,s Dinner and receive credit for money we have already committe=d to=20 give to the Committees earlier this year. =20

With the assistance of Congressman Tom DeLay we were able to apply our=20 previously contributed soft money toward this dinner. Consequently, we wil=l=20 be =01&credited=018 as giving $250,000 to this event, even though we are be=ing=20 asked to give only $50,00 in =01&new=018 soft money. Our earlier contribut=ions of=20 $100,000 each to the NRCC and NRSC will make up the remaining money. You==20 will be listed as Co-Chair of the event, the highest level of giving. We==20 will be crediting Congressmen DeLay, Armey, Barton and Tauzin for raising t=he=20 $100,000 allocation for the NRCC. As for $100,000 we earlier gave the NRSC=,=20 Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison has requested that Enron give her some credit==20 for raising the money. We would like to split it among several other=20 Senators. =20

In addition, Congressman Tom DeLay has asked Enron to contribute $100,000 t=o=20 his leadership committee, ARMPAC, through a combination of corporate and=20 personal money from Enron=01,s executives. ARMPAC funds will be used to as=sist=20 other House Members as well as the redistricting effort in Texas. We will =be=20 meeting this request over the course of this calendar year. [Emphases added.]

With the Enron trials underway, we thought this would be a good time to dig into this e-mail trove. But it's too big to do alone. So, if you have some spare time and want to help bring more gems like these to light, go to the Enron Email Corpus and start searching. Post your best finds in the comments below, and we'll do our best to help shine a light on what you find.

The Boehner ad

2006-02-02T15:49:00.000-05:00

Cold. Hard. Cash.

We've also posted a quick summary of Boehner's likeness to the disgraced Majority Leader he replaces, Tom DeLay. Feel free to circulate:

The Facts on John Boehner (R-OH)

1. Like Tom DeLay, John Boehner has close ties to K Street

Boehner played a key role in Tom DeLay's vaunted "K Street Project" to encourage lobbying firms to hire Republicans. In fact, beginning soon after the GOP took control of Congress in 1995, Boehner held weekly meetings with about a dozen of the most powerful lobbyists in the speaker's suite in the Capitol. "He was a policy traffic cop for the business community," said a colleague of Boehner's of his role as chairman of the GOP conference. "He ... translated business outreach into votes."1 Across the span of his career, Boehner has raised nearly 95% of his money from business interests.

2. Like Tom DeLay, John Boehner raises money from the industries he regulates

Special interest groups and lobbyists have two paths by which to try to influence John Boehner: his campaign account and his leadership PAC, the Freedom Project.

Boehner chairs the powerful Committee on Education and the Workforce, which has jurisdiction over minimum wage, worker safety and compensation, and employee protections, as well as student loan policy. Boehner also serves as vice chair of the powerful Committee on Agriculture, which has jurisdiction over a broad range of agribusiness including the tobacco industry. From student loans to tobacco, Boehner has favored special interests over the public interest.

Boehner's 10th highest contributor over the span of his career is tobacco giant RJR Nabisco/RJ Reynolds Tobacco. The cigarette manufacturer is also a consistent and generous donor to Boehner's Freedom Project leadership PAC. Some argue that Boehner and other Republican leaders reneged on a promise to introduce legislation in 1998 to prevent children from smoking after they received large contributions from tobacco industry PACs. John Boehner (R-OH) took $10,800 from the tobacco industry during that cycle. At the time, the average contribution from the tobacco industry to Boehner and other members of the Republican leadership was $12,700, over five times more than the average House member's $2,360.2 In 1996, Boehner came under fire for distributing campaign checks from tobacco interests to colleagues on the House floor.

Last year, Rep. Boehner supported legislation that would benefit banks that make student loans and increase payments for millions of students. Between 2003 and 2004, banks and other institutions that provide loans to students donated nearly $60,000 to Boehner and nearly $70,000 to his leadership PAC, the Freedom Project.3

3. Like Tom DeLay, John Boehner Curries Favor with fellow Republicans

Of the $8.7 million he has raised in his congressional career, John Boehner has donated $2.7 million to Republican colleagues and candidates since 1998, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. "Money talks, and John is listened to," said Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) who is himself embroiled in the Abramoff scandal.4

4. Like Tom DeLay, Boehner Likes to Travel on the Dime of Special Interests

A group of Washington lobbyists led by Richard Kessler under the umbrella of the Ripon Educational Fund and the Ripon Society has spent millions of dollars taking lawmakers to European capitals and U.S. resorts, thereby skirting congressional ethics rules that forbid registered lobbyists from paying for congressional travel. John Boehner took two trips costing a total of at least $13,920.5

5. Like Tom DeLay, Boehner has Connections to the Abramoff Scandal

John Boehner received $32,500 in political contributions from Indian tribes represented by fallen lobbyist Jack Abramoff, placing him in the top tier of lawmakers who got donations from the lobbyist or his clients. Only 12 other members of Congress raked in more money than Boehner.6

6. Boehner votes with Tom DeLay

John Boehner voted with Tom DeLay 96% of the time between 1991 and 2005.7

ENDNOTES

The Hill, Oct 6, 2005.
Public Citizen: http://www.citizen.org/...
Center for Responsive Politics.
Associated Press, June 26, 2000.
Public Citizen report, January 23, 2006.
Center for Responsive Politics, The Cincinnati Post, January 5, 2006, http://news.cincypost.com/...
http://www.pcactionfund.org

Counting all the votes, twice

2006-02-02T13:28:00.000-05:00

In the race for Majority Leader, early signs are that the Republicans are taking balloting seriously:

House Republicans are taking a mulligan on the first ballot for Majority Leader. The first count showed more votes cast than Republicans present at the Conference meeting.

(via Roll Call)

That's the ticket -- finally the GOP agrees they should count all the votes. Any paper ballots?

UPDATE: Roy Temple of FiredUp! America adds:

This discrepancy can be accounted for quite simply. A number of people had taken so much money from both Blunt and Boehner that they felt obligated to cast a ballot for each of their financial patrons.

A colleague wonders if they had Katherine Harris counting the votes.

DeLay wants to keep in shape

2006-02-02T10:53:00.000-05:00

Tom DeLay must be worried about staying in shape.

He was one of the 50 House members voting "no" yesterday on a new ban on former members of Congress who become registered lobbyists from using the House gym.

He must be thinking ahead. A guy has to keep in shape, after all.

(Thanks, Murshed Zaheed)

Off to the races

2006-02-02T10:28:00.000-05:00

Today is the big day: House Republicans will vote on which version of DeLay-ism will be their new majority leader: Roy Blunt (R-MS), John Boehner (R-OH), or John Shadegg (R-AZ).

If you haven't yet seen the ads on these characters, click here.

Meanwhile, The New York Times reports that the Republicans aren't exactly ready for revolution. In a closed-door meeting, they voted 107-to-85 not to open up the seven leadership slots below House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL).

And Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) has thrown in his hat for his state colleague, Shadegg.

Is DeLay's ARMPAC Broke?

2006-02-01T11:39:00.000-05:00

DeLay's ARMPAC has no money. ARMPAC's year-end report shows that the PAC received $17,000 from six different PACS. The PAC spent a little less than that on disbursements which mostly consisted of the salaries of Delay's wife (Christine DeLay), his daughter (Danni DeLay Ferro), and his codefendant in Texas Jim Ellis (the PAC gave Ellis his December paycheck and fronted him his January one as well).

The PAC is carrying a debt of nearly $150,000 which technically makes it insolvent. The PAC reported cash-on-hand at year's end of $44,000. It also reported that $22,000 in previously-written checks had been "lost," voiding them out, and thereby giving their account a credit for that amount. Without the unexpected $22,000, ARMPAC would barely have $20,000 in the bank.

The PAC reported only one small payment to one of its three law firms and didn't report any debt owed to the other lawyers.

Hard Times Besets DeLay's Fundraising Ability

2006-02-01T11:23:00.000-05:00

DeLay's campaign committee had a rough fourth quarter. They raised $872,621.92 but had to spend $589,557.30 on fundraising costs. DeLay now only has $281,000 more than he did at the end of the third quarter.

Lampson's Cash On Hand Is Even With DeLay's

2006-02-01T11:11:00.000-05:00

Democratic candidate for congress and potential DeLay challenger Nick Lampson has reported that his campaign is just shy of $1.3 million in cash on hand. This almost matches the $1.4 million that the DeLay campaign has reported. Lampson has almost wiped out DeLay's fundraising advantage.

Blah blah blah

2006-01-31T21:18:00.000-05:00

The President unequivocally supported DeLay on national TV a month and a half ago, even after DeLay's indictments. Do we believe him tonight?

A hopeful society expects elected officials to uphold the public trust. Honorable people in both parties are working on reforms to strengthen the ethical standards of Washington – and I support your efforts. Each of us has made a pledge to be worthy of public responsibility – and that is a pledge we must never forget, never dismiss, and never betray.

Does he think Tom DeLay upheld the public trust?

Do you see what I see?

2006-01-31T21:01:00.000-05:00

The chamber, bought and sold.

Don't forget the SOTU-DeLay...

2006-01-31T20:57:00.000-05:00

...drinking game!

And a shot of DeLay

2006-01-31T20:56:00.000-05:00

Hanging out with Trent Lott. Lots in common there.

Who else will dare to be seen with him?

UPDATE: Yes, that's a sip of Bacardi, with vodka -- he was smiling!

And, over at the Daily Muck...and Think Progress

2006-01-31T13:45:00.000-05:00

Paul Kiel has a good blog post on the troubles of Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA), who, it turns out, wrote letters on behalf of two Indian gaming tribes to Interior Secretary Gale Norton. Both tribes, one from Iowa, one from Massachusetts, both pretty far away from California, were clients of Jack Abramoff's. Doolittle, who claims to be anti-gambling, is stonewalling. The Sacramento Bee, (login required) meanwhile, reports that thirteen months after Doolittle wrote his letter on behalf of the Iowa tribe, it made a $5,000 contribution to Doolittle.

Kiel also has some verbiage on Tom DeLay's interview with Chris Matthews last night. Think Progress blogs on the same, showing how Mathews lets DeLay get away with glossing over just how his junkets were financed. DeLay claims the funding came from a "legitimate conservative organization." But DeLay's airfare was charged to Abramoff's American Express card! Of course House ethics rules bar lawmakers from accepting gifts of travel from registered lobbyists.

State of the Union Drinking Game -- DeLay Edition

2006-01-31T12:40:00.000-05:00

Early press reports say President Bush's speech is likely take him about 24 minutes to deliver, but to expect the whole address to last an hour while Members of Congress and assorted dignitaries interrupt to applaud their favorite lines.

To help you enjoy the evening, we've prepared our first ever "State of the Union Drinking Game--DeLay Edition." Here are the rules (feel free to add your own):

1. Every time President Bush uses the word "lobbying reform," chug a beer.

2. Whenever the camera shows Tom DeLay, take a sip of Bacardi in honor of the $20,000 in corporate money that Bacardi USA illegally gave to his Texas PAC.

3. If DeLay is smiling, add some Russian vodka in honor of the $1million his U.S. Family Network charity received from Russian oil and gas tycoons, allegedly to buy his vote on an International Monetary Fund loan to Russia.

4. If DeLay coughs, take a swig of beer, in honor of his friend David Rehr, formally a lobbyist for the National Beer Wholesalers Association. Under Rehr’s influence, DeLay tried to block tougher drunk driving laws back in 2000.

5. If you see either Rep. Roy Blunt or Rep. John Boehner shaking hands with their colleagues, in their last-minute push for votes to succeed DeLay as Majority Leader, light up a smoke in honor of their work for Big Tobacco (Blunt attempted to slip tobacco-friendly language into the Homeland Security bill; Boehner once actually handed out campaign checks from tobacco interests on the House floor).

6. If the President actually mentions Jack Abramoff by name, try not to choke on a pretzel.

Remember, drink as responsibly as Members of Congress fundraise.

Just don't get drunk on power.

Inside Baseball

2006-01-31T11:04:00.000-05:00

If you want an inside baseball account of leadership race campaigning check out this story in today's New York Times, which reports on Blunt, Boehner, and Shadegg stumping among conservative House members. There's talk--and denial--of any trading of favors for votes. The election, implies the paper of record, may come down to personality. Each candidate, apprently, has "stiles and perspectives that play to certain constituencies."

Nothing at all here about substance of the candidates involved, about how they each are pros at pay-to-play politics, how they are practitioners of DeLayism.

Rich Lowry is wrong ... and right

2006-01-27T10:15:00.000-05:00

Over at National Review, Rich Lowry says John Shadegg is the reformer in the Majority Leader race:

Underdog Shadegg, a member of the historic class of 1994, has no inside advantages whatsoever. He has only a clean image, a serious commitment to reform, and a refreshing insistence that the GOP get back to its government-limiting basics. He offers a fresh start.

Wrong (flash).

But he is right about Roy Blunt ("Blunt has run the oldest possible old-style campaign. His appeal is partly based on the money and favors he’s given other members of Congress, and on pressure to be with the winner.") and John Boehner ("he is a practiced K Street player").

Blunt (flash)

Boehner (flash)

Majority Leader election in the era of DeLay

2006-01-26T17:54:00.000-05:00

Our partners at Public Campaign and allies at Campaign for America's Future have teamed up to release three online videos lampooning the leadership election in the House.

Watch them here.

There is a need in this Congress to address systemic reforms, not just do window-dressing. The GOP looks headed toward using a new leadership election to proclaim a break from the DeLay legacy. But they cannot wipe away DeLay-ism with a new election. They have to change the rules of the game to prevent those addicted to and drunk with power from repeating DeLay's disgraceful big money agenda.

I particularly enjoyed this USA Today editorial on the issue, which is best summed up by this passage:

The leadership race demonstrates how Congress' corrupt culture extends beyond DeLay and Abramoff. Those who rise to the top tend to be the smoothest practitioners of the system: corporate lobbyists provide money and perks to gain access and legislative favors, and lawmakers use the money to win campaigns and earn colleagues' fealty.

It's a seamy game Republicans certainly didn't invent, but one at which the two leading contenders for majority leader excel. Blunt and Boehner are both calling for changes, but it's hard to take them seriously when they're so much a part of the problem...

Blunt and Boehner have their chances to respond, but after being skewered by the editorial, it's hard to take them seriously, particularly Blunt. Just take a look at FiredUpMissouri to get a taste.

Photograph Company President that "scrubbed" Abramoff photo with Bush gave to Bush

2006-01-26T14:38:00.000-05:00

Josh has a post in which he interviews the President of Reflections Photography on why their photos of Abramoff and Bush are no longer available. From his post:

But early this afternoon, I decided to take one more go at Reflections. I talked to company president Joanne Amos. We went back and forth over various questions about whether photographs at the site were available to the public and why some had been removed. When she, at length, asked me who it was in the picture with the president. I told her we believed it was Jack Abramoff.

Amos very straightforwardly told me that the photographs had been removed and that they had been removed because they showed Abramoff and the president in the same picture. The photos were, she told me, "not relevant."

When I asked her who had instructed her to remove the photos, she told me she was the president of the company. She did it. It was "her business decision" to remove the photographs. She told me she had done so within the last month.

Business decision. Yeah, I bet. Here's the real reason:

According to the Center for Responsive Politics, Amos gave $2,000 to Bush in 2003 and $2,000 to the RNC in 2004.

She's a Republican donor helping sweep this under the rug.

UPDATE: Yes, she's making a "business decision." But did anyone at the White House point out to Amos that it would be a good business decision to remove it?

UPDATE II: You know, normally it's the politicians doing the favors for the donors, not the other way around. But here's a donor who wants to keep her business with the White House, so she's doing them a favor. A big one. This certainly is a microcosm -- a mini one with the small money involved -- that speaks volumes about how this Abramoff scandal is a campaign finance one, not simply a lobbying one, and why Congress needs to take up serious real including Clean Elections-style public financing of elections.

UPDATE III: Okay, from commenter Earl below, courtesy of Fundrace.org, looks like a total of $4,000 to the RNC and $2,000 to the Bush campaign from Joanne Amos, and $4,150 to the RNC and $2,000 to the Bush campaign from Steven Amos, who I believe is Joanne's brother and business partner. (Earl had double counted some donations below, I think.) That's a total of $12,150 from the Amos/Reflections Photography family. Pretty soon, we'll be adding up to real money.

George Will on DeLay's Defiance

2006-01-26T11:29:00.000-05:00

Tom DeLay is defiant in the face of criticism and scandal, writes George Will in today's Washington Post. We knew that, but it's still interesting to read just how defiant he is.

"I'm very proud of [the K Street Project]," he told Will, of the plan he fashioned after the GOP takeover in the mid-1990s to bully Washington trade associations and lobbying firms to hire Republicans and get rid of Democrats.

And he's not sorry about all those earmarks, either. Will points out that:

Congress under Republican control has increased earmarks 873 percent in a decade and validated the axiom that the more solicitous government becomes, the more servile it seems and the more scorn it receives. Congress has not been so unpopular since 1994, when Democrats lost their 40-year grip on the House.

But

To a visiting columnist who waxes censorious about earmarks for highway projects, DeLay responds with a notable lack of repentance: "You just drove out on one."

The world according to Tom DeLay: If I do it, it must be good.

More subpoenas

2006-01-25T15:27:00.000-05:00

Ronnie Earle has issued subpoenas surrounding donations to DeLay and former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-CA), who recently plead guilty to accepting bribes for government business and other favors, reports the AP.

The subpoenas center on a San Diego-based company called PerfectWave Technologies, run by Brent Wilkes, who has ties to both DeLay and Cunningham. According to the documents, PerfectWave received a check from another businessman. Two days later, it sent $15,000 to a Texas political group involved in DeLay's case. Another $25,000 went to a charity event for Cunningham.

Naked Pix of Abramoff and Bush Found :)

2006-01-25T13:45:00.000-05:00

New photos showing President George W. Bush and disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff "totally naked" surfaced today according to the satirist Andy Borowitz.

The photos, published yesterday in Payboy, a magazine devoted to naked pictures of disgraced lobbyists, appeared to fly in the face of the President’s claims that he had never met Mr. Abramoff.
The five photos, which appear to have been taken on five different occasions, show the two naked men smiling and shaking hands.
“The fact that they are smiling and shaking hands proves that they know each other,” said Davis Logsdon, the magazine’s photo editor. ...
“These naked pictures of the president and Jack Abramoff are nothing out of the ordinary,” Mr. McClellan says. “In the course of his daily schedule, the President oses nude with dozens of dignitaries.”
Mr. McClellan said that the American people “would have no problem believing” that Mr. Bush posed naked with Mr. Abramoff on five different occasions without actually knowing who he was.

Which leads us to ask...does Mr. McClellan mean "know" in a biblical sense?

ba da bump.

Of course, we only read "Payboy" for the articles.

ba da bump again.

Adweek Covers Tom DeLay Ad

2006-01-24T12:48:00.000-05:00

Adweek covers Houston TV stations' turnabout in deciding to air the DeLay ad.

Bush and Abramoff Caught on Camera

2006-01-24T10:49:00.000-05:00

It's been floating around the blogosphere these past few days and now the White House has finally confirmed it: photos exist of either President George W. Bush with Jack Abramoff or the president with Abramoff's children. The photos were taken at a White House Hannukah party. Why did the White House finally admit that the photos were out there? Says the New York Times:

The general assumption in Washington was that celebrity tabloids would eventually buy and publish the photographs as the unforgettable images of a scandal that Mr. Bush's aides have been anxious to keep outside the White House gates.

Earle Wants US Family Network Contribution Records

2006-01-23T19:38:00.000-05:00

Today Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle subpoenaed Robert G. Mills, a former campaign manager for Rep. Tom DeLay, reports the AP. He's seeking information about a 1999 $500,000 political contribution from the National Republican Congressional Committee to the U.S. Family Network. Many of Jack Abramoff's clients were directed to contribute to the conservative group.

2006-01-23T13:02:00.000-05:00

Here's Tom DeLay crowing to Pittsburgh Tribune Review columnist Salena Zito:

For all the hand-wringing people do about partisan politics, the fact of the matter is that the redistricting process pretty accurately reflects the will of the people. It can be nasty and partisan, but it works, just as the Founders imagined it would.

I can see it now: Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, George Washington, John Adams, the whole crew of 'em, in a huddle.

Tom: "Let's make illegal campaign contributions the cornerstone of redistricting!"

Ben: "Huzza huzza!"

Hmmph.

No longer banned in Houston

2006-01-22T23:13:00.000-05:00

Watch it.

After close to 50,000 emails from our members and members of Campaign for America's Future to four Houston TV stations, our ad is running in DeLay's congressional district. Read about it here and here.

The ad contains all the same information from the previous ad that TV stations rejected under pressure from Tom DeLay and his DC lawyers. But, in the end, we won, and the public in DeLay's district will know more about his corrupt pay-to-play politics.

Texas Prosecutors Digging Around California

2006-01-20T13:35:00.000-05:00

Texas prosecutors who have charged DeLay with campaign finance law violations are digging deeper and trying to piece together a $15,000 contribution to TRMPAC from a California based defense contractor--the same contractor that bought disgraced former Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham. This is what the prosecutors are looking for:

"On Thursday, Travis County prosecutors dug deeper into the Southern California connections to DeLay and Texans for a Republican Majority political action committee, subpoenaing a second round of records of any 'negotiations or agreements' that prompted the donation. They also asked for any communications about pending federal legislation that would have affected the firm."

Read more at the Austin American-Statesman.

Prosecutors Seek to Revive DeLay Conspiracy Charge

2006-01-19T11:34:00.000-05:00

Prosecutors are seeking to revive a criminal conspiracy charge against Rep. Tom DeLay, reports the AP. They want the 3rd Court of Appeals to reconsider the decision of State District Judge Pat Priest to dismiss a charge of conspiracy to violate state election law.

Nobody Wants to Talk About the Elephant in the Room

2006-01-19T11:09:00.000-05:00

This week has been a big one for lobby reform, with Congressional Republicans releasing their draft plans for lobbying reform and the Democrats following suit yesterday. Notably absent from all these proposals is any mention of public financing of elections, or, frankly, any mention of campaign finance reform at all. It's as if nobody wants to talk about the proverbial elephant in the room. Instead the list of lobbying reforms includes things like prohibiting travel paid by outside groups, tigheteing the gift ban, extending the prohibition on lobbying for former lawmakers and aides to two years, etc., etc. Worthy goals all, although there is a big fat loophole in all the variants of the travel prohibitions, as Jeffrey Birbaum wrote in yesterday's Washington Post:

According to lobbyists and ethics experts, even if Hastert's proposal is enacted, members of Congress and their staffs could still travel the world on an interest group's expense and eat steak on a lobbyist's account at the priciest restaurants in Washington.

The only requirement would be that whenever a lobbyist pays the bill, he or she must also hand the lawmaker a campaign contribution. Then the transaction would be perfectly okay.

Hmmph. Birnbaum, in his wisdom, also points out the same glaring omission we do:

A third major area -- campaign finance laws -- would go untouched, an omission that amounts to a gaping loophole in efforts to distance lobbyists from the people they are paid to influence.

Another pundit clued into the myopia of the reform solutions being put forth is the New Republic's John Judis. In a piece titled, "Why Lobbying Reform Won't Work,"he writes:

Some of these [lobbying] measures certainly have merit, but, by themselves, they aren't going to prevent the kinds of problems that have engulfed Congress over the last 40 years. That's because the excesses of Abramoff and DeLay--like those of the Nixon administration in the early 1970s and House Democrats in the early 1990s--are an outgrowth of a flawed system of campaign finance.

and

The clean-money approach would fund primary candidates who meet a threshold by raising local contributions and would then fund the general-election candidates. Candidates accepting public funds in the general election could not accept private funds, but if an opponent relying on private funds threatens to outspend them, they can receive additional matching funds. They can also receive matching funds if they are targeted by issue ads from an outside group.

Hear, hear, Judis! He keeps going...(comments in brackets)

Publicly financed campaigns are, of course, a hard sell. They were adopted in Arizona and Connecticut in the wake of major scandals. [Excuse me, Mr. Judis, but surely the DeLay-Abramoff scandals are also major scandals?] And voters in Missouri and Oregon have voted down public financing proposals. [Although the Portland, Oregon City Council recently approved what it calls Voter Owned Elections.] But there isn't really another kind of reform that promises to break the connection between money and politics that has given us the K Street Project, Abramoff, and DeLay. Anyone who thinks that passing a gift or travel ban will do the trick is simply deluding himself. [Thank you, thank you, thank you!]

And if you want to read still more on the topic, check out the statement of Nick Nyhart's Public Campaign executive director here.

CNN: Will The Congressional Focus On Ethics Lead To Meaningful Reform?

2006-01-19T10:50:00.000-05:00

CNN QuickVote results from 11:25 AM EST:

Will the congressional focus on ethics lead to meaningful reform?
Yes: 8% (5,481)
No: 92% (66,706)
Total: 72,187

This may not be a scientific poll but...ouch! The CNN crowd doesn't have much faith in Congress.

To vote click here and scroll down about half way and the poll is on the right.

Protest Video

2006-01-18T14:14:00.000-05:00

Check out this video of this morning's protest from Move On.

Green Cash and Scam

2006-01-18T12:12:00.000-05:00

Dan Tynan at the Witlist blog has boiled the Abramoff-DeLay scandal down to a level that even a pre-schooler could understand. He calls his piece "Tom DeLay Denies All Charges (As Told by Dr. Suess)." It starts:

That Abramoff!
That Abramoff!
I do not like that Abramoff!
"Would you like to play some golf?"

I do not want to play some golf.
I do not want to, Abramoff.

"We could fly you there for free.
Off to Scotland, by the sea."

I do not want to fly for free.
I don't like Scotland by the sea.
I do not want to play some golf.
I do not want to, Abramoff.

"Would you, could you, take this bribe?
Could you, would you, for the tribe?"

I would not, could not, take this bribe.
I could not, would not, for the tribe.

Read the whole thing.

MoveOn.org Protest Draws More Than 60 People

2006-01-18T11:17:00.000-05:00

The anti-corruption protest this morning in front of the offices for the Americans for Tax Reform drew about 60 people (which is great considering it was a windy and rainy morning in Washington, DC). The protest lasted about 45 minutes and generated numerous media including a few news cameras. We'll keep you posted on any coverage that was generated.

Bob Ney steps down

2006-01-17T15:37:00.000-05:00

For anybody who missed it, Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) over the weekend resigned his position as chairman of the House Administration Committee. Ney has come under fire for his close ties to Jack Abramoff, particularly after he was identified as "representative no. 1" in the court documents filed as part of Jack Abramoff's guildty plea.

Of course we've been on Ney's trail for awhile. Click here to read about the ads we ran on Ney last week.

The Real Scandal: Our Pay-to-Play Campaign Finance System

2006-01-17T12:43:00.000-05:00

Check out Public Campaign's editorial memorandum on the need for comprehensive campaign finance reform in the wake of the scandals swirling around Reps. Tom DeLay, Bob Ney, Jack Abramoff, etc. and etc. From the memo:

With scandals swirling around disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and Rep. Tom DeLay (R-TX), likely to spread to dozens of members of Congress and aides, official Washington’s reply is to offer lobbying reform proposals. While lobbying reform is important, these proposals lack the crucial element needed to restore public confidence in our political system: addressing the pay-to-play campaign finance system that puts lobbyists and other special interests ahead of ordinary voters. In contrast, Connecticut, Arizona, Maine, and other states and localities are passing and implementing practical, proven full public financing systems that allow candidates to run for office without being in the pocket of well heeled donors.

McCain Rails Against FEC & Earmarking

2006-01-17T12:13:00.000-05:00

Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) says lobbying reform won't cure what ails Washington, as reported here in the Washington Times. McCain points his finger at a "corrupt" Federal Elections Commission and at the congressional practice of "earmarking" pork projects in federal legislation.

Protest Tomorrow Morning At Americans For Tax Reform

2006-01-17T11:56:00.000-05:00

MoveOn.org, along with co-sponsors Public Campaign Action Fund and Campaign for America's future, will be holding a peaceful protest tomorrow morning at 9:45 AM in front of the offices of Americans for Tax Reform. We'll be protesting at the site of the weekly Grover Norquist, a major player in the DeLay/GOP "K Street Project," "Wednesday Group" meeting of inside the beltway operatives.

Come on down and protest pay-to-play politics! More details below:

Groups to Protest GOP Corruption; Norquist "Pay-to-Play" Scheme
Despite K Street Scandal, It's Business As Usual For Abramoff, DeLay, and Santorum Cronies
WHAT: "Stop Corruption" Protest this Wednesday at 9:45 a.m. EST
Outside K Street Project meeting
WHEN: 9:45 a.m. to 10:15 a.m., Wednesday, Jan. 18
WHERE: Sidewalk outside offices of Americans for Tax Reform, 1920 L Street, N.W. (20th & L Streets)
DETAILS: Members of MoveOn.org Political Action will launch their "Stop Corruption First" campaign Wednesday with a protest outside Grover Norquist's "Wednesday Group" meeting. The group will be joined by Campaign for America's Future and the Public Campaign Action Fund - leading anti-corruption groups. Norquist was a principal architect of the now infamous GOP K Street, "pay-to-play" project.
Norquist, with his allies DeLay, Santorum and Abramoff, were creators of a scheme to ensure lobbying firms, most of whose offices are located on K Street, would only hire Republicans and would make large contributions to GOP political action ommittees and candidates in order to secure passage of legislation for their clients.

Texas Hires DeLay-Linked Lobbyists

2006-01-17T10:56:00.000-05:00

The State of Texas has a $330,000 contract with Todd Boulanger, who used to work closely with disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, and who has close ties to Rep. Tom DeLay, reports the Houston Chronicle. Boulanger now works for the lobbying firm Cassidy & Associates. Texas hired the firm in January 2005 and then renewed the contract in November. DeLay's former chief of staff, Tony Rudy, introduced Boulanger to his wife, Jessica, who also worked for DeLay. Jessica Boulanger is now press secretary to Rep. Roy Blunt (R-MO), who is campaigning to become majority leader following DeLay's resignation of the title.

Texas has already hired another lobbyist with connections to DeLay--Drew Maloney, his former chief of staff. Maloney "was a key figure in the 2002 fundraising that brought DeLay a reprimand from the House Ethics Committee."Together, the two contracts are worth $1.1 million through 2007, to be paid by Texas taxpayers.

(Check out more on this subject here.)

Barely One In Five

2006-01-16T17:51:00.000-05:00

DeLay's support in his district is waning. According to a newspaper poll conducted this past weekend, only 22% of those polled said they would vote for him if the election were held now.

The response from the DeLay campaign:

"DeLay's spokeswoman Shannon Flaherty challenged the validity of the poll and said the result is 'contrary to the strong support we're seeing for Congressman DeLay throughout the district.'"

I'd bet if the DeLay campaign's poll numbers were different than those of the poll released this past weekend than they would have countered the assertion with something better than the "support" they're "seeing" in the district is "strong". More here.

Demand stations run our ad

2006-01-13T17:56:00.000-05:00

FactCheck.org just released its analysis of our ad that is sitting gathering dust at Houston TV stations as station managers remain cowed by Tom DeLay's bullying.

Guess what? It's factual:

DeLay's primary complaint is that the ad refers to "one million dollars from Russian tycoons to allegedly influence his vote." In fact, The Washington Post has reported just such an allegation. It quoted the former president of an advocacy group as saying DeLay's former chief of staff told him that Russians contributed $1 million to the group in 1998 specifically to influence DeLay's vote on legislation.

We've faxed the FactCheck.org analysis to the stations, and we're urging that people email or call:

Jim Jossolyn, General Manager
KPRC-NBC
(713) 222-2222

Peter Diaz, General Manager
KHOU-CBS
(713) 526-1111

Henry Florsheim, General Manager
KTRK-ABC
(713) 666-0713

D’Artagnan Bebel, General Manager
KRIV-FOX
(713) 479-2600

You know what to do. Report what you hear on this thread.

Update: The Houston Chronicle's Samantha Levine, again, covers the controversy.

Tell Us What The Houston TV Stations Said

2006-01-13T15:42:00.000-05:00

Use this open thread to tell us what the Houston TV stations told you about our ad!

For more information go to http://ga3.org/campaign/houstonstations.

Lots of News on our Ads

2006-01-12T12:42:00.000-05:00

Today the Houston Chronicle runs a story saying that our DeLay ad is running on cable and on the Internet but that broadcast stations have caved into pressure. One key quote from the story:

Dallas attorney Joe Chumlea, who has handled several libel and defamation cases, said [DeLay attorney Don] McGahn likely would not have had a strong legal case against stations running the ad because the Supreme Court provides broadcasters with the highest level of protection when it comes to political ads. Broadcasters can only be liable for damages if they air something that they know is false or recklessly ignore the fact that it could be, he said, but someone such as McGahn telling a broadcaster that an ad is false doesn't meet the standard.

See the ad here: http://www.pcactionfund.org/accountability

Lots more covereage on the ad:

Houston Chronicle, Samantha Levine, - “Ads to focus on DeLay controversy” (1/9)

Roll Call, John Bresnahan, - “Texas Appeals Court Denies DeLay Request for Quick Trial” (1/9)

Washington Post, - “3 Houston TV Stations Refuse DeLay Ads” (1/11)

Reuters, Jeff Franks, - “Houston TV stations withhold ads attacking DeLay” (1/11)

KHOU, Jeremy Desel, “Some Houston TV stations will not air ad targeting Tom DeLay” (1/11)

KGBT 4, - “Houston TV stations refuse to air ads critical of DeLay, Ney” (1/11)

Houston Chronicle, Samantha Levine, - “Anti-DeLay ad surfaces on cable, liberal Web sites” (1/11)

Political Affairs, Joel Wendland, - “The Abramoff Scandal: Bringing Down the Republicans” (1/12)

Chillicothe Gazette, Malia Rulon, - “Groups target Ney in radio, billboard ads” (1/11)

KWTX 10, - “Ads Targeting DeLay Run Starting Wednesday” (1/11)

Capitol Hill Blue, - “Houston TV stations don't like ads that tell truth about DeLay” (1/12)

Broadcasting & Cable, John Eggerton, - “KHOU Pulls DeLay Ad” (1/11)

The Business of Television, John Eggerton, - “Broadcasters Benefit from Lobbygate” (1/9)

Houston Chronicle, Samantha Levine, - “Channel 13 pulls TV ad linking DeLay, lobbyist” (1/11)

Denton Record-Chronicle, - “Activist groups target DeLay, Ney with ads highlighting scandals” (1/10)

The Hotline, - “DELAY: A Tribal Connection” (1/11)

The New York Times, - “National Briefing” (1/11)

DeLay's Home Sweet Home

2006-01-12T11:25:00.000-05:00

You gotta love it if you're Tom DeLay and a GOP precinct chairman from your home district gives you this ringing endorsement:

Wade Webster, a Republican precinct chairman in Clear Lake, said he thought the party would stand behind Mr. DeLay, for now.

"It's going to be tougher, yes, with all the bad publicity and the innuendos and what-not," he said. "Until something more definitive comes out, I'm supporting him. But I retain the option to change my mind."

This is from a front page NYT story today on the challenges DeLay faces in his reelection bid, thanks, in part, to his hard work on redistricting in Texas. Worth a read.

Another scandal

2006-01-11T18:00:00.000-05:00

A former top aide to Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) has pled guilty today to "aiding and abetting the bribery of a public official and conspiracy" according to AP.

This has no place in Congress. Rep. Jefferson ought to come clean.

David Donnelly On Houston Talk Radio Show At 3:15 PM EST

2006-01-11T15:16:00.000-05:00

Public Campaign Action Fund's David Donnelly will be on the Deborah Duncan show on KTRH in Houston, Texas at 3:15 EST (2:15 CST) to 3:22 EST (2:22 CST). If you live in Houston please call in and ask David questions on the ads and the DeLay/Abramoff scandal!

DeLay threatens TV stations about our ads

2006-01-11T12:30:00.000-05:00

One station reported it, and then played our ad as part of the newscast.

We're working to get the ads ack on the air, and considering next steps. We can't let the bully censure TV stations -- he's intimidated Washington for too long -- we won't let him prevent the public from knowing the truth.

Editorial today in Atlanta Journal Constitution

2006-01-11T12:15:00.000-05:00

The Atlanta Journal Constitution writes that the only way to change the culture of corruption and enact meaningful reforms in Washington will be by sheer force via grass roots pressure.

"Given that reality, congressional Republicans can't put this scandal behind them merely by jettisoning DeLay. If their newly professed fondness for ethics is to have any meaning, they also have to jettison the system that DeLay created and the ethical mind-set he embodied. And without a prod from voters, it's unlikely they'll take that step."

Help us grow our numbers! Tell your friends about the Without DeLay campaign!

DeLay Tried To Shut Down Indian Casino

2006-01-11T10:39:00.000-05:00

The lead paragraph from the CNN posted story says it all:

"Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay tried to pressure the Bush administration into shutting down an Indian-owned casino that lobbyist Jack Abramoff wanted closed -- shortly after a tribal client of Abramoff's donated to a DeLay political action committee, The Associated Press has learned."

The full story here.

Alexander Strategy Group Shuts Its Doors

2006-01-11T10:07:00.000-05:00

The Alexander Strategy Group, a DC based lobbying firm that was peppered with former DeLay staff and a product of a recent DailyDeLay blog post, has permanently shut its doors. The Group's owner Edwin Buckham told the Washington Post, "reports in the press have made it difficult to continue as a lobbying/political entity."

Looks like not all publicity is good publicity. More at The Washington Post.

Side note: According to a January 10 Bloomberg News article, both Blunt and Boehner's PAC's have employed the Alexander Strategy Group.

Radio Report

2006-01-10T17:19:00.000-05:00

"To the Point" with Warren Olney was tons of fun. I went on right after Rep. Dreier. He had just sweet-talked his way through ten minutes of how he was taking his task very seriously, getting input from all sorts of people, including John McCain and Democrat Steny Hoyer, and while he wouldn't give details of the Republican reform proposal, he promised "bold changes," and mooted such proposals as a ban on campaign contributions from lobbyists, a ban on all gifts to Members of Congress and all privately-paid travel (all of which are supported by a majority of the public, according to a new Washington Post poll).

Yeah, right, I thought. Waiting to go live on the radio, I instant-messaged Josh Marshall and asked him if he remembered where Dreier stood on the vote on the DeLay Rule. That was back in late 2004, when the Republican majority in the House moved to protect then-Majority Leader Tom DeLay from being forced to step down from his leadership post if he was indicted. Sure enough, Dreier had written a constituent, explaining why he had backed DeLay in that secret vote. His rationale was that "a local political operative could remove a Congressional leader at a key or sensitive time by bringing an indictment against him or her for political purposes," a reference to Texas prosecutor Ronnie Earle, who the Republicans were then trying to demonize as being on a partisan witch-hunt against DeLay.

Well, now DeLay is no longer Majority Leader (though he has placed himself in Duke Cunningham's old seat on the House Appropriations Committee, a power seat to have), prosecutors in the Justice Department, who no one can accuse of partisanship, are on his tail, and who does Speaker Hastert put in to draft the Republican reform package? A DeLay loyalist, Dreier.

Don't forget, Speaker Hastert, who somehow still has this grandfatherly image, was behind the removal this past February of three relatively independent Republicans on the House Ethics Committee, punishing them for their mild rebuke of DeLay's ethics.

The fish rots from the head down, someone once said.

Tom DeLay: "Conviction politician"

2006-01-10T15:43:00.000-05:00

Rich Lowry, editor of the National Review, makes an amusing Freudian slip in his column today on the Abramoff scandal. He writes:

There are two deeply rooted sources of corruption in Washington. One is that many members of Congress believe that they would be making much more than their $160,000-a-year salaries if they were in some other line of work. This sense is compounded when they watch their former 30-year-old aides go to work on K Street for $300,000 a year. This is how someone like Tom DeLay — otherwise a conviction politician — justifies playing the best golf courses in the world on someone else's dime and getting special interests to funnel easy money to his wife. [Emphasis added.]

I know Lowry is using the Right's vernacular for someone who is supposedly motivated by conviction. But given DeLay's self-induced legal problems, it's fun to think that soon he actually will be a politician of conviction. Possibly several convictions, in fact! [Thanks, Matt!]

New Ads to Run in Tom DeLay's and Bob Ney's districts

2006-01-10T13:54:00.000-05:00

Today Public Campaign Action Fund joined Campaign for America's Future announced a new ad campaign targeting Tom DeLay and Bob Ney in their districts. See the ads here.

Here is our press release:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEJanuary 9, 2006

TOM DELAY, BOB NEY TARGETS OF MAJOR NEW AD CAMPAIGN LINKING BOTH TO MONEY SCANDALS ROILING WASHINGTON

Public Campaign Action Fund And Campaign For America’s Future Kickoff Joint Campaign To Clean Up Congress

WASHINGTON – Two public interest groups joined forces today to unveil $115,000 in new television, radio and billboard ads targeting Rep. Tom DeLay, R-Texas, and Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, for their central roles in one of the worst congressional corruption scandals ever. The television and radio ads will begin airing Wednesday in Reps. DeLay and Ney’s districts and the billboard looms above Rep. Ney’s hometown exit on Rte. I-70 in Heath, Ohio.

The groups, Campaign for America’s Future and Public Campaign Action Fund, announced that the advertising campaign kicks off a yearlong combined effort to educate the public about congressional scandals, to hold corrupt public officials accountable, and to mobilize support for comprehensive solutions to address campaign finance, lobbying and ethics reform in Congress. The joint effort will focus on at least a dozen lawmakers across the country.

The television ad asks Rep. DeLay to “resign from Congress” and is scheduled to run throughout the Houston media market on broadcast and cable stations KHOU-CBS, KRIV-FOX, KPRC-NBC, KTRK-ABC, CNN, FOX, CNBC and CNN Headline News.

“Tom DeLay. Indicted for criminal money laundering. Pocketed tens of thousands in campaign contributions from indicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff,” says the announcer in the television spot. “Forty-eight trips to golf resorts, 100 flights aboard company jets, 200 nights at world-class resorts and hotels. One million dollars from Russian tycoons to allegedly influence his vote.”

The radio spot asks Rep. Ney to “come clean” with the bribery investigation that connects him to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and is set to run throughout his southeastern Ohio district on WWVA-AM, WHBC-FM, WKOV-FM, WHTH-AM and WNKO-FM.

“A lavish trip to Scotland to play golf on world-famous courses. Free tickets to sporting events. Meals at upscale restaurants. Tens of thousands of dollars. Sounds like a game show jackpot, doesn’t it?” says the radio spot. “Unfortunately, it’s what Ohio Congressman Bob Ney got from convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff in exchange for political favors.”

The billboard is above the east bound lanes of Rte. I-70 at exit 126, one mile west of State Rte. 37 in Heath, Ohio where Rep. Ney lives and simply says, “Rep. Bob Ney. Under Investigation for Taking Bribes.”

David Donnelly, the national campaign director of Public Campaign Action Fund, will run day-to-day operations of the joint campaign. Donnelly said the campaign is designed to push bold reforms to clean up the most corrupt Congress ever.

“There should be no place in Congress for the corrupt pay-to-play politics of Tom DeLay and Bob Ney,” said Donnelly. “These politicians will be held accountable and Congress should enact a comprehensive and serious set of political reforms, which must include draining the money swamp of Washington by passing public financing of elections.”

Campaign for America’s Future co-director Roger Hickey said the yearlong campaign is designed to fight for the priorities of the American people against the special interests. The American people are paying the price for giving special interests access to Congress, with higher prescription drug prices and higher gas and home heating costs.

“Americans know the Republican Congress has been making life worse for families on everything from health care to energy policy, retirement insecurity to jobs. Now they understand that the money machine Tom DeLay and Bob Ney have built is designed to make sure that the GOP majority will only respond to wealthy lobbyists, big donors and well-connected corporations,” said Hickey. “These scandals in Washington shine a light on members of Congress and lobbyists they’re willing to sell the public interest for private gain. Enough is enough.”

Campaign for America’s Future is a national public interest group that brings together coalitions around “kitchen table” issues to make the economy work for working people again. The group played a leading role in rallying opposition to the president’s plan to privatize Social Security and the organization’s Apollo Alliance for Jobs and Energy has outlined a 10-step national agenda to create energy independence by the year 2015 and represents a coalition of national security, labor, environmental, civil rights and business leaders.

Public Campaign Action Fund is a national nonprofit watchdog organization that works to hold politicians accountable for special favors they give to wealthy donors, and supports comprehensive political reform to level the playing field and put power in the hands of the people.

###

Public Campaign Action Fund1320 19th Street, NW, Suite M-1, Washington, DC 20036Ph. 202-293-0222 FAX 202-293-0202 Email: info@pcactionfund.org

2006-01-10T13:24:00.000-05:00

The Orlando Sentinel's Mike Thomas rips into Tom Feeney and gives us a nod:

The liberal Public Campaign Action Fund once ranked Feeney as the nation's lawmaker most in the "pocket" of DeLay.
It was a proud day for the Oviedo Republican."Bottom line is, I'm a big Tom DeLay supporter," Feeney said.
He was more than that. He was Tom DeLay Lite. As speaker of the Florida House, he once ran that body with the same tight fist as DeLay when he ran the U.S. House. Like DeLay, he was an ideological warrior for the right.

(Thank you, Meghan!)

Radio Alert!

2006-01-10T12:32:00.000-05:00

I'm going on NPR's "To the Point" show, hosted by Warren Olney, today. The topic is lobbying reform. The guests include Rep. David Dreier (the House Rules Chairman who has been tapped by Speaker Hastert to manage the House Republican leadership's reform proposal), Jan Baran (former counsel to the RNC), and Larry Noble (executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, and former counsel to the FEC). The show airs live from 2-3pm eastern (we're on from about 2:20-2:45); check your stations for local listings.

One thing you should know about Rep. Dreier, if he does appear on the program. (The producers weren't 100% sure). He makes it a condition of his appearance that he will NOT interact with other guests, only with the host. God forbid he should have to answer a question from a plain old citizen of the USA!

Blunt = Boehner = DeLay

2006-01-10T11:46:00.001-05:00

A report in today's Bloomberg news makes the same point we have here, that House majority leader contenders Reps. Roy Blunt of Missouri and John Boehner of Ohio are both awfully close to Tom DeLay and K Street:

Both Blunt and Boehner have political action committees that employ Jim Ellis, who was indicted along with DeLay. Both PACs have retained Alexander Strategy Group, whose partners include former Abramoff and DeLay associates.
Blunt =has served as the Republicans' official liaison to K Street.
In 1995, Boehner handed out campaign checks from the tobacco industry to members on the House floor at a time when lawmakers were considering eliminating a tobacco subsidy. (We all know about that, but always worth repeating.)
DeLay relied on Blunt as an "ambassador" to the lobbyist community.
In 2003, Blunt wrote a letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton opposing a casino for an Indian tribe that would have competed with one of Abramoff's clients. The same year, Blunt signed a similar letter along with DeLay, House Speaker Dennis Hastert and Chief Deputy Whip Eric Cantor.
In 2002, Blunt tried to insert language into a bill that would have helped Philipo Morris, now Altria Group Inc., by making it harder to sell cigarettes over the Internet. Blunt later married an Altria lobbyist.

We've said it before, we'll say it again: "Meet the old boss, same as the new boss."

Stop That Train!

2006-01-10T11:46:00.000-05:00

Three cheers for the Washington Post's Ruth Marcus, who definitely understands what's going on. In "Derail These Fundraisers," she puts her finger precisely on what is so corrupt about Washington's pay-to-play culture, and why real reform is needed, and could make a big difference. She describes an invitation to "Joe Barton's 2006 Texas Train Ride" (tickets, $2,000 per individual, $5,000 per PAC) not so much to single out the Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, but to illustrate Washington's "culture of coziness," where powerful legislators sell access to wealthy interests on a daily basis, and no one blinks an eyelash. She writes:

It's this latter problem that ought to be foremost in lawmakers' minds as they scramble to write new rules to govern their dealings with lobbyists.
Even the strongest rules can't stop a lobbyist or lawmaker bent on corruption; see, e.g., not only Abramoff but also former California congressman Randy Cunningham, who pleaded guilty to taking $2.4 million in bribes from defense contractors. Certainly, the more disclosure that is required, the fewer temptations that a lobbyist can legally dangle in front of a lawmaker and the less the opportunity for criminal mischief. But where lobbying reform could have its most cleansing effect is not with the crooks in Congress or the private sector but with those who play, more or less, by the rules of a fundamentally flawed system.
The world-weary Washington-insider take on lobbying reform is that it will be adopted and change nothing. That's wrong. True, the capital won't magically be transformed from Mr. Abramoff's Neighborhood to Mr. Rogers'. Reform also needs to be wholesale, addressing the array of systemic abuses, to be effective: Like fixing a leaky basement, patching just one or two damp spots won't keep undue influence from seeping in. And even the most effective rules, like the most careful repairs, tend to be eroded over time.
But that doesn't mean reform isn't worth doing. [Emphases added.]

This is dead on. We can't settle for half-measures.

2006-01-09T21:15:00.000-05:00

The LA Time's Ronald Brownstein got it partly right when he wrote about the rush to return Indian gaming contributions in his column yesterday:

Sending back the tribes' money isn't only silly, it's destructive to the cause of reforming Washington. It perpetuates the fiction that "bad" contributions can be segregated from "good" contributions in some orderly fashion that allows politicians to raise millions without compromising their independence. ...

[T]he vast majority of contributions legislators in both parties received from Abramoff's Indian clients looks no different, legally or even morally, than the money they collect from all other interests jostling on Capitol Hill. That's why the rush to refund the money is so misguided. By returning the Indian money, the recipients are trying to claim vigilance against suspect contributions.

But political money doesn't sort itself into black and white categories of appropriate and inappropriate; much of it, like the money from the tribes, is gray. It usually comes not with explicit demands but with implied expectations that every legislator must weigh. Is the Indian money really more suspect than the massive pharmaceutical contributions that influenced a prescription drug law that barred Medicare from bargaining for lower drug prices? In practice, the choices are not as clear-cut as legislators imply by returning the Indian dollars while keeping so many other donations that could provoke similar ethics questions.

Ok, we're with you so far, Mr. Brownstein. But then you fall into the trap that Micah wrote about earlier today, arguing that no reform will work. Yes, it is important to vote the rascals out, as you state, "the surest way for Americans to discourage elected officials from providing undue favors to special interests is to vote out some of those who do." We're with you there. But we also need to replace our current system with one that doesn't put special interest donors in a more important position than voters. We need some structural reform in addition to Brownstein's version of "electoral reform."

No to the Nattering Nabobs of Negativism

2006-01-09T17:34:00.000-05:00

Watch out! While federal investigators are steadily pulling the lid off the sewer that is Washington politics, exposing every sleazy and slimy practice you can imagine, a strange coalition of battle-weary journalists, slick DC operators and ethically-challenged ex-Congressmen are starting to hit the media with a dangerous message. They want to quell rising public demand for real change, which is the natural response to the corruption we're seeing as the full workings of DeLay Inc. are laid bare. To wit, look at Todd Purdum in yesterday's New York Times Week in Review, DC uber-lawyer Jan Baran in yesterday's Washington Post, investigative reporter Jeffrey Birnbaum in today's Post, and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich just about anywhere, including NPR's Morning Edition today.

I wrote about Purdum's piece at greater length yesterday on my personal blog, but here's what they all are saying in common:
1. Don't get so upset, it's not like corruption in Washington is a new problem.
2. Big government is the real problem; if it weren't for all those pesky government regulators threatening to interfere in someone's livelihood, there wouldn't be so much lobbying.
3. Oh, and lobbying is actually a good thing that educates Members of Congress on complicated issues and helps all kinds of Americans get heard.
4. Don't expect any big changes, or for them to make a big difference.

A few quick responses. First of all, we have every right to be upset. The DeLay-Abramoff scandals are just the tip of the iceberg, the culmination of more than a decade or two of Washington policy being sold off to the highest bidders. Cast your mind back over the bulk of legislation passed by Congress in the past two decades of Big Money running Washington and you'll see what I mean: bankruptcy "reform" written by credit card companies to screw poor debtors; deregulation of the banking, securities and insurance sectors that led to rampant corporate malfeasance and greed and the destruction of the retirement plans of millions of small investors; deregulation of the telecom sector producing media conglomeration and cable industry price gouging; rampant overpricing of pharmaceutical drugs and the creation of false scarcity (i.e. no reimports from Canada) to keep those prices high; blocking of any increase in the minimum wage (except for one larded with billions in subsidies to big business), etcetera, etcetera.

Second, there's no real correlation between the growth of government and the explosion of favor-seeking by lobbyists and favor-selling by Members. Government didn't double in size between 1992 and 2004, either in budget terms or regulatory terms, but campaign spending has more than doubled (from $1.6 billion to $3.9 billion). The number of registered lobbyists quadrupled in the first half of the 1980s, Purdum points out in his article--not actually a time of overall government growth, but actually a time when the lobbyists got to feast at Gucci Gulch (a metaphor for all the tassled loafers padding the halls of Congress) and got themselves all kinds of special tax benefits, boondoggles, and the first wave of government deregulation (that among other things led to the savings and loan scandals).

Third, while lobbying is indeed rightfully protected by the First Amendment, that's not what the problem. It's that there's absolutely no balance in whose up there hobnobbing with our public representatives. Baran has this amusing paragraph in his defense of lobbying:

While officials may prefer to legislate without being importuned by those affected or by their representatives, that is not the way laws should be made in an open democratic society. The founders sought to ensure the public interest by promoting pluralism and protecting the participation of all. How then can it be surprising that there are now more than 27,000 registered lobbyists petitioning on behalf of business, labor, the environment, education, abortion rights, the elderly, the poor, ethnic groups and more?

Isn't it nice how he makes it sound as if business is just one small interest alongside all those more wholesome groups and issues? We all know this intuitively makes no sense. For example, advocates for people who use public transportation, public housing, and public hospitals are hardly lining the halls of Congress alongside their counterparts representing the auto companies, the airlines, the real estate industry, health care providers, for-profit hospitals, big insurance companies, and pharmaceuticals.

The last part of their Big Lie is the notion that there isn't much we can do to change this situation. Go for small steps, says Gingrich (who amazingly has been rehabilitated by the media as a champion of ethics after his paying a $300,000 fine for misleading Congress about his own abuse of tax-exempt charities!). We have to change the culture first, says Baran. Lobbyists will find their way around every new law, says Purdum. Public financing as a solution? Noble but impractical, says Birnbaum.

Collectively, what this adds up to is a lot of negativism about the possibility for positive change, precisely when the evidence showing the need for fundamental changes is most obvious. Do you buy it? We don't, and we're going to keep hammering on these nattering nabobs of negativism because, as Jon Stewart once said in a semi-related context, they're hurting America

Did the Court inform DeLay of their decision on Friday?

2006-01-09T16:29:00.000-05:00

Nancy just wrote up the decision by the (all-Republican) court of appeals in Texas to reject's DeLay request for a speedy trial below.

This begs the question, as a colleague just suggested to me: Did the Court tell DeLay on Friday of its decision, thereby pushing DeLay to issue his statement on Saturday that he wouldn't seek to return to his leadership position?

It's not unheard of for courts to inform parties of an impending decision shortly before they issue it. Did DeLay know? Did the Republican court give DeLay a face-saving way out?

TX High Court Denied DeLay Request to Drop Money Laundering Charges

2006-01-09T13:15:00.000-05:00

This just in from the AP:

The [Texas] highest criminal court on Monday denied Rep. Tom DeLay's request that the money laundering charges against him be dismissed or be sent back to a lower court for an immediate trial...
DeLay and his attorneys had been trying to rush to trial in Texas in hopes of clearing his name and allowing him to regain the position. That changed Saturday, though, when DeLay announced he would not attempt to reclaim the job.

keep in mind

2006-01-09T12:10:00.000-05:00

Both Boehner and Blunt have voted alongside DeLay 96 % of the time. According to opensecrets.org, since 1999 Boehner received a total of $32,500 from Jack Abramoff, his Indian gaming clients, and SunCruz casinos; Blunt, $8,500. Also at opensecrets.org, lifetime campaign finance profiles of the two show Boehner in the pocket of insurance, banking, and securities firms; and Blunt in the pocket, of, well, insurance, banking, and securities firms. Is an election between these two guys really an election?