CORRUPTION UPDATES 19

Previous Corruption Updates: Page 18

Next Corruption Updates: Page 20

1) THE ARTICLE SAYS; LA TIMES, 10-19-06:

Rep. Lewis Is House's Top Recipient of Lobbyist Donations

“A watchdog study ranks lawmakers by how much campaign money is from special interests. Members of both parties are high on the lists.”

By Richard Simon, Times Staff Writer
October 19, 2006

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-money19oct19,1,3013632.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

“WASHINGTON — When the list was finished, House Appropriations Committee Chairman Jerry Lewis (R-Redlands) came out on top, ahead of all his House peers. But this was one triumph no one in his office was celebrating.”

“Lewis, according to an analysis released Wednesday, got more campaign cash from lobbyists than any of his colleagues did.”

“The lawmaker is under federal scrutiny over his ties to lobbyists whose clients have received millions of dollars in earmarks from the appropriations committee. He has denied any impropriety.”

“Congress members' relationships with lobbyists and special interests seeking favors in the form of earmarks have been at the center of a wave of scandals involving disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, imprisoned former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Rancho Santa Fe) and others.”

“Lewis' No. 1 ranking was based on a study issued by Public Citizen, a Washington watchdog, of how much money special interests had given to members of Congress. The group advocates public financing of campaigns.”

“"When lobbyists give members of Congress money, they expect — and often get — something in return," said Public Citizen President Joan Claybrook.”

“Lewis raked in more than $700,000 from lobbyists between January 1999 and December 2005. Among senators, Banking Committee Chairman Richard C. Shelby (R-Ala.) was ranked the top recipient of lobbyist contributions.”

“Rep. Jim Leach (R-Iowa) and Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) accepted the least amount of money from lobbyists: zero, according to the study.”

“The analysis was unlikely to become campaign fodder in the battle for control of Congress, because members of both parties were high on the lists. For example, Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, the senior Democrat on the tax-writing Finance Committee, and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) were ranked the top recipients in their chambers of PAC contributions between January 1999 and June 2006.”

“The top names on the lists were party leaders, chairs and ranking members of key committees, or lawmakers mulling bids for higher office.”

“Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), who is exploring a 2008 presidential campaign, and Rep. Patrick J. Kennedy (D-R.I.), who led the fund raising effort for House Democrats in 1999 and 2000, were their chambers' top recipients of out-of-state contributions from individuals.”

“The study is posted at http://www.cleanupwashington.org/sii .”

The Committee Says:

TOP RECIPEINTS OF LOBBYISTS BRIBES ARE LEADERSHIP OF BOTH PARTIES

CORRUPTION WILL NOT BE A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE TO THE POLITICIANS-NO MATTER WHAT THE VOTERS THINK

This is an above average article on corruption, based on the work of Public Citizen. Public Citizen provides an excellent source of critical information on political corruption. Check out their website, linked above.

Both the article, and Public Citizen, identify the corrupting influence our “system” of political bribery, disguised as campaign contributions, have on our political system. But neither the article, nor Public Citizen, has any plan for comprehensive reform. They both have the target, corruption, clearly in their sights, but neither the press, nor the reform organizations, have been able to pull the trigger. It appears they are afraid of directly challenging the relationship between wealth and power. This may explain why neither the press, or the reform groups, have come up with comprehensive reform that will end the system of bribery that shackles our democracy.

The only reform that will restore democratic government to our people is voter-only contributions. Voter-only contributions will restore political power to the citizen-voter. Stopping the special interests from contributing anything, to any officeholder or candidate, will put our citizens back in control of politics.

The Committee is proposing that California lead our Nation back to democracy and democratic practices by eliminating direct contributions by any non-voter to California politicians.

Read our draft initiative, and help get our democracy back.

Article and Links on Lewis, from Answers.Com

Top of Page

2) THE ARTICLE SAYS; AP in the LA TIMES,

10-19-06:
Secret Federal Data Allegedly Used in Attack Ad

From the Associated Press

October 19, 2006

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-adflap19oct19,1,904985.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

“DENVER — Information in an attack ad run by Rep. Bob Beauprez against his Democratic opponent for governor was obtained from a federal database available only for law enforcement, Colorado authorities said Wednesday.”

“The Colorado Bureau of Investigation launched a criminal investigation into the ad after candidate Bill Ritter's campaign raised the possibility that the database was illegally accessed because the information could not be verified through public records.”
“Bureau Director Robert Cantwell said the information came from the National Crime Information Center, a federal database available only to law enforcement officials.”

“"Because this is a federally controlled and regulated system, CBI has requested the assistance of the FBI to further pursue the investigation," Cantwell said. "The FBI and CBI will be working jointly to complete the investigation."”

“Use of the federal criminal database for any purpose other than law enforcement is a crime punishable by fines and up to a year in prison.”

“The TV ad refers to a suspected illegal immigrant who was arrested in Denver in 2001 on suspicion of heroin trafficking. The ad says that when Ritter was the district attorney for Denver, he sought a plea bargain and the suspect avoided deportation and was later arrested in California on suspicion of sexually assaulting a minor.”

The Committee Says:

POLITICAL ATTACK AD BASED ON ILLEGAL USE OF FED CRIMINAL DATABASE

POLITICAL DIRTY TRICKS AND ILLEGAL USE OF GOVERNMENTAL POWERS AN EXPECTED RESULT OF CONSTITUTIONAL BREAKDOWN OF AMERICAN RIGHTS

The above article looks like just another report on political dirty tricks, but in today's political climate, it is a lot more than that. The dirty tricks reported by this article rise in importance because of the increasing tide of political manipulation of governmental authority and information that is occurring today.

Recent stories about political manipulation of governmental research, of the data collected by various governmental agencies, are far-reaching.

Manipulation of scientific data about global warming, about political manipulation at the FDA and PBS, about bogus news stories and reporters bribed by the government, to the incompetence, graft and corruption at the Departments of Defense and Interior become even more dangerous when the goal is not limited to wealth and power. All the branches of “our” government have been expanding their claims to Arbitrary Authority.

Congress has long pretended to have authority to decide on the moral behavior of private adults in free association. They have no such rights. Congress has allowed torture, kidnapping, and illegal searches. Congress has passed laws restricting the rights granted citizens by the Constitution. The Executive openly claims to have no Constitutional limits to his authority, and Congress says nothing.

The manipulation of the government by private interests to collect power and wealth has not just broken our democratic limits on power. We have allowed corruption to change the very character of our government from one that offers protection from power, the protection of the rights and welfare of the people, to a government that is a weapon against the rights and welfare of the people.

In these times of political criminality, it is doubly dangerous to tolerate using the police powers of the state outside of their constitutional limitations, for the fight against terrorism, or for political advantage. Our politicians do not seem to be able to distinguish between the two.

It is dangerous, but has become common, for politicians to blur the line between partisan political gain and their duty to their country.

Top of Page

3) THE ARTICLE SAYS; LA TIMES, 10-20-06:

Campaign Cash Flows Around Rules

“Money given to county party committees and independent war chests isn't subject to the same limits as direct donations to candidates.”

By Dan Morain, Times Staff Writer
October 20, 2006

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-me-money20oct20,1,2161651.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

“SACRAMENTO — Political consultants and wealthy interest groups are skirting contribution caps and disclosure requirements as they pump millions of dollars into last-ditch attempts to sway the electorate.”

“In some instances, donors are loading independent campaign war chests with six-figure checks — far more than the law allows them to give directly to candidates. The money is paying for mailings and television ads that promote friendly politicians and attack others who may disagree with them.
In other instances, contributors are giving hundreds of thousands of dollars to little-noticed county campaign committees that are controlled by political parties. The committees, in turn, are transferring money to candidates in tough races at opposite ends of the state.”

“Under state law, candidates must disclose any donation of $1,000 or more within 24 hours. The disclosures include the identities of contributors. State law also restricts donors to giving $3,300 to legislative candidates, $5,600 to statewide candidates and $22,300 to gubernatorial candidates.”

“But there are no caps on the amounts that wealthy interests can spend on campaign activity done independently of candidates. And disclosure requirements for such efforts are far more lax.”

“Four Southern California Indian tribes that own casinos poured $3.1 million into a new independent campaign committee in recent days, filings with the California secretary of state's office show. The tribes had sought major expansion of their gambling operations in late August, only to be rebuffed by Assembly Democrats.”
“In public filings with the secretary of state, the committee disclosed spending $20,000 on behalf of one Assembly Democrat who voted for the gambling expansion, $260,000 on behalf of four Assembly Republican incumbents and $493,000 on behalf of Sen. Jeff Denham (R-Salinas), who faces a challenge from a well-funded Democrat.”

“In recent years, both Democrats and Republicans have bypassed contribution caps by using their parties' once-sleepy county central committees. Donations made to county parties can come in five- and six-figure amounts, money the committees can spend without limits on candidates' behalf.”

“An added allure of this strategy is that state law allows the identities of donors to remain secret if they give to county committees during a three-week period in October. This year, their identities won't become known until next Thursday.”

“Republicans pioneered the tactic in 2002 when an insurance company donated $1 million to a variety of county committees, which in turn spent it to help elect Republican candidates.”
“The San Diego County Democrats, primarily using money from organized labor and other elected officials, have shifted $650,000 to help the campaign of Cathleen Galgiani, a Democrat who is running for a Stockton-area Assembly seat. Did Democrats take a page from the GOP?”
“"Certainly," said Jess Durfee, San Diego County Democratic Central Committee chairman. "We've got to stay competitive."”

The Committee Says:

PARTIES AND THEIR BRIBERS WORK TO CIRCUMNAVIGATE CAMPAIGN FINANCE RESTRICTION

THIS IS WHY INDEPENDENT CAMPAIGN COMMITTEESS MUST BE PROHIBITED FROM BRIBING POLITICIANS

This article cuts to the center of the latest financial technique special interests are using to focus their wealth into political influence. First, lets get something straight about the facts reported in the article. The candidates who are receiving these “shadow party” funds had already been bought by the special interests, but contributions limits suit neither the candidates, nor the special interests.

So we face the spectacle of our political parties channeling, actually laundering, special interest money around campaign finance laws for the purpose of disenfranchising the voice and vote of the local citizens.

Our initiative deals directly with this problem. First, it prevents independent committees from giving cash to candidates or officeholders. Second, the initiative limits party contributions to candidates to one-third of the amount the candidate collects from their constituents.

The remaining problem is that independent committees have become shells for special interests and parties to avoid campaign finance limits. Many are “shadow” parties, and the only distinction between them and the candidate is a convenient facade. These groups must be kept within the limits of their free speech rights. If they do not, they must be severely fined, the culprits imprisoned, and the group disbanded.

Articles about how BIG MONEY RUNS POLITICS

 

Top of Page

4) THE ARTICLE SAYS; LA TIMES, 10-20-06:

Gov. Pumps Millions Into Reelection

“This report is from Robert Salladay's blog, "Political Muscle." To read more of the blog and other exclusive Times Web features, go to latimes.com/calpolitics.”

By Robert Salladay, Times Staff Writer
October 20, 2006

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-me-arnold20oct20,1,3189554.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

“SACRAMENTO — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has put $3.5 million of his own money into his reelection campaign, according to secretary of state filings late Thursday.”

“The Republican governor now has donated close to $30 million from his personal fortune to finance his various political campaigns over the last three years.”
“Sources close to the governor said aides asked for roughly $6 million to complete his 2006 reelection effort, but the governor has settled for the smaller amount so far.”

“Under Proposition 34, donors are limited to giving $22,300, but candidates can spend as much as they want on their own campaigns.”

The Committee Says:

ARNIE SPENDS 30 MILLION OF PERSONAL FORTUNE IN 3 YEARS ON POLITICAL AMBITIONS

According to judicial interpretations of our Constitution, the wealth of a candidate may be used to facilitate their own election. The recall of Davis was funded by a rich silicon valley executive. The candidacies of Posner, and Westly were both the products of their vast wealth.

The Committee is not opposed to candidates using their wealth to run for office. The Committee is opposed to out of state wealth being used to manipulate local elections they cannot vote in. The Committee is appalled by wealthy candidates who collect out-of-state special interest money. If the founders wanted the wealthy to run the country, they would not have prohibited nobility, nor would they have protected the rights of the citizens of each state to choose their own representatives. They would have allowed everyone to vote in every election. They did not allow this. Today, wealthy out-of-state interests act as if they had a right to manipulate elections in states they have no right to vote in.

If the founders wanted this outcome, they would have allowed the citizens of each state to vote in the elections of every other state. The founders had just eliminated the authority of nobility, a radical act brought about by a radical revolution. The result was a Constitution which established sovereignty in the people, not the wealthy, nor the powerful. The Constitution was structured to check their political authority, and prevent government from becoming the tool of wealth and power.

Today, we are faced with a new nobility, a corporate aristocracy, exerting its illegitimate power and authority across state boundaries, stealing the sovereignty of virtually every voter in the country. They claim their free speech rights have trumped your sovereignty, your right to select, and elect, your own representatives.

This misshapen idea has allowed our country to become politically inverted, with power and legitimacy flowing downward, from our corporate aristocracy, rather than upward, from the voices and choices of the local voter.

The Committee is more concerned with the corrupting influence of outside wealth manipulating local elections, than the local rich funding their own campaigns.

Top of Page

5) THE ARTICLE SAYS; LA TIMES, 10-20-06:

Hollywood ponders ballot choices

“Democrats in the industry watch for signs of who may emerge as the party's candidate for president. Choice fund raisers await once the campaign coalesces.”

By Tina Daunt, Times Staff Writer
October 20, 2006

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-et-cause20oct20,1,462300.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

“The news that former Virginia Gov. Mark Warner had ruled out a presidential run in 2008 hit Hollywood at cyberspeed.”

“Within minutes of the announcement last Thursday, e-mail messages were popping up on music executive Nicole Avant's computer screen.”

“"People are upset," she told colleague and fellow politico Herb Trawick later that evening at a gathering for economist Jeffrey Sachs at the home of News Corp. President and Chief Operating Officer Peter Chernin.”

“It's no secret that members of the entertainment industry worry that the polarizing Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) would ultimately lose to a Republican if she ran in a presidential election. Two years out, they have been busy scouting for other Democratic candidates.”

“This week, a group of Washington hipsters (political insiders from both parties) launched a website — called Hotsoup.com — to serve as a virtual town hall. It's a place where the online community can engage in discussions about the hot topics of the day with some of the country's most influential people. All issues are on the table: healthcare reform, political corruption, immigration and, yes, pop culture.”
“Hotsoup.com founders include Matthew Dowd, chief strategist in President Bush's 2004 reelection campaign; Mark McKinnon, media advisor for Bush's presidential campaigns; Allie Savarino, an Internet advertising consultant; and three partners in a Democratic consulting firm: Joe Lockhart, former Clinton White House press secretary who became a senior aide to Sen. John F. Kerry's presidential campaign in 2004, and Carter Eskew and Michael Feldman, advisors to Gore.”

The Committee Says:

LATEST HOLLYWOOD DRAMA:

WHICH DEMOCRAT THE MOGULS WILL BACK FOR PRESIDENT

This article fails to point out that the whole of the mass media, including newspapers and television news, have gone “Hollywood.” The “news” is trivial, treating citizens as consumers, presenting shallow reporting, and little or no analysis, nor honesty.

This transformation has cost us one of our most important assets: an informed citizenry.

The Committee's fight for democracy is blocked by the mass media, and its most powerful propaganda tool, Hollywood.

Hollywood gushes forth with a fountain of consumer entertainment that uses greed and lust as the basic story line, portrays corruption as entertaining, while making billions.

Then they invest in our politicians.

Top of Page
6) THE ARTICLE SAYS; LA TIMES, 10-21-06:

High Court Allows Arizona to Enact New Voter ID Law

“The ruling reverses one by the 9th Circuit. It is expected to benefit Republicans at the polls.”

By David G. Savage, Times Staff Writer
October 21, 2006

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-voterid21oct21,1,5444273.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

“WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court cleared the way Friday for Arizona to enforce a new rule for next month's election that requires most voters to show proof of identification before casting a ballot.”

“In an unsigned and apparently unanimous opinion, the justices reversed a ruling by the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco that had blocked the Arizona law from taking effect this year.”
“The justices emphasized that they were not ruling on the still-pending constitutional challenge to the law. They also noted that the law included some exceptions for eligible voters without photo identification.”

“Nonetheless, Friday's order is likely to be seen as a benefit for Republican candidates and a setback for Democrats.”

“In recent years, Republicans in Congress and in many state capitals have pressed for voter-identification requirements at the ballot box. They say these rules are needed to combat fraudulent voting.”

“These laws have been opposed by Democrats and civil rights advocates. They say that there is little evidence of such fraud and that the requirements are designed to suppress voting by poor, elderly, disabled or minority persons who do not have a government-issued photo identification, such as a driver's license.

The Committee Says:

SUPREME COURT OKS ID CHECKS FOR VOTERS IN ARIZONA

DEMS UPSET THAT ILLEGAL SUPPORTERS ARE PREVENTED FROM VOTING

It's about time that we tightened up our elections. Stopping the bribery and corruption of our politicians must be backed up with proof of voting qualifications that are honest, non-partisan, and prevent no eligible voters from participation.

The measures required to prevent fraud must not prevent citizens from voting. The system we have now is an invitation for fraud, both in the contributions to, and conduct of, our most important right, our democratic elections.

Top of Page

7) THE ARTICLE SAYS; AP in The Bee, 10-24-06:

Pentagon official sentenced in arms sale

By MATT APUZZO, Associated Press Writer
Published 1:30 pm PDT Tuesday, October 24, 2006

http://dwb.sacbee.com/24hour/politics/v-print/story/3401793p-12503860c.html

“WASHINGTON (AP) - A former Defense Department official was sentenced to 18 months in prison and another pleaded guilty Tuesday to selling military equipment in the Middle East and pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Most of the equipment was unneeded and scheduled for auction, but prosecutors said the illegal deals also included the sale of Humvees that were still weaponized and were not supposed to have been sold.”

“Ronald W. Wiseman of New Boston, Texas, was sentenced for violating federal weapons laws. Wiseman worked for the Defense Reutilization and Marketing Service, the Pentagon agency that sells excess military equipment.”

“The agency contracts with overseas auctioneers to sell the equipment and return the money to the government. Prosecutors said Wiseman and a Saudi Arabian auctioneer agreed to sell some equipment off the books and share in the profits. “

“U.S. authorities have recovered some of the Humvees and traced others to Spain, the Czech Republic and other countries, according to court documents.”

The Committee Says:

Every department of our government, and much of our society, has been tainted by the corruption bleeding down from our political and economic leadership.

The pervasiveness of corruption in our government is a function of the corrupt process, our undemocratic elections, that produces our party leaders, and our political representatives.

Until we fix our electoral process, our corrupt system of political bribery, we are going to continue to be plagued by middle, and low level governmental corruption.

Top of Page

8) THE ARTICLE SAYS; AP in The Bee,

10-24-06:

Officials scrutinize Ariz. land deal

By JENNIFER TALHELM, The Associated Press
Published 6:16 pm PDT Tuesday, October 24, 2006

http://dwb.sacbee.com/24hour/politics/v-print/story/3402008p-12504509c.html

“WASHINGTON (AP) - A land deal involving Rep. Rick Renzi, R-Ariz., is being scrutinized by the U.S. attorney's office in Arizona, a law enforcement official in Washington said Tuesday.

“The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity while the inquiry is ongoing, said the investigation has been under way for a few months and is still in its very early stages.

“At least one transaction involving Renzi has raised questions in Arizona recently.”

“Records and officials involved in the October 2005 deal say Renzi helped promote the sale of land that netted a former business partner $4.5 million.”

 

The Committee Says:

REP. RENZI, (R-ARIZ) BEING INVESTIGATED FOR USING OFFICE TO ENRICH FAMILY, SELF, & ASSOCIATES

RENZI VOTED ONE OF “20 MOST CORRUPT MEMBERS OF CONGRESS,” BEING INVESTIGATED FOR SWEETHEART DEALS TO FATHER AND A FRIEND

Just imagine if we elected our representatives based on their relationship with their own voters, rather than the wealth of special interests money they collect.

We see a future where corruption would be the exception, rather than the rule.

Under our present system, no voter can be sure their representative is not tainted.

Top of Page

9) THE ARTICLE SAYS; LA TIMES,

10-25-06:

As Politics Enters Races for Judicial Seats, Some Fear a Loss of Objectivity on the Bench

“As more candidates raise funds for slate ads, observers fear loss of objectivity on bench.”

By Jessica Garrison, Times Staff Writer
October 25, 2006

http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-me-judgeelect25oct25,1,945366.story?coll=la-headlines-politics

“Judicial contests in Los Angeles County are usually quiet affairs. Not this year.”
“First came June's election, when a bagel shop owner with limited legal experience ousted a highly regarded sitting judge, prompting near hysteria from some judicial officers who complained that the election's outcome had sent them into "despair."”

“Now, a lawyer in his 70s is alleging age discrimination by the county bar association, which rates judicial candidates and called him "not qualified."”

“Observers say the nonpartisan contests in California are still mild compared with the heated, partisan battles familiar to voters in Texas and other states.”

"There are storm clouds on the horizon," said the chief justice of California's Supreme Court, Ron George, who is concerned about the issue nationally. He said the stakes are high: "If the judiciary becomes politicized, then the rule of law is in jeopardy."

The Committee Says:

BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION ENGULFING JUDICIAL ELECTIONS: INDEPENDENT JUDICIARY A JOKE

PAY TO PLAY IS THE RULE FOR BUYING LEGISLATION AND LAWS, AS WELL AS FOR OBTAINING FAVORABLE JUDICAL INTERPRETATIONS OF LAW

Mr. Justice George must know that our judges have been the tools of corrupt elections, legislation, and laws, since the turn of the LAST century.

We are moving towards partisan judicial elections. This is the direct result of our “pay to play” system of political values. Since the judicial branch did not stop the corruption of our democracy, they have facilitated the inevitably spread of corruption into all of our political and social institutions. And their elections will not be an exception

Until we impose democratic principals on our political parties, and restore democratic elections to our people, every branch of government will be subject to the undemocratic influences of wealth and power. Every branch is for sale, and will continue to be until we decide our authority is not for sale.

The Committee has no sympathy for the judges; they have been enforcing the unconstitutional laws of illegitimate legislators for over a century, and have repeatedly failed to protect the rights and general welfare of our citizens.

If they are really so worried about undemocratic trends in elections, they should have acted long ago.

Now, only the people will be able to save our democracy, if they still have enough of the spirit of democracy within them.

And when our people restore democracy, most of our judges and politicians will be thrown out of office.

Join the movement for democracy, and help us throw these corrupted bums out of office.

 

Read more Articles on Judicial Corrution

GO TO:

Previous Corruption Updates: Page 18

Next Corruption Updates: Page 20

Contact Us: Committeefordemocracy.org

ALL ARCHIVES

Home Page

Top of Page