|
CORRUPTION UPDATES 72 June 11, 2007 The CORRUPTION UPDATES posts corruption news stories from California, the Nation and the World, and gives you the straight story. |
CORRUPTION UPDATES 72
Previous Corruption Updates: Page 71
Next Corruption Updates: Page 73
Contact Us: Committeefordemocracy.org
1) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE:
Musharraf Rescinds Media Regulations After Public Outcry
NYT June 11, 2007
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/11/world/asia/11pakistan.html?pagewanted=print
ISLAMABAD, Pakistan, June 10 — Pakistan’s president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf, has formally withdrawn his decree that imposed new regulations on the news media, government officials said over the weekend.
The independent media channels agreed to prepare a code of conduct to be incorporated into government media regulations, the state news organization reported.
Independent television channels have closely followed the progression of the former chief justice, Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, as he has toured the country in the weeks after he was dismissed by General Musharraf.
Since his dismissal in March, Justice Chaudhry has drawn huge crowds on his stops to visit provincial courts and lawyers’ associations, and opposition parties have organized protest rallies to support him. At the rallies, criticism of General Musharraf and the military has been aired along with demands for change and a return to civilian rule.
The presidential decree, which went into immediate effect when it was issued on June 3, amended media regulations to give the government regulating body broad powers to seize broadcasting equipment, seal premises and suspend licenses on impromptu orders. The regulating body was instructed to draft regulations at its own discretion, and a media committee that was to consider complaints and other contended issues was replaced with a board of government officials.
. Legislators were incensed that the decree was signed into law during a three-week recess of Parliament, thus avoiding any debate. Lawmakers had just spent five months working on amending the media law, and they finally passed it earlier this spring.
The orders banning live coverage and live talk shows appear to still be in force.
THE COMMITTEE SAYS:
Musharraf Pretending to ease Media Shutdown while Maintaining Ban on Live Coverage
Alex, 6-10-07, Berkeley. California
Musharraf is trying to appear as if he is moderating his Dictatorial hold on power, while he is, in fact, doing nothing of the sort. His "concessions" to the press are not cocessions, they are a public relations move.
Musharraf's goal in this charade is to diffuse the massive street protests against his Dictatorship, in a desperate attempt to keep his tyranny alive.
It will not work.
Also See:
Corruption Updates 67, 4th article on page, "Musharraf Issues Decree Cracking Down on News Media"
Corruption Updates 70, 7th article on page, "Protests Rage Against Musharraf; Aides Criticize Justice He Ousted"
Search the Corruption Database under
Pakistan
2) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Lieberman: U.S. Should Weigh Iran Attack
Sunday, June 10, 2007
(06-10) 15:18 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) –
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/06/10/national/w092116D80.DTL
Sen. Joseph Lieberman said Sunday the United States should consider a military strike against Iran because of Tehran's involvement in Iraq.
"I think we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq," Lieberman said. "And to me, that would include a strike over the border into Iran, where we have good evidence that they have a base at which they are training these people coming back into Iraq to kill our soldiers."
The U.S. accuses Iran of fostering terrorism and Tehran's nuclear ambitions have brought about international reproach.
He added, "If they don't play by the rules, we've got to use our force, and to me, that would include taking military action to stop them from doing what they're doing."
Lieberman said much of the action could probably be done by air, although he would leave the strategy to the generals in charge. "I want to make clear I'm not talking about a massive ground invasion of Iran," Lieberman said.
"They can't believe that they have immunity for training and equipping people to come in and kill Americans," he said. "We cannot let them get away with it. If we do, they'll take that as a sign of weakness on our part and we will pay for it in Iraq and throughout the region and ultimately right here at home."
Lieberman proves himself insane: Demands Attack on Iran
Alex, 6-10-07, Berkeley. California
Attacking Iran would assure that we will soon be engaged in three wars in the middle east.
The Iranian response to an American or Israeli air assault is predictable, and assures we will shortly be engaged in a full scale conflict with Iran.
This would be disastrous to the American position in Iraq and Afghanistan, and require that our troops will be in Iraq for at least a decade, if not longer.
Lieberman's call for an attack on Iran is actually a call for a permanent commitment of American forces in Iraq, by calling for us to attack Iran.
An American attack on Iran would provoke massive Iranian intervention in Afghanistan and Iraq. This would have two direct effects: American troops in Iraq would confront Iranian irregular forces, in addition to fighting the Sunni and Shia, as they are now. The Sunnia and Shia would find it exceedingly easy to aquire real high tech weapons such as anit-aircraft and anti-tank missiles.
We will be wishing for the days when we only faced fancy roadside bombs, shortly after bringing Iran directly into the Iraq conflict.
If we attack Iran, our forces in Iraq would never be able to leave. The Iranians will flood Iraq with sophisticated weaponry, arming all sides in the conflict, inflaming the Shia-Sunni split, resulting in a serious increase in the danger to our troops in Iraq.
The flood of Iranian arms and agents into Iraq and Afghanistan following an American attack on Iran would cause a spiraling tension along the Iraq-Iran border, until we would find ourselves fighting a hot ground war against Iran.
If we follow Lieberman's advice, we will be trapped in three distinct wars: Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran. A draft and wartime mobilization of the American Economy will be required within three months of an attack on Iran.
The effects on our middle eastern policy are already disastrous, but it will get alot worse if we attack Iran.
I predict something historic will happen in the middle east after we attack Iran: Every muslim, independent of nation of origin, or religious sect, will put aside their differences to unify in hatred and resistance to every American presence in the middle east.
Our Saudi, Jordanian, and Egyptian dictators will fall, or go radically native.
Lieberman's call to expand the war reflects the desperation of the situation in Iraq.
Rather than lead our country responsibily, Lieberman is mouthing the fears and desires of Israel, putting the welfare and desires of Israel before that of the United States.
Lieberman's solution to both these problems is to expand the war into an endless regional conflict that will substantially damage the United States.
Lieberman is not just a traitor to the Dem Party, Lieberman is a traitor to the United States. Lieberman represents the power of Israel to buy, bribe, or threaten American politicians. This bribery has bent the will of the US government to protect Israel, no matter the cost to America.
Until we end political bribery, we will be led by the nose by Lieberman, and the rest of the bribed tools of Israel, which includes majorities in both the House and Senate.
Also See:
Corruption Updates 45, 1st article on page, "McCaffrey Paints Gloomy Picture of Iraq"
Corruption Updates 49, 1st article on page, "3 Generals Spurn the Position of War 'Czar'"
Corruption Updates 58 6th article on page, "War-torn Iraq 'facing collapse'"
Search the Corruption Database under
Iraq War
Generals
3) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Report: FBI supplied cash to supervisor in probe
Sunday, June 10, 2007
(06-10) 12:31 PDT San Francisco (AP) –
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/06/10/state/n123134D41.DTL
As part of an investigation into possible extortion, the FBI reportedly supplied cash to the businessmen who paid San Francisco Supervisor Ed Jew $40,000,
The businessmen brought the FBI into what authorities are investigating as a possible extortion case because they were concerned that the supervisor was suggesting they do something illegal, the San Francisco Chronicle reported Sunday.
THE COMMITTEE SAYS:
Jew's Lies Rejected on All Fronts
(written June 8, 2007 for Corruption Updates 71_7)
Jew just can't get rid of his dirty bribe money. But it's much too late for pretending he didn't take a bribe, as the FBI has him firmly by the Balls.
Jew's only difference from more sophisticated politicians was his lack of understanding of the Political Action Committee.
All he needed to do was set up a PAC, and direct all of his bribes there, and Problem Solved, the Bribe transforms itself into a "contribution."
But Jew was too stupid to even satisfy the residency requirements for City Supervisor, so don't expect this cockroach to exhibit a lot of sophistication when it comes to the fine art of Political Bribery.
Also See:
Corruption Updates 71, 7th article on page, "Ethics panel rejects Ed Jew's statement"
Search the Corruption Database under
4) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Sudan aids CIA's spy efforts in Iraq
While denouncing the regime on Darfur, the U.S. relies on it for intelligence. Critics say sanctions are diluted as a result.
By Greg Miller and Josh Meyer
Times Staff Writers
9:27 PM PDT, June 10, 2007
From the Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON — Sudan has secretly worked with the CIA to spy on the insurgency in Iraq, an example of how the U.S. has continued to cooperate with the Sudanese regime even while condemning its suspected role in the killing of tens of thousands of civilians in Darfur.
President Bush has denounced the killings in Sudan's western region as genocide and has imposed sanctions on the government in Khartoum. But some critics say the administration has soft-pedaled the sanctions to preserve its extensive intelligence collaboration with Sudan.
The relationship underscores the complex realities of the post-Sept. 11 world, in which the United States has relied heavily on intelligence and military cooperation from countries, including Sudan and Uzbekistan, that are considered pariah states for their records on human rights.
THE COMMITTEE SAYS:
Bush trades Genocide for Spying Services from Sudan
Now we know why Bush has done nothing about Darfur.
What is even more disturbing is the NY Time's white washing of Bush's inaction on the Darfur genocide under the smoke screen of "...the complex realities of the post-Sept. 11 world..."
The simple reality is the NY Times led us to war, hid Bush's illegal wiretapping program for a year, and continues to justify kidnapping, endless detentions, and torture.
Now the Times is adding Genocide to the list of Bush Crimes they are soft peddling.
The New York Times is a despicable institution.
Also See:
Corruption Updates 34, 4th article on page, "BUSH KIDNAPPING ON TRIAL IN GERMANY"
Corruption Updates 70 , 3rd article on page, "Italy: First CIA rendition trial opens"
Search the Corruption Database under
Illegal Detentions
5) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Powell Calls for Closing Guantanamo Bay
Sunday, June 10, 2007
(06-10) 12:02 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) –
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2007/06/10/national/w120239D07.DTL
Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said Sunday he favors immediately closing the Guantanamo Bay military prison and moving its detainees to U.S. facilities.
The prison, which now holds about 380 suspected terrorists, has tarnished the world's perception of the United States, Powell said.
"If it was up to me, I would close Guantanamo. Not tomorrow, but this afternoon. I'd close it," he said.
"And I would not let any of those people go," he said. "I would simply move them to the United States and put them into our federal legal system. The concern was, well then they'll have access to lawyers, then they'll have access to writs of habeas corpus. So what? Let them. Isn't that what our system is all about?"
The Defense Department estimates it would take about three years to conduct 60 to 80 military commission trials, if the administration decides to hold that many.
Powell, who was secretary of state under President Bush, said the U.S. should do away with the military commission system in favor of procedures already established in federal law or the manual for courts-martial.
"I would also do it because every morning, I pick up a paper and some authoritarian figure, some person somewhere, is using Guantanamo to hide their own misdeeds," Powell said. "And so essentially, we have shaken the belief that the world had in America's justice system by keeping a place like Guantanamo open and creating things like the military commission.
THE
COMMITTEE SAYS:
Powell Sticks up for Rule of Law after Aiding and Abetting Criminal War
6) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Joint Chiefs Chair Will Bow Out
Pentagon Wary of Thorny Reconfirmation Hearings
By Josh White and Thomas E. Ricks
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, June 9, 2007; A01
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/08/AR2007060801537_pf.html
Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates announced yesterday that Marine Gen. Peter Pace will step down as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in September, a move that Gates said will avert the contentious congressional hearings that would be needed to reconfirm the nation's top military officer.The surprise announcement yesterday at the Pentagon amounts to Pace being fired before a customary second two-year term.
Pace has been at the center of war planning and policy since the days immediately following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, when he started as vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs.
Pace's departure -- along with the simultaneous retirement of Adm. Edmund Giambastiani, his vice chairman -- completes a nearly clean sweep of top military advisers linked to the tenure of Donald H. Rumsfeld as defense secretary. Both military officers were close to Rumsfeld and have been criticized for not challenging him.
In office since Rumsfeld was ousted after the November elections, Gates has shown a desire to distance himself from Rumsfeld's Pentagon.Gates said he has recommended that Bush nominate Adm. Michael G. Mullen, chief of naval operations, as the next chairman of the Joint Chiefs for a term beginning Oct. 1.
...congressional staffers said there was concern from both parties that Pace's confirmation hearing could evoke bitter debate about Iraq war policy. Some said Pace's recent comments to reporters at the Chicago Tribune about the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy, in which he said homosexuality was immoral, would also be a distracting issue.
Kori Schake, a West Point expert on defense strategy and budgets who worked on the staff of Bush's National Security Council, said Pace's legacy is likely to be downbeat. "There will continue to be some pretty serious questioning about whether General Pace and Admiral Giambastiani made too many compromises of their military judgment," Schake said.
THE COMMITTEE SAYS:
Another General Bites the Dust
First Written by Al on March 28, 2007, for Corruption Updates 45, #1
As American Citizens, we lost the Iraqi War when we threw away our values and principals, and invaded an innocent country, based on self-serving lies and deceptions.(since this was written, Durban came out of the closet, and admitted hiding the truth from the American Public)
In military terms, we lost the war after winning an initial military victory. Our only victory was the defeat of the Iraqi Army. Afterwards, everything else went to hell. We are unable to impose our will and values on people with military force, nor are we capable of bribing enough Iraqi traitors to run a successful government for us.
Our "democratic" elections in Iraq were a farce. Iraq is divided into sects and clans, not corporate controlled political parties. Expecting their "government" to act according to our corporate values is ignorant. People voted for their tribes, clans, and sects, not corporate controlled parties.
Our "values" are so corrupt that we are only capable of inspiring resistance to our occupation, in Iraq and around the world. Yet we did achieve military victory.
Despite their defeats, Arabs and Persians seem willing to contest our victories in Iraq, and the middle east, by giving up their lives to kill us, and each other.
Although we seem unwilling to understand it, or even admit the fact that many Arabs are
"...sorry they have but one life to give for their country."
Sound Familiar?
If only the Nazis had anticipated the depth of resistance the French, Dutch, and Russians were willing to put up against their invasion and occupation of their countries, they might have thought twice about the consequences of their brutality.
Instead, they "bombed, bombed, bombed Iran, (England)" John McCain recently sung this ditty in South Carolina, greatly amusing the VFW meeting he was attending.
Bush, or our Israeli proxy, is going to attack Iran, extend the war in a doomed attempt to rescue the legacy and failed policies of this corrupted administration from the shit-can of history.
The legacy of this administration has already been established, if not recognized: The Bush Administration is the catalyst for the loss of American dominance over the middle east, and control of the world's oil markets.
Firing Pace will do little to change the enevitable failure of our wars in the middle east.
Also See:
Corruption Updates 49, 1st article on page, "3 Generals Spurn the Position of War 'Czar'"
Corruption Updates 58, 6th article on page, "War-torn Iraq 'facing collapse'"
Corruption Updates 45 , 1st article on page, "McCaffrey Paints Gloomy Picture of Iraq"
Corruption Updates 70, 4th article on page, "Retired Generals Refused "Czar" Job; "Last Chance" Lute tells it Like it Is: Is Bush Finally Listening?
Search the Corruption Database under
Generals
War
Iraq War
7) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Public sector reels at retiree healthcare tab
By Evan Halper
Times Staff Writer
June 10, 2007
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-retireemainbar10jun10,1,987965,full.story
From the Los Angeles Times
...officials at every level of government confront the staggering cost of providing healthcare to their retirees. For years, public employers have promised workers lifetime benefits, but little money has been put aside to cover the bill. Now, new accounting rules have required government employers to calculate and disclose the potential liability.
The tab is enormous.
Over the next three decades, the Los Angeles Unified School District will have to pay out hundreds of millions of dollars a year for retiree health benefits. It has yet to set funds aside to cover the bill.
Contra Costa County's retiree healthcare tab is on track to grow larger than the value of all its assets by 2012, according to a government report...
In just four years ending in fiscal 2004-05, the cost of providing healthcare to the average Los Angeles County retiree doubled. By 2011, government retiree healthcare costs statewide are projected to be nearly triple those in 2004.
Government retirees, in many cases, receive excellent insurance, with no premiums, no big co-pays and few out-of-pocket expenses at all.
The state of California estimates that the price tag for providing such health benefits has reached more than $500,000 for a married retiree and spouse who live 20 years after retiring. Because many government employees retire before 60 and since life expectancies continue to grow, the cost could easily reach $1 million for some employees.
The perk is typically a holdover from the days when insurance cost as little as $5 a month. Now it can be as much as $1,000.
. Analysts at Credit Suisse warn that the cost of continuing to provide these benefits could easily lift the tax rates of governments by 10%.
. Many recent retirees have large pensions — a 30-year San Diego County employee whose salary is $80,000 upon retirement can collect a pension of as much as $70,000 a year — plus generous healthcare benefits.
(San Diego County Supervisors)...recently voted to take the lifetime health benefits away from thousands of employees positioned to receive the biggest pension checks.
The county's retirement board, which is controlled by organized labor, has balked at acting on the proposed cuts. But county officials have warned that if they aren't made, the supervisors might invoke their authority under the county charter to cut off healthcare to all retirees.
. Los Angeles County, which recently disclosed that over the next 30 years its tab will be as much as $20 billion, is bound by a state law that restricts it from cutting the benefits of any retiree.
The laws are murkier elsewhere in the state, but in many places retirees can make the case that their benefits are guaranteed by contract.
Californians for Health Care & Retirement Security, a coalition of government employee unions, proposes..."putting money aside now to create a fund to pay for retiree healthcare in the future,"
The nonpartisan California Health Care Foundation projects that, thanks to skyrocketing healthcare costs, an upcoming surge of retirements and lengthening life spans, the price to governments of continuing to provide coverage at the current rate will increase 15% a year over the next 15 years. Even if public employers had many billions to invest — which they don't — insurance costs will continue to rise much faster than investment earnings, the foundation says.
Former Assemblyman Keith Richman, a San Fernando Valley Republican...proposes another solution: Push back the retirement age for most government workers to at least 65. At that point Medicare would pick up most of their health expenses.
Labor leaders say the answer is universal healthcare. Richman's proposal, they say, is mean-spirited and overzealous.
THE COMMITTEE SAYS:
Thought your Elite Unions Protected You? No, Dems Bought Union Silence with Massive Perks, While the Rest of Us Learned Spanish
Alex, June 11, 2007
Labor only wants universal health care now that their plum benefits are threatened. Prior to this threat, they and the Dems were content to feather each other's nests, while letting the rest of us work for peasant wages and no benefits.
This is the same as the major American manufactures, who are calling for Universal health care to transfer their medical care obligations to the government.
Previous Article:
COSTS OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE BENEFITS COMING DUE
YEARS OF SWEETHEART CONTRACTS FOR UNION POLITICAL SUPPORT GOING TO COST TAXPAYERS BILLIONS WE DON'T HAVE
First Written by Alex on November 13, 2006, for Corruption Updates 22, #9
Our politicians have written checks that can't be cashed. All of the promises to State employees made by generations of California politicians are sweetheart deals to cement union political support: the Unions hand over big bucks to the Dems, then cheat like hell in the elections, and "bam," the unions receive lifetime benefits that average workers in California can only dream of.
The true cost of this political bribery is going to be borne by the people. The average workers in California. The people who don't have fat pensions and benefits, will pay for those that do.
While these political payoffs were being made to elite unions, the conditions and wages of the average worker in California have slipped to the level of peasant wages.
Maybe we should open up these elite jobs to the same pressures that the rest of the workers are experiencing in California. The unions seem to be able to protect their special privileges, while letting the rest of the workers go to hell.
I'll bet we could find very cheap laborers who expect no benefits, overtime, dignity, or decent wages to do almost any job in the State Government. The rest of these jobs can be outsourced to India. Give the unions and the Dems what they have given us: Poverty.
The unions, and their politicians, have sold the average American laborer down the river.
The Committee has little sympathy when the unions lose what they denied to the rest of us.
Also See:
Corruption Updates 22, 9th article on page, "COSTS OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE BENEFITS COMING DUE"
Corruption Updates 21 1st article on page, "SEIU Political Corruption in LA Defended as Normal"
Search the Corruption Database under
Unions
Democrats
8) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Chinese floods leave dozens dead
Sunday, 10 June 2007, 15:53 GMT 16:53 UK
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/low/world/asia-pacific/6739021.stm
Floods and landslides triggered by four days of rain in southern China have left 66 people dead and forced 600,000 to flee their homes, state media said.
At least 48,000 homes were completely destroyed in the rains, which pounded China's southern provinces.
The provinces of Guangdong, Guangxi, Guizhou, Hunan, Fujian and Jiangxi were among the worst-affected regions.
"Floods caused by heavy rains have affected about 294,800 hectares of crops, completely destroying 53,000 hectares of them," an official told China's Xinhua news agency.
THE COMMITTEE SAYS:
China Swings from Extreme Drought to Extreme Flooding
BBC Report of May 25, 2007, CU 61_9:
China has suffered increasingly severe periods of extreme weather in recent years, including floods, drought and powerful typhoons.
Authorities announced recently that the country is likely to be hit by more extreme weather during 2007 than at any time in the past decade.
They blame the changing weather patterns on climate change, a view at least partly backed up by meteorologists.
Also See:
Corruption Updates 61, 9th article on page, "Chinese flooding leaves 21 dead"
The BBC quoted climate experts who cited global warming as a contributing factor to flooding in article 61_9, yet have omitted any mention of Climate Disorders contributing to current flooding.
China joined the US to censor the UN and curb other initiatives to slow CO2. It may be that the Chinese are censoring their media to omit mentioning the contributions of global warming to the current flooding.
China Daily: Half of China on flood alert, 23 dead (in today's China Daily)
Search the Corruption Database under
China
Environment
9) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Lobbyists press Congress to ease tough ethics rules
They're angry they had no input in law about to take effect
Thursday, June 7, 2007
http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/chronicle/archive/2007/06/07/MNGKTQAH671.DTL
(06-07) 04:00 PDT Washington -- The lobbying disclosure bill passed by the House last week hadn't been voted on yet when Kenneth Gross stood at the head of a blocklong conference room in New York, supplying 148 lobbyists and lawyers with the new congressional definition of a friend.
"Friendships have been breaking out all over Washington, because they bring the gift limit up from zero to $250," Gross, an ethics lawyer at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, said he told the group.
The House ethics committee, he said, defines a lawmaker-lobbyist friendship as a long-term relationship featuring mutual gift-giving. The lobbyist must select gifts specially for that lawmaker, and not claim them as an expense or tax deduction.
THE COMMITTEE SAYS:
Criminal Congressional "Reforms" allow lobbyist "Friends" to give Congressmen Gifts
Alex, 6-11-07, Berkeley, California
Our Criminal Congress is going to great lengths to preserve the perks and little luxuries lobbyists use to bribe them.
This is occurring as Congress fails to address the real problem: the massive corporate and special interest bribes that are pouring into their PAC and campaign coffers. These big money bribes have not been addressed, or abated, at all.
Until we stop the bribery itself, denying gifts and luxury perks is no more than a superficial, almost meaningless cosmetic change that does nothing to change the source of the "culture of corruption:" Big Money Bribes by Lobbyists and their corporate sponsors.
But the Lobbyists are pissed-off, nonetheless. The gift ban makes it difficult for them to bribe the Congress in the style they are accustomed to. The lobbyists share in all the luxuries they shower the politicians with.
The real issue here is the preservation of the lobbyists' free speech rights, while stopping the lobbyists free speech rights from being a cover to bribe, if not purchase our politicians outright.
The only answer is to completely stop anyone but qualified voters from contributing ANYTHING to politicians.
No Money. No Golf. No Meals. No Luxury Trips. No "gifts" whatsoever. And we must make it a crime for lobbyists to contribute one penny to any account, PAC, or campaign fund, under penalty of prison.
But the lobbyists are pissed, and are going to use their considerable wealth and influence to maintain their considerable wealth and influence.
As soon as the Congress feels less heat about their corrupted state, they will willingly comply, and try to restart the gravy train.
Unless we criminalize Bribery.
Also See:
Corruption Updates 14 , 10th article on page, "Trading Votes for Pork Across the House Aisle" (Murtha)
Corruption Updates 14, 5th article on page, "Earmarks Find Way into Spending Bill"
Corruption Updates 19, 1st article on page, "TOP RECIPEINTS OF LOBBYISTS BRIBES ARE LEADERSHIP OF BOTH PARTIES"
Corruption Updates 26, 1st article on page, "LOBBYISTS SEE NO CHANGE UNDER DEMS:CORRUPTION PRESENTED AS FORCE OF NATURE, DEM..."
Search the Corruption Database under
Lobbyists
Democrats
Bribery/Contributions
10) THE ABSTRACT PRINTED BELOW WAS ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED IN THE :
Nevada's gambling industry raises its presidential ante
By Dan Morain
Times Staff Writer
June 10, 2007
http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-gamble10jun10,1,642830.story
From the Los Angeles Times
LAS VEGAS — Sen. John McCain stopped by Tabu Ultra Lounge, next to the craps and roulette tables on the MGM Grand casino floor, and left with roughly $400,000 for his presidential campaign.
Former New York Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani walked away from the Red Rock Casino with $100,000, courtesy of the owners of Station Casinos Inc., whose interests include Nevada and California gambling halls.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York gathered $320,000 in March at the Four Seasons Hotel on the Strip, the same place former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney celebrated his 60th birthday and collected $400,000, mostly from noncasino interests.
The casino industry has always played politics. But gambling's campaign role has grown since the 2000 election, as Indian casinos boomed, Wall Street became a big financier for the major casinos, gambling spread to 48 states, and gross U.S. wagering revenue soared to $85 billion annually.
In the 1990s, the industry accounted for $19 million in federal campaign donations. Since the beginning of 2000, the tally is $50 million, says the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks donations.
It doesn't count other donors with a stake in gambling: Wall Street, labor unions, developers, strip club owners, restaurateurs, hoteliers and others feeding off the 39 million tourists and conventioneers lured here each year.
Though McCain doesn't accept campaign money from tribal casinos — because of his role on the Senate Indian Affairs Committee — two top campaign aides work as consultants to Indian casinos.
Most of Romney's $400,000 in Nevada came from developers, business owners and church members.
Nevada's biggest player to date is Giuliani, also a Republican. In the first 90 days of the year, he raised $526,000 in the state, more than any other candidate. Casino interests accounted for at least $205,000 of the total, including $100,000 from owners, executives and family members of Station Casinos.
Clinton's $319,000 Nevada haul was the most among Democrats, and included $118,000 from gambling sources.
...McCain takes donations from commercial casinos, which increasingly have been partnering with tribal groups. Presidential appointees could prove critical to such joint ventures: The tribes and their business partners must gain approval of the Interior Department and the National Indian Gaming Commission; the White House controls appointments to both.
"You give to the person you think is going to support your self-interest," said University of San Diego Law School professor Robert C. Fellmeth, a critic of the fundraising system. "A contribution of that degree implies agreement, if not obligation."
THE COMMITTEE SAYS:
No Gamble Here: Bribery Pays for Gambling Industry
What this means for voters is that Casinos will go wherever the hell they want to go.
If you think you can democratically stop the expansion of casinos over the whole country, you are wrong: you don't have a democracy when industry buys politicians.
The Gambling industry has purchased enough federal political clout to derail democratic resistance to their exponential growth across the country.
Previous Corruption Updates: Page 71
Next Corruption Updates: Page 73
Contact Us: Committeefordemocracy.org
