Fit to print or printed too early?
ANALYSIS 3: NYT CBC LETTER DOCUMENTATION. At some points, the NYT piece by Eric Lipton on CBC foundation fund raising appears to rely on creating the mere appearance of impropriety rather than actual hard facts that point to corruption. Typically when journalists seek to prove that members are acting on behalf of a company that has given money to their campaign you simply look no further than the earmark requests to find a connection. The NYT has no examples in a 2,560 word piece. The NYT writes that, “the CBC Foundation has rasised more that $53 million from 2004 to 2008 from 700 corporations and unions.” Wouldn’t you think that with 700 corporations and unions involved you could find an earmark or a piece of legislation offered by one of the 42 members of the CBC on behalf of one of the 700 entities out there? Making a case for influence peddling corruption is not hard but there are none to be found in this 2,560 word piece.
That is surprising. There was no problem finding corruption links between earmarks and companies campaign donations when Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) here put together their “most corrupt members” of Congress list. They verify connections between earmarks and personal financial gain by members and their friends by Reps. Ken Calvert, Pete Visclosky, Jerry Lewis and Don Young to name a few. In those cases the corrupt connections are as clear as crystal. For example, in the case of Rep. Don Young, he earmarked $10 million dollars for a campaign donor. The CBC allegations contain nothing even close to this two-fisted stuff… but we go on with the analysis…
Don Young, Pete Visclosky
••• Letter 3: NET NEUTRALITY •••
NYT: “…18 members of the caucus signed a letter, written after consulting AT&T, to oppose so-called Net neutrality rules the FCC is considering. These rules would prohibit Internet providers like AT&T, Comcast and Verizon from giving preferential treatment to certain types of Web traffic…” [Who in the CBC signed it: Along with 40 other members of the House, the 18 CBCers who signed were: Meeks, Towns, Eddie Bernice Johnson, Fattah, Hastings, Clay, Hank Johnson, David Scott, Bennie Thompson, Donna Christiansen, Bishop, Cummings, Fudge, Jackson-Lee, Danny Davis, Green and Cleaver. SCANDAL ASSESSMENT: The NYT leaves out that 40 other members signed on — not that that makes everything cool but there are a total of 58 signers in all. Could they all be the victims of too much wining and dining by AT&T and Verizon? Maybe but unlikly. The sheer number of people prompts questions but the analysis is incomplete without hearing from some of the 58 on the letter.
••• Letter 4: ONLINE POKER •••
Letter 4 [to Geithner and Bernanke]: NYT “Three black caucus members – Melvin Watt, Lacy Clay and André Carson – join other members of Congress in this letter to urge the Obama administration to delay enforcing a law that would prohibit or restrict Internet poker. Harrah’s, a major donor to the caucus and the owner of an Internet poker company, is working with others to repeal the law.” [Who in the CBC signed it: House Financial Services Committee members Mel Watt, Andre Carson and Lacy Clay.
SCANDAL ASSESSMENT: The “other members of Congress” who signed this letter total 15 people. Note that the NYT assumes that three CBCers signing a letter constitutes a de facto “CBC” endorsement. Interesting. By that logic the fact that Ron Paul signed this letter would mean the Libertarian Party has endorsed online poker. That logic is, of course, completely ridiculous.
As for Rep. Carson, Gambling is a huge issue right now in the Indiana General Assembly so he could be involved because gambling leads to jobs and casino tourism in a district struck by foreclosure and unemployment. If Dick Durbin and Illinois Gov. Pat Quinn can get proudly stand behind a microphone and proclaim that a federal prison that will cost taxpayers $410 millon is the “opportunity of a lifetime…” because it brings in jobs, Carson can sign this letter with a straight face. Watt and Clay? Who knows… checking… more when the House returns on Feb 22.
