The House (and Senate) of Ill Repute
Veteran Washington Post reporter Robert Kaiser on how lobbyists and lawmakers have given government a bad name.
It's not clear if longtime Washington Post reporter Robert Kaiser holds a lower opinion of lobbyists or lawmakers. Based on a 27-part series that ran in the Post, his new book, So Damn Much Money, covers the 35-year history of the modern lobbying industry. But at the heart of Kaiser's book is not K Street. It's money—and the way that American governance has been subverted by it. While many lobbyists unabashedly pursue the goals of their corporate clients at the expense of the public interest, it's members of Congress—and their voracious appetites for perks and campaign cash—that keep the lobbyists in business. Because of the way the US political system has evolved, Kaiser's book reveals, elected representatives now spend less time actually making law and ensuring oversight than ever before—and more time raising funds, campaigning, and angling for post-Congress lobbying jobs. Earlier this week, Kaiser spoke to Mother Jones about how lawmakers and lobbyists have polluted politics.
Mother Jones: You structure the book around the career of one immensely successful lobbyist, Gerald Cassidy of Cassidy and Associates. Why did you make that decision?
Robert Kaiser: I'm a storyteller and it's always seemed to me that a good story has a good lead character. When I decided to do this project, I began looking around and I discovered the S-1 that Cassidy had filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission when he proposed to take [Cassidy and Associates] public in 1998. An S-1 is a very revealing document, when done properly, which is meant to explain to would-be investors in a company why they should want to invest in it, and why it has any value. For a reporter it was a gold mine. It was a road map.
MJ: Perhaps the most important thing about Cassidy, other than the fact that he managed to make $100 million as a lobbyist over three decades, is that he invented earmarks.
RK: Yes, and that was not clear to me initially. I found out from his original partner. What they realized was that a good earmark was something that made everybody happy. I should define an earmark, the way I use the term. It is a direct appropriation from Congress to a particular project sponsored by a particular institution, and it's most often suggested by that institution. It is not part of a government program, and it's not something that an executive branch agency has recommended.
In the very first instance, it was just something that Tufts University wanted to do—have a nutritional center. But what they realized was that the congressman that represented Tufts, and the other congresspeople from the state, the lobbyist who is pushing the idea, and of course Tufts, the beneficiary, all have the same wonderful sense that if this thing goes through, they are helping themselves. The congressman was bringing home the bacon, the university had hit on a great new scheme for making money, and the lobbyist had found a new way to make money.
MJ: Was it the case back then, and is it still the case today, that when a lobbyist and a member of Congress work in conjunction to slip an earmark into a much larger bill, the other lawmakers who eventually vote on that bill don't know that it is even in there?
RK: More than that, in fact, particularly in the early years. Back then, there was only some general statement [in the bill] and then there was report language, as it's called. There was some paragraph in the report of the conference committee that wrote the final version of the bill that says, "The research laboratory in section 8, paragraph 7 is one that can only be built at Podunk University, and we expect the money to go to Podunk." For a long time, that was all you needed.
Later, this became more complicated and controversial, and you had to have a line item [mandating spending in the bill, instead of in report language]. But even when you had the line item in the bill, most members of Congress had no idea what was in these big appropriations bills. Nobody pays attention to earmarks that aren't their own. Except John McCain.
Money is the root of all
Money is the root of all evil in politics. If money = free speech, more money = more speech.
if we had real campaign finance reform
-
tagged as:
- solution
The allure of a post-Congressional lobbying gig would be dampened if we had real campaign finance reform. My favorite is complete public funding for all elections. If you run for the Presidency, you get X dollars to spend. Spend X+1 and you forfeit the election. Senate races would get Y dollars. Y+1 = forfeit. This could apply all the way down through state and local elections. No more PAC's, no 527's, no swift-boat-nitwits-from hell. You could only pay for ads with the public money, and no "on behalf of" organizations. Imagine someone having to run on the isssues instead of having to run down his/her opponent. Maybe some talented people who can't stomach the current bloodbath would apply themselves to public service. Just a thought...
+
Pardon me, most inforrmed
Pardon me, most inforrmed intelligencia, if you are going to post an opinion which is premissed on a quote, particularly found in the Bible, you might want to check your references....
the correct quote says: "..the love of money is the root of (all) evil.." Hopefully, you might see a different slant on the rest of your banter...
Love of money
Even more interesting then the verbatim quote, is how many people regularly mis-quote the same scripture the same way. The revised version is not accidental. By removing "the love of" society has thus taken the onus off of ourselves and created an evil (though completely inanimate) scapegoat. Money is a tool, like so many others. Our lust for it is the destructive element. We can control our own emotions but certainly can not be expected to control what the treasury dept. does. So we have (selfishly) rendered ourselves the innocent victims.
Our government started out being imperfect and has now become larcenous. Amazingly, no one mentions our court system, which has become the good-ol’ enforcement arm of the larcenous glory-boys.
Nothing should be expected to improve whilst our judicial system remains the domain of the damned.
Sorry. I wish I were wrong about this.
Respectfully submitted~
Budget therapy
If money is the problem in government anymore, then reduce the size of the federal budget, by half, even, or, put one more check n balance in the apparatus, and have final comptroller approval of any/all federal monies that go 'out the door'.
Have 2 months out of the year where the federal government spends NO money, and our representatives have a chance to catch their breath, and talk to the People about the state of things in their states. Maybe even make it 3.
One thing I wish that they WOULD put 'in writing' is a full commitment by both the administration and Congress to reduce/abolish the national debt. We now have a situation where China holds something like a trillion in T-bills, that's debt AND tax burden against the working american public.
How can individual people help? If you don't NEED public services, don't USE public services. When things come up to a vote(infrequently, that's kind of interesting, ain't it) on spending, just say 'no'. When it looks like politicians are doing something seedy/sleazy/crooked, vote em out. When you don't have that job anymore, well, your government spending authority just went bye-bye.
Read about the people that are lobbying the most, what companies they represent, what states they're from and so forth. Read about states like California, the world's 8th largest economy, (now 9th, now 10th) and their apparent attitude of 'we OWN this place' kind of stuff. It's gotten pretty stupid in budget/economy-land, and the lobbying is just a symptom of it.
If you don't like government corruption, waste, overspending and so forth, then DO support term limits. Clean House, AND Senate, as many times as is necessary to 'keep it honest'. Barack Obama is pushing for transparency, and there should be 310 million OTHER americans ALSO pushing for transparency, because when all our government business has to transpire in the full light of day, and there's a couple-5 million people looking it over, looking for problems, some of them with legal and tax and contracting backgrounds, the odds are greater of the People being able to defend themselves from the fraud, the graft, the grand larceny, the waste, and the corrupt payola-politics that've made most people switch to an entertainment channel over the years instead of listening to their representatives anymore.
America's 11 trillion in the hole. Folks in D.C. gotta figure out how to run a 'tight ship', and if they can't, then other Candidates that think they can do the job need to step forward, volunteer themselves, be nominated and so forth. It's just money, it's just numbers, and they've got supercomputers and all, these days, so Make The Budget Balance. Buy a copy of SuperQuicken, and start with ten dollars, and by approval ONLY for every copper penny thereafter, even if it means fidderilploybeez facing pay cuts or agency reductions or regular lockwashers instead of unobtainium anodized hyperwhizbang-alloy etc. They gotta cut, cut, cut, and get out of people's wallets by a good 20%, and stop trying to 'help' people that could help themselves pretty well if they had a paycheck to call their own. That's another thing, I think The Government should just about get out of real estate. Maybe work with property owners and companies to guide towards efficient apartment complexes, but past that, the whole freddie/fannie/skim-scammy, screw that. Not everyone needs to be a 'homeowner', or should want to, upon further research. Stop trying to sell us a bunch of B.S./down the river to some foreign country, take your hands out of the cookie jar, do the People's business in Washington, and not Halliburton, or resign and come back to the state you're from. 'Government' is more than just about money, but if money is all you do all day, that leaves how many minutes, and how many seconds of your workday for 'other'. Hmmmm....
Klaatu marachas necktie
Not to worry ...
Not to worry ... reality will soon end government excesses. The goose is dead.
For example, here is the
For example, here is the statistics of lobbying for 2006. The companies operating in the area of pharmaceuticals spend on lobbying for their interests in the corridors of power spent 164 million dollars. In second place - were the insurers - they have invested in American politicians and legislators, 128 million dollars. In third place all the business association representing the interests of different industries. Next come the companies working in healthcare, electric power, in the field of computer technology and Internet, education, oil and gas industry.




























