Disappointing, but yet another component of the machine

A document obtained by the Washington Post has revealed that almost half of the members belonging to an influential House subcommittee responsible for defence spending are being investigated by Congressional ethics investigators: the ethics committee and the Office of Congressional Ethics (the Office of Congressional Ethics will investigate and then make recommendations to the House ethics committee, which has the power to subpoena and sanction elected representatives). The matter involves seven subcommittee members and the very influential PMA Group, a defence lobbying organization currently under investigation by the Justice Department and founded by the apparently ethically challenged Paul Magliocchetti.

In 2008 the PMA Group's offices were searched by the FBI, who confiscated boxes of records chronicling its political donations and the organization's attempts to secure earmarks for its clients. Ethics investigations of Congressional members are according to standard protocal very confidential, however The Washington Post learned of the investigation through a file-sharing network, where the document was obtained (what a scoop!). Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), who chairs the House ethics committee, released a statement on Thursday that the document had been accidentally released by a Congressional staffer (whoops!). The document states that Congressional investigators are examining House members who apparently were "accepting contributions or other items of value from PMA's PAC in exchange for an official act." A Congressional source downplayed this statement, claiming the ethics committee has not obtained a significant amount of information and has not focussed on any specific legislators (huh?).

According to the document obtained by the Washington Post, two separate ethics offices are conducting investigations into representatives who received campaign contributions from the PMA Group, and then assisted in directing federal dollars to the organization’s clients. The representatives currently under investigation are:

• John P. Murtha (D-Pa.)
• Peter J. Visclosky (D-Ind.)
• James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.)
• Norm Dicks (D-Wash.)
• Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio)
• C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla)
• Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.)

Apparently the clients of the PMA group have received up to two hundred million in earmarks in the last two years, thanks to the efforts of the aforementioned seven legislators. For their part, the seven members received more than six million in campaign contributions from the PMA Grup and its clients in the last ten years (from an analysis by Congressional Quarterly and Taxpayers for Common Sense). The Washingont Post conducted its own review of earmark and campaign records and discovered that all seven of them had supported funding for PMA clients and received donations. And according to the Center for Responsive Politics, while this group of seven received these contributions, the PMA Group would go on to be one of the top lobbying groups in Washington, while raking in over one hundred million over the past ten years.

Now here’s where the story gets really interesting. The document obtained by the Washington Post revealed that Rep. Devin Numes (R-Calif.), was threatened by a PMA lobbyist, when Numes refused to direct tax payer dollars to one of PMA’s clients. A Nunes staff member was informed by the lobbyist that the influential defence contractor would vacate his district and dozens of people in Nunes’ district, employed by PMA, would lose their jobs. Ugh, the sleaze.

"I didn't appreciate being threatened," Nunes told the Washington Post. "To me, it was a symptom of the disease we have in Congress, where a lot of members have simply gotten addicted to contributions from companies that are getting their earmarks." Bingo! You can just smell the pork at the trough, mixing it up with the sleaze and greed, wining and dining at the tax payer's expense.

The PMA lobbyist who apparently threatened Nunes, Don Fleming, now works for Flagship Government Relations, an organization founded by former PMA lobbyists. In a statement, Fleming said "an important responsibility of any government relations professional is to communicate to policymakers the impact that their decisions have on our clients." He added that he has "always adhered to the strictest code of professional ethics."

Anyways, what I did want to get to with this post is just how disappointing this is that Marcy Kaptur is involved. Kaptur of late has been a rising star amoung progressive voters. She appeared as a progressive populist firebrand who actually cares about the people in Michael Moore's "Capitalism: A Love Story", and made a recent and very impressive appearance on Real Time With Bill Maher.

But wait a minute, is this such a big deal? According to a local ABC affiliate in Toledo Ohio, a Congressional committee's inquiry does not mean that an elected representative has violated any rules. In addition, elected representatives are also allowed to earmark federal dollars to organizations who provide donations to their campaigns. I can't see an ABC affiliate grossly neglecting their journalist standards to such an extent, so it is legal, but this entire process and product of Washington is a massive turn-off for almost everyone of whatever political or partisan stripe. It is also most of all offensive to tax payers and the ordinary citizen. It's a matter of the rules that elected representatives have to abide by, but really they shouldn't have to abide by such rules because those rules need to be re-written or erased altogether, as corporate lobbying has been perverting, corrupting and destroying the essence of America's basic democratic processes.

Regardless, it is still very disappointing to see a rising progressive star succumb to the very old tired cliches of Washington D.C.