Lobbying
Burns/Abramoff Link Gets Stronger
By Courtney Lowery, 12-07-05
The Associated Press's Mary Clare Jalonick is reporting on one more deeper connection between Montana Sen. Conrad Burns and indicted lobbyist, Jack Abramoff. A story plastered across papers today shows Burns and his staff met at least eight times with Abramoff's lobbying squad and collected some $12,000 right before Burns voted on a measure in a way that helped of the lobbyist's clients in the Mariana Islands. Over the weekend, Jennifer McKee of Montana's Lee State Bureau first made the connection and this story furthers the link by getting into the meetings and the money that changed hands before the vote.
Burns has been adamant that the meetings are just part of the democratic process, telling the AP, "Advocates, paid and unpaid, exercising their right to petition their government provide information on many issues but you always know that they are representing a particular position based upon their client or issue preference."
He has also asked Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to review the situation so he could be cleared of any untoward dealings.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Add your comment below
While at first glance, these may dealings seem unethical and unseemly, it is the way Washington works (and has always worked). Lobbyists give money and support members of congress whose personal views match theirs. It's not a quid pro quo- it's simply that people want people in office who will be on their side. Just as individuals give money to candidates whose views they support. Happens everywhere on both sides of the aisle.
When you are a powerful member of Congress as both Senator Burns and Baucus are...it makes sense that the most powerful lobbyist in DC would have business with them.
A bit of trivia: the term "lobbyist" was coined in the 19th century when President Ulysses Grant was pestered at the Willard Hotel by would-be power brokers seeking his ear; for such people he coined the word "lobbyists".
Morrison's proposal to "provide the public with the ability, through searchable databases, to see all information about who is trying to influence legislation in Congress and the executive branch through full and timely lobbying reports filed on the Internet" is completetly unrealistic and underscores his naiveté of politics on the national stage.
Capitol Hill, Washington DC is a small community. Everyone is connected to everyone in some way. Six degrees of separation. As we've seen in recent media reports, friends that started out working as staff assistants for members of congress, find themselves years later in positions of power. If one becomes a lobbyist and one continues to work on Capitol Hill...can they no longer be friends?
Let's look at all of the great things Montana's senators have done for the state instead of this constanct nit-picking. I challenge the media to make a list of all of the funding and projects that Burns and Baucus have be able to secure for the state of Montana. I'd bet dollars to donughts all would be very pleasantly surprised.
The fact is, Abramoff's lobbying partner, Michael Scanlon, has pled guilty to conspiring to corrupt public officials and defraud his own lobbying clients. Abramoff is under indictment. And John McCain, who sits on the senate committee investigating these acts, has said that a continuing investigation of other members of congress should be pursued because there is "strong evidence of significant wrongdoing."
While I have no illusions about the way money influences congress, I think Ms. Atley's assertion that this is simply "the way Washington works" misses the mark. The conduct of Abramoff, Scanlon, and other who were complicit in their conspiracy, goes beyond "lobbying" and that is why Scanlon has already plead guilty and more charges and indictment are forthcoming.
As for Senator Burns, he is certainly entitled to a presumption of innocence. But the notion that Conrad Burns had some "personal view" or concern for garment makers in the Marianas Islands and therefore Jack Abramoff donated to Burns is tenuous at best. In fact, Burn's voting record indicates that he didn't give jack-#### about the garment makers in the Mariana's before receiving Abramoff's money. And who can blame him, he was apparently busy doing "great things" for the state of Montana.
In short, Burns has been involved with the Marianas, Guam, Palau, Marshall Islands, etc. for quite some time now as a member of Interior Appropriations, and continues today.
Specifically regarding this issue, in February or March of 2000 the GAO released a report that said the economy of the CNMI, already suffering from the economic 'asian flu' from the pacific rim market crashes, would be devastated if the legislation in question was to pass and be signed into law.
Just some points to throw in the mix.
If someone did something illegal, then let's deal with it an move on. All the presumed assumptions of guilt and rumormongering is bad for our democracy.
Also- I think we tend to forget that while our Senators are in DC to represent the state of Montana, they also serve an important role of serving the entire country. Because of Burns' role on interior appropriations and Baucus' role as Minority leader of the Finance Committee--they both have important responsibilites that go beyond the state of Montana.
Like I said in my previous post, I challenge the media to report on the hudnreds of millions of dollars that have gone to important projects in the state of montana (thanks, in part, to our senators). Let's stop focusing on the couple of million that went to a native american school or legislative help to the Marianas. And since when did funding native american schools or helping impoverished economies become a bad thing anyway?