Making Government Transparent and Accountable
The Sunlight Foundation uses cutting-edge technology and ideas to make government transparent and accountable. Underlying all of our efforts is a fundamental belief that increased transparency will improve the public's confidence in government
The Sunlight Foundation Blog
-
Transparent Lawmakers Win
In January of 2007, freshman Democratic congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand became the first member of the House of Representatives to post her daily schedule on her official web site, a historic step for transparency in Congress. At the time, many feared that this level of transparency would harm her reelection prospects in a mostly Republican district. Those fears turned out to be wrong. Last night, every non-retiring candidate posting their daily schedule online was reelected to Congress, proving that transparency does not harm electoral prospects.
Since Rep. Gillibrand’s daily schedule went online, eight other lawmakers (including Sen. Jon Tester, the first senator to post a daily schedule) began posting daily schedules – you can view a map of their meetings here. They include Reps. John Doolittle, Dennis Rehberg, Kathy Castor, Jan Schakowsky, and John Yarmuth and Sens. Tester, Max Baucus, and Bill Nelson. Of these lawmakers, Rep. Doolittle retired and Sens. Tester and Nelson were not up for reelection. Reps. Rehberg, Castor, Schakowsky, and Yarmuth and Sen. Baucus all joined Rep. Gillibrand in winning reelection.
From her first day, Rep. Gillibrand has been a leader on operating a unilaterally transparent congressional office. Aside from posting her daily schedule, she was among the first lawmakers to post on her web site a list of her earmark requests and her personal financial disclosure. Since then, unilateral transparency (the disclosure of information not required by laws or congressional rules) has become much more prevalent throughout the House and Senate.
Today, over forty lawmakers disclose their earmark requests to some degree, while dozens more provide some lesser form of earmark disclosure. Others post their personal financial disclosures and travel reports.
The movement towards transparency continues unabated. The proven ability of transparent lawmakers to win reelection provides further space for more lawmakers to operate in an open and transparent manner.
-
In Broad Daylight: Rangel’s Disclosure Discrepancies
Like a man sinking in quicksand, Rep. Charles Rangel continues, with every flailing day, to sink further as more discrepancies are revealed in his personal financial disclosures. New revelations show Rangel’s disclosures to be in complete disarray. Some assets and transactions are listed at high values one year and then listed at no value the next. The Associated Press compiled a list of the erratic disclosure listings.
The New York Times called on Rangel to temporarily step down from the chair of the Ways and Means Committee barring an ethics investigation. It looks like too many are having flashbacks to the Democratic scandals of the ’80s and ’90s that felled numerous congressional leaders.
The Washington Post takes a look at how business connections fuel bundled political contributions. One major Bush and McCain bundler, John Vogt, calls it the “favor arbitrage business,” where, “You’ve got to know who to ask, how to ask and more importantly, you have to be prepared to return the favor.”
Rep. John Doolittle has been under investigation for a long time – longer than this presidential election – and it looks like Kevin Ring’s indictment brings that investigation that much closer to his door step. Ring is accused of hiding Doolittle’s attempts to find a job for his wife from federal investigators. As McClatchy Newspapers reports, “[Ring's] apparent desire to protect the Doolittles is now figuring very prominently in his legal troubles.”
-
Full Ring Indictment
The full indictment of lobbyist Kevin Ring is available here part 1, part 2 (via Letter of Apology).
As I pointed out in the previous blog post on Ring’s indictment, the labeled congressmen, Representative 4 and Representative 5, are former Rep. Ernie Istook and Rep. John Doolittle, respectively. The indictment clearly alleges that these two lawmakers willfully and knowingly accepted gifts and travel from Ring and Abramoff in exchange for favors, including the insertion of earmarks for the lobbyists’ clients. Doolittle is even alleged to have said that he felt like a “subsidiary” of Ring and Abramoff’s lobbying firm.
Ring was arrested yesterday and entered a plea of not guilty. The inevitable trial of Ring will likely delay further action against Istook and Doolittle, who, if the indictment is proven accurate are in a whole host of trouble. Ring was cooperating with the government in the investigation until he refused to plead guilty.
For all the gory details in the indictment, check out this ABC News piece.
-
Yet Another Abramoff Crony Indicted
The Justice Department unsealed a ten-count indictment today against Kevin Ring, a lobbyist and former staffer to Rep. John Doolittle, in the on-going Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal. According to a Department of Justice statement, Ring is charged “with conspiring with Abramoff and others to corrupt congressional and executive-branch officials by providing things of value to several public officials to induce or reward those who took official actions benefiting Ring and his clients.”
The statement also includes two unnamed congressmen, Representative 4 and Representative 5. Ring is alleged to have engaged in illegal conduct with the chief of staff to Representative 4, who is not identified as being either a current or former member of Congress. Previous indictments identify Representative 4 as former Rep. Ernie Istook. His chief of staff pleaded guilty earlier this year.
Representative 5, while not appearing in previous indictments, is readily identifiable. Ring is alleged to have lied about his knowledge of employment opportunities provided to the wife of Representative 5 by Abramoff. Only one sitting member of Congress fits this bill, and that is Ring’s former boss, Rep. John Doolittle.
One line in the statement possibly explains where this investigation is going next:
Ring and his coconspirators allegedly understood that the public officials to whom they provided things of value were failing to report those gifts as required and were filling out false financial disclosure forms, because to fill out the forms truthfully would reveal that they had accepted gifts in violation of ethical rules and federal law.
Looks as though investigators are going the Ted Stevens route in pursuing Tom DeLay (Representative 2), Tom Feeney (Representative 3), Ernie Istook (Representative 4), and John Doolittle (Representative 5).
-
Another One Bites the Dust
The era of Abramoff appears to be nearing conclusion in Washington. Bob Ney is serving time behind bars; Tom DeLay forced to resign; Sen. Conrad Burns and Reps. Richard Pombo and J.D. Hayworth defeated in the 2006 elections; numerous lobbyists and officials now have prison records. Today, under pressure from Republican leaders, Rep. John Doolittle will drop out of his race for reelection in his northeastern California district. Rep. Doolittle was one of the few remaining members of Congress suspected of making illegal deals with the convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff and is under investigation by the FBI. Let’s recap Doolittle’s history as an Abramoff apparatchik with a little help from Congresspedia.
Doolittle’s story starts in the hey day of the Republican majority, when pundits praised Karl Rove as the "architect" of a permanent conservative ruling party and Majority Leader Tom DeLay sat at his table in the Abramoff-owned restaurant Signatures, puffing cigars and declaring that he was the government. The best part about this era wasn’t the bills that were passed or the investigations undertaken but the lobbyist-provided perks including the sky box seats at the MCI Center (now Verizon Center) and FedEx Field. Who wouldn’t want to watch the pre-Arenas Washington Wizards get pounded by the Sacramento Kings while chowing down on crab puffs and rissoto balls? John Doolittle wasn’t going to miss that:
John Doolittle, a Mormon, is an "ardent opponent of casino gambling," yet he held a fundraiser at a Wizards-Kings basketball game in a skybox paid for by lobbyist Jack Abramoff’s tribal casino clients. According to the Washington Post, Doolittle was "particularly close to Abramoff" and later referred to him as one of his "closest friends."
Doolittle failed to report the skybox fundraiser in his FEC filings. His spokesperson, Laura Blackman, claims "It was an in-kind contribution, and it was an oversight that it wasn’t reported, but we are taking steps to correct that."
Doolittle didn’t just partake of the Abramoff sky boxes, he also accepted campaign contributions and did favors for Abramoff’s lobbying buddies, including casinos and gambling interests:
In addition to giving Doolittle access to his skyboxes, Abramoff personally donated $4,000 to Doolittle’s congressional campaigns from 1999 until his 2006 conviction. Doolittle wrote a total of three letters to the Interior Department favorable to Abramoff’s tribal clients. In June 2003, he wrote to Interior Secretary Gale Norton "criticizing the Bush administration’s response to a tribal government dispute involving the Sac & Fox Tribe of the Mississippi in Iowa." And in October of 2003, "Doolittle appealed in a letter to the secretary for quicker action for a Massachusetts tribe, the Mashpee Wampanoag, that was seeking federal recognition." He was also one of 26 lawmakers who wrote to Norton "urging her to reject an Indian casino opposed by Abramoff’s tribal clients." Prior to signing the letter, Doolittle received a $1,000 contribution from Abramoff. Two months later, Doolittle received another $16,000 in contributions from Abramoff’s tribal clients and "[b]y year’s end, Doolittle also had used Abramoff’s Washington, D.C. restaurant to cater a campaign event and received an additional $15,000 from tribes.
Doolittle also helped out Abramoff’s lobbying interests in the Northern Marianas Islands who were working to keep the Congress from shutting down their slave labor garment factories:
In addition to securing money for the the islands, Doolittle met several times with Marianas officials, particuarly Ben Fitial, a close Abramoff associate who rose from Speaker of the House to be Governor of the Marianas. Doolittle visited the islands in February 1999 as part of a congressional delegation. On two occasions, in April of 2000 and April of 2001, he met with Fitial in Washington D.C. Finally, in August 2001, he endorsed Fitial in his run for governor, citing his ability to "get things done" and "[persuade] the Congress."
But what really seemed to get the Justice Department’s attention was an odd arrangement between Abramoff and Doolittle’s wife, Julie Doolittle. Julie Doolittle worked as a fundraiser for her husband’s campaign committee and leadership PAC. Unlike most fundraiser’s she had an odd arrangement: she took a 15% commission on every contribution made to her husband’s reelection efforts. From 2001 to 2006, she had made $215,000 off of her husband’s campaign contributions. But it was her other clients, for which she held the same 15% commission arrangement, that raised the eyebrows of Justice and the FBI. These clients were Jack Abramoff’s lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig, Abramoff’s restaurant Signatures, and the Korea-U.S. Exchange Council, a front operation that was headed by a DeLay crony. Congresspedia has the run down of what transpired next:
The Justice Department became interested in Doolittle and his ties to Abramoff. In 2005, a spokesman for Doolittle, Laura Blackann stated, "The congressman has not been subpoenaed or questioned by the Justice Department." However, his wife Julie’s firm, Sierra Dominion Financial Solutions, received a subpoena in 2004 from the grand jury investigating Abramoff.
On April 17, 2006, it was reported that Doolittle had hired a lawyer to answer questions about his relationship with Abramoff. The lawyer, David G. Barger, worked as an associate of independent counsel Ken Starr in the Whitewater investigation.
In October 2006, it was revealed that Doolittle had paid the lawyer over $38,000 to speak with the Justice Department during 2006. Despite this, Doolittle still maintained that he was not the target of any investigation.
On June 25, 2007, it was revealed that Doolittle’s former chief of staff David Lopez, under subpoena, provided documents pertaining to campaign finance records to federal prosecutors investigating the congressman and his wife. Conversations between Lopez’s lawyers and the Justice Department had been ongoing since the fall of 2006, but the former aide stated that he had still not been in direct contact with the department.
In "recent days" prior to April 17, 2007, the FBI raided Doolittle’s Northern Virginia home, which also is the house where Doolittle’s wife, Julie Doolittle, ran the fundraising company, Sierra Dominion Financial Solutions Inc.
Doolittle was forced to resign his committee seats and has faced ceaseless pressure to retire from Congress. He appears to have finally ceded to that pressure. For more on John Doolittle’s congressional career and controversies see his extensive Congresspedia page.
The Jack Abramoff plaque no longer hangs on a sky box door in the Verizon Center, his restaurant is now closed, and the people whom he worked with to game the system in Washington are almost all gone. Despite all this, Abramoff’s Borsalino still hangs over Washington and will until future Abramoff’s can’t hide in dark fixing the system against the will of the people.
-
Jack’s Back and The Mayor of Capitol Hill Pleads Guilty
And you thought it was safe? Today, Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit fraud and violate federal lobbying laws and to making false statements. Ney, formerly known as the Mayor of Capitol Hill, is the first lawmaker to plead guilty in the ongoing investigation into the activities of uberlobbyist Jack Abramoff. (Please read TPM Muck’s Tribute to Bob Ney.) This guilty plea comes one day after the House passed a miniscule earmark reform, a lame replacement for lobbying and ethics reform. Not long ago the Washington Post wrote this, "Some lawmakers and political analysts believe that voters could punish incumbents during the November elections if Congress passes a minimalist ethics bill. The chances of such a backlash could rise, these critics say, if there are more indictments or guilty pleas later this year." Polls are already showing that individual lawmakers involved in the Abramoff scandal are suffering in their chances for reelection.
Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., is one lawmaker who is deeply tied to the Abramoff scandal (not to mention his ties to Duke Cunningham briber Brent Wilkes). Doolittle, a recipient of Abramoff’s largesse, was called the "hero" of Abramoff client the Northern Marianas Islands, a U.S. protectorate that specializes in sweat shop labor and forced abortions, and also wrote supportive letters for Indian tribal casinos across the country despite being adamantly opposed to gambling. A recent poll shows Doolittle, a conservative Republican in a conservative Republican district, suffering to hold his seat against opponent Charlie Brown. Doolittle leads Brown 41%-39%. Augh, indeed.
Just south of Doolittle’s district in the East Bay region of California another Abramoff ally Rep. Richard Pombo, R-Calif., is fighting a similarly tough battle for reelection. The last poll released in this race showed Pombo’s opponent Jerry McNerney leading Pombo 46%-42%. Pombo’s ties to Abramoff, former Majority Leader Tom DeLay, and the oil and gas industry are hurting the seven-term Congressman chances in what looks like an anti-incumbent election season.
In Montana the largest recipient of Abramoff cash, Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., is looking like a stone in the water. Abramoff told Vanity Fair that he got "every appropriation we wanted" from Burns. The Montana Democrats wasted no time in tarring Burns with Abramoff’s misdeeds last year and it looks like their early efforts have born fruit. Burns’ opponent, State Sen. leader Jon Tester is locked in a tight race with the three-term Senator, although most polls show Tester with the edge.
Congress watchers consistently predicted this summer that ethics have had little to no impact on the congressional races this year. These are just three races in which they have. DeLay’s former district, Texas-22, looks like it will flip to the Democrats as well. With Ney’s guilty plea all eyes should turn to the four competitive Ohio elections in OH-15, OH-02, OH-01, and Ney’s district, OH-18. Congress should also take a look at itself and decide if it has done enough after the convictions of two sitting members of Congress and at least five former Hill staffers in the past year.
-
Doolittle Family Cashing In on Donations
A story in today’s Roll Call (subscription required) notes that California GOP Congressman John Doolittle’s wife is earning more money than ever this year from fundraising activities on behalf of her husband.
It’s been reported earlier – including in a blog here last week – that she’s been collecting a 15 percent commission on all contributions to her husband’s leadership PAC. Julie Doolittle runs a fundraising business out of the family home in Oakton, Virginia – though it doesn’t advertise and she is apparently the only employee.
Now it seems she’s collecting even more money from her commissions – but this time it’s coming from donations to Doolittle’s campaign committee.
In other words, if the candidate’s wife “raises” a $1,000 contribution for her husband’s reelection, $150 of that is passed directly to the candidate’s own family. You can see the expenditures for yourself on OpenSecrets. So far this election cycle, Doolittle’s reports are showing a total of $54,163 going to “Sierra Dominion Financial Solutions” – Julie Doolittle’s one-person business operating out of the family home.
Federal laws specifically prohibit the “personal use” of campaign contributions, though the Federal Election Commission has interpreted this rather generously. It’s ruled in the past – for instance in an advisory opinion issued in 2001 – that family members working on campaigns may be paid salaries, as long as the salary is commensurate with the going rate for that kind of work.
I remember a case back in the early 90s when Alan Keyes actually paid himself a hefty salary out of campaign funds while he was campaigning for a U.S. Senate seat from Maryland. His argument was that as a full-time candidate, he was entitled to a salary commensurate with his professional talents. The FEC agreed.
All of which makes it sound like the Doolittle family’s convenient arrangement won’t be blocked by the FEC or anyone else. All we can do is monitor the money – and I see in Doolittle’s latest FEC filing, for the month of June – that Julie Doolittle’s Sierra Dominion firm collected yet another $6,985.99 from her husband’s campaign.
Since we still haven’t hit the peak fundraising season for congressional campaigns – that comes in September and October – the Doolittle family will be reaping quite a bonanza this year from the “business” of running for reelection.
That kind of financial ingenuity might make an interesting case study for the Harvard Business School, but it deserves an “F” in civics class – and far greater scrutiny from the press, the public and the FEC.
-
Doolittle’s Leadership PAC Pays Wife
What a deal. Your husband is a member of Congress. You’re his spouse and you start up a business raising money for his leadership PAC, and collecting a 15% commission on every dollar the PAC raises.
That’s the essential scenario for Congressman John T. Doolittle (R-Calif) and his wife Julie, and the details are spelled out on the front page of today’s Washington Post. The story also dwells on expensive gifts that Doolittle’s PAC – the Superior California Federal Leadership Fund – spent money on, but I’d like to focus today on that fundraising commission.
You can find an example of the expenditures on the OpenSecrets website here. When I added up the numbers this morning, I found just under $70,000 paid out in the current election cycle alone to “Sierra Dominion Financial Solutions Inc.” of Oakton, Virginia. Sierra Dominion is the name of company run by Doolittle’s wife. As the Post explains:
All told, Julie Doolittle’s firm – run out of the couple’s home in Oakton with no phone listing or Web site and no other known employee – has received commissions totaling $169,146 since its founding in March 2001, according to FEC records and Taxpayers for Common Sense.
The article cites a comment from Kenneth Gross, one of the capital’s most prominent money-and-politics lawyers (and former chief counsel at the FEC) that leadership PACs don’t have the same restrictions on “personal use” that regular campaign committees have.
Which makes me wonder, why not?
Fundraising is one of the biggest industries in Washington. More time and effort is spent wringing money out of donors seeking to boost their influence than almost anything else. Political fundraising events are held virtually every day (and night) that Congress is in town. Look at the contribution records of virtually any politician in Washington and you’ll find dozens, if not hundreds, of contributions from every interest group under the sun – all with specific legislative agendas.
The only way that politicians have gotten away with such transparent conflicts of interest is because of the understanding – backed by bribery laws – that none of the money actually winds up in the pockets or bank accounts of the members themselves.
Whatever the fine print of federal election laws governing leadership PACs, Doolittle’s arrangement of paying his wife 15 percent of every dollar the PAC raises is a violation of that hands-off policy. The more his PAC raises, the richer his own household becomes.
I’m not a lawyer, so I won’t comment on the legalities of leadership PACs versus campaign committees. I am a citizen, though, and from that perspective this flat out stinks.
-
Daylight AM:
- Roll Call reports that the Justice Department subpoenaed the e-mails of Rep. [sw: William Jefferson] (D-La.) in the ongoing bribery investigation. Jefferson will have the chance to challenge the release of certain e-mails under the Speech and Debate Clause. The congressman could "be allowed to review them and decide whether he wants to try to assert his privilege under the Speech or Debate Clause and withhold them from the federal prosecutors. Jefferson would then have to file a legal motion in federal court in Alexandria outlining the reasons for why they should not be turned over to federal investigators."
- The manager of MZM, Inc., Richard A. Berglund, was accused of violating FEC rules by illegally donating money to Rep. [sw: Virgil Goode] (R-Va.). MZM, Inc. was one of the chief defense contractors charged with bribing Rep. [sw: Duke Cunningham] and the owner, Mitchell Wade, has since pled guilty to the charges. In this case Berglund stands accused of ""aiding and abetting" a scheme by MZM’s owner to donate the funds in the name of others."
- The money paid to Julie Doolittle, the wife of Rep. [sw: John Doolittle] (R-Calif.), by Jack Abramoff to do fundraising for a charity event is receiving new scrutiny after the Senate Indian Affairs Committee report detailed the dates that she received the payments. Julie Doolittle "received the lion’s share of her monthly retainer fees long after a canceled charity event, which had been the principal reason cited for her $5,000-a-month retainer deal with the admitted felon’s ex-lobbying firm". Julie Doolittle received just $27,000 around the time of the charity event, but later received a seemingly unconnected $40,000 from Abramoff "three weeks after Rep. Doolittle, an avowed anti-gambling Mormon, wrote a letter of support for a tribal client of Abramoff’s seeking to reopen its casino."
-
Feds: California. Here We Come!:
- The Associated Press has more information on the subpoena issued to San Bernadino County in relation to their lobbying contract with Bill Lowery, a close ally of Appropriations Chairman [sw: Jerry Lewis] (R-CA). The subpoena "asked for all records of the county’s correspondence with Lewis and his staff and with the lobbying firm, Copeland, Lowery, Jacquez, Denton, & White, which employs former California Republican congressman Bill Lowery". The Inland Valley Daily Bulletin is reporting that Redlands city has been issued a subpoena as well. A spokesman for Lowery’s law firm stated, "This work was bread and butter, run of the mill, routine appropriations. … This kind of work happens in Washington every day, every month and every year on behalf of municipalities."
- Mother Jones has an interesting article tracing the history of Cunningham-Wilkes scandal figures Brent Wilkes and K. Dusty Foggo. It just so happens that a certain Bill Lowery pops up in the article.
San Diego Representative Bill Lowery, for example, first elected to the House in 1980 at the tender age of thirty-three, traveled in the Foggo and Wilkes Honduran road show, part of a Republican task force organized to help sell Reagan’s Contra war against the Sandinistas to a skeptical Congress and public. After leaving office, Lowery, who has floated around the edges of every Republican scandal from the Savings and Loan collapse of the 1980s to the recent Jack Abramoff lobbying case, and is now reportedly under investigation by the Justice Department, went on to become a top lobbyist, skilled in the art of "earmarking."
- Rep. [sw: John Doolittle] (R-CA) is in a tight spot this year, according to Bloomberg. The northern California congressman is caught between two of the biggest congressional scandals in history as he has acknowledged friendships with both Jack Abramoff and Brent Wilkes. Doolittle vehemently denies any charges of wrong doing but he is "one of at least four members of Congress whom prosecutors have focused on in their questions to Abramoff".
