Another Trip to the Favor Factory: Corruption STILL in Plain View

My first post on the subject (which, I’m happy to say, was one of the most read posts on this site) can be found here.

Jim, from the Seattle Times, informed me of the update by commenting in my About page.  I promised to link to the update, and am very happy to do so.  I cannot praise the Favor Factory project enough.  It really is a tremendous resources for amateurs like myself to dig up the financial ties of America’s lawmakers.  It is such an excellent and easy-to-use database (I daresay, it’s so easy, it’s fun) that I wonder why I don’t see larger media companies emulating or availing themselves of the resource (The Washington Post has an interesting article on earmarks and lobbying from two years ago entitled the Favor Factory but, disappointingly, is not referring to the Seattle Times project).

The Seattle Times has a new, excellent, and absolutely chilling article which I highly recommend those without a history of blood pressure problems reading in full.  The article accompanies the updated Favor Factory that sums up much of the egregious assisted-larceny and favour trading that has taken place in the passing of the 2008 Defense Bill.  Credit should be given to the lawmakers that contributed to an overall reduction in in earmarks by about 20%, but there is very little to be enthusiastic about otherwise.  The most disappointing remark made in the article follows:

“• The House broke the new rules at least 110 times by failing to disclose who was getting earmarks, making it difficult for the public to judge whether the money is being spent wisely.

• In at least 175 cases, senators did not list themselves in Senate records as earmark sponsors, appearing more fiscally responsible. But they told a different story to constituents back home in news releases, claiming credit for the earmarks and any new jobs.

Lawmakers do not face penalties for failing to follow these ethics rules.”

Looks like the brazen conduit for taxpayers money to constituent and friendly contractors for campaign contributions (at a $1,000:$1 ratio, at times) is still active and will be so for the foreseeable.  As usual, enforcement of the rules is a joke and the rules are only suggested to placate suitably outraged voters.  And there is little hiding the fact that this was Congress’ intention all along.

“The whole ethics bill was a sham,” said Sen. Jim DeMint, a Republican from South Carolina, after being told of The Times’ findings.

“It was written to create loopholes, to get around any transparency and our ability to cut out those earmarks. Neither leadership is committed to significantly changing the earmarking process.”

(Robert Novak, in The Washington Post, reports on some of Senator DeMint’s previous work against earmark spending.  Senator DeMint, being a fairly novice Senator, has a short history of taking such stands against earmarks.  Mr. Novak’s column, however, is somewhat one-sided in his laying of blame.)

The Seattle Times provides a shocking understatement that, sadly, is required fare in serious news:

“Complicating matters, lawmakers routinely accept campaign donations from the people asking for earmarks, raising the specter of corruption.”

As a blogger, I have no such requisite for euphemism:  This IS corruption and Congress could hardly care less.  That they can defend it on technicality (as the first Washington Post article I linked to suggests, where a Congressional staffer of Jerry Lewis’ (R-CA), Letitia White, had her salary cut by $12,500 to put her $80 below the salary threshold that would have required her to wait one full year after leaving her government position before accepting a lobbying position.  Needless to say, she did not wait that year.  She left her supply-side corruption job on January 8, 2003, and took her demand-side corruption job on January 9, 2003), but the intention behind the acts seem fairly clear, and the violation of the spirit of the law (and what is ethical is seldom reliant on a technicality) is even more clear.

And here’s something for you Democrats out there that believe Republicans are the Party of Corruption:

“When a reporter for the Congressional Quarterly pointed out how difficult it remains to pull all the information [linking lawmakers and earmarks to companies] together, Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of the committee that drafts the defense bill, had a quick answer: “Tough shit.”"

Don’t like corruption?  Like accountability?  John Murtha says: “Tough shit.”

Well, Fuck You too, Mr. Murtha.

“The biggest single earmark in the defense bill was $588 million to “accelerate” buying a new submarine made by General Dynamics, which builds submarines in Groton, Conn.

The military never asked for the project, and the Bush administration asked that it be stripped from the bill.”

Next to Congress, even Ten-Trillionaire George W. Bush looks like the model of fiscal restraint.  THAT’S an achievement.

Connecticut and Rhode Island successfully conquer the United States of America:

“Although they don’t list themselves as sponsors of the submarine earmark, independent Sen. Joe Lieberman and Democratic Sens. Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Jack Reed of Rhode Island did take credit for the new submarine program in news releases back home, highlighting their work to bring jobs to the region.

“The funding for a second submarine has been an extended battle for Connecticut, and today we declare victory,” Lieberman said.”

Over the protests of the Bush Administration, and despite the fact that the US military is not interested in this submarine (which appears likely to be built in Connecticut), Joe Lieberman et al. claim to be victorious in allocating $588 million to its purchase.  With that definition of victory, I can see why Lieberman is such a fervent supporter of the Iraq War.  He might consider the invasion of Iraq victorious if we succeed in wasting a ludicrous amount of money, against the military’s better wishes, to please one of his campaign contributors (7th on the list with a healthy $35,050 of contributions).

And the Seattle Times article provides a chilling story for those who believe that the corruption they’ve detailed is just harmless stealing:

“Latrobe Specialty Steel of Latrobe, 40 miles east of Pittsburgh, makes specialty steel for aircraft parts.

In 2006, its parent company, Timken, spent $2.9 million lobbying Congress on various issues and persuaded lawmakers to ban the Defense Department from buying any products using foreign-made specialty steel. As the sole U.S. producer of certain kinds of specialty steel, Latrobe saw its orders climb. Timken then sold Latrobe to a group of investors in a $250 million deal.

But the buy-American restrictions for specialty steel caused serious problems for the Air Force, creating a 17-month lag in getting spare parts for aircraft used in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

The careless or simply callous corruption endemic in Congress not only wastes billions in the face of a $10 trillion national debt, it is willing to tie down our military to do so.  After all, what’s more important: (a) getting members of Congress re-elected; or (b) having spare parts for aircraft in Iraq and Afghanistan?  If you answered (b), well… you must not be a member of Congress.

But don’t you worry, Congress will have this problem it created fixed even if it has to spend all of your money to do it:

“[Represenative John] Murtha had talked about giving taxpayer dollars to Latrobe. “We’re trying to get together to see how we can work out an increased capacity for that particular company,” Murtha said at a subcommittee hearing in April 2007. “I’ve talked to that producer. And what I’d like to see is them put some money in, us put some money in, and reduce the time it takes to get those spare parts out.”"

John Murtha’s congressional district, of course, contains Latrobe.  But it’s not like he’s behind the earmarks to Latrobe.  No one is.  In fact, it’s not even an earmark:

“Through a spokesman, Murtha said the project was not an earmark because the contract was competitively bid. Last year at a hearing, however, Murtha talked of giving Latrobe funding because it was the only U.S. company that could make that steel.”

John Murtha makes corruption disappear!  And how did he know my card was the Jack of Clubs?

[An updated Corruption All-Stars, a la my previous Favor Factory post, will be forthcoming]

… and the cow goes moo