4 Congressional Relatives Who Are Well-Paid Lobbyists

4 Congressional Relatives Who Are Well-Paid Lobbyists | Care2 Causes

Clipped from: http://www.care2.com/causes/4-congressional-relatives-who-are-well-paid-lobbyists.html

• by Kevin Mathews

There are a lot of perks that come from being related to a member of Congress, not the least of which is a heightened shot at receiving a cushy job. As a terrific Washington Post expose reveals, over the past five years, 56 family members of federal legislators were employed by lobbying firms in order to protect major corporate interests.

Although it may seem unethical, it isn’t actually prohibited to, say, hire a Representative’s child to lobby on behalf of a bill that is being considered by his or her parent’s Congressional committee.

Here are four such egregious examples that The Washington Post detailed of how Congressional relatives pushed the boundaries of conflicts of interest in their lobbying efforts. While every instance includes assurance from the involved parties that nothing unethical transpired, considering that 6 out of 7 such lobbyists were hired only AFTER their relatives were elected into office, it seems hard to believe that – at the least – the companies spending hundreds of millions on these lobbying efforts weren’t hoping to benefit from some familial influence.

1. Republican Tennessee Senator Bob Corker likes his former staffer Justin Spickard enough to permit him to marry his daughter. About the time he became Corker’s son-in-law last year, Spickard gained employment as a lobbyist for the American Petroleum Institute.

Since then, six bills Spickard lobbied for passed through Corker’s committees. Corker even co-sponsored a bill to push through the Keystone Pipeline, which happens to be Spickard’s pet project. Spickard’s firm notes that while there are no rules or laws that would disallow Spickard from lobbying his father-in-law, that still no such interactions have taken place.

2. After Missouri Democrat William Lacy Clay retired from the House in 2000, his son William Lacy Clay Jr. won his seat. Like many former Congresspeople, rather than getting out of politics altogether, Clay Sr. actually transitioned into lobbying, with his new firm receiving more than $200,000 from attorneys who represent investors.

Meanwhile, Representative Clay Jr. offered Congress a bill that would provide additional legal rights to defrauded investors – a certain boon for attorneys representing these investors. The overlap between the father and son’s interest is merely a coincidence, apparently. Clay Jr. insists he had no discussions with his dad on the subject.

3. Throughout Bill Emerson’s 16 years of service in the House, his wife, Jo Ann Emerson, worked as a lobbyist for insurance and restaurant businesses. Once her husband died, Emerson took over his seat and in time served on a number of budgetary committees, including one in charge of both the Agriculture Department and FDA. Already, that’s a lot of conflicts of interest, but this story has only just begun.

Now Emerson’s two daughters are lobbyists – one for General Motors and one for Monsanto. Combined, the two companies have spent more than $12 million lobbying Congress and have seen 25 bills that benefit them go through Emerson’s committees. Moreover, Emerson herself has sponsored 17 bills that are friendly to GM and Monsanto’s interests.

Representative Emerson claims to “never ever” discuss work with her daughters, despite that being a frequent conversation topic amongst most parents and grown children I know. For what it’s worth, the always trustworthy Monsanto says, “Any employee of Monsanto may not lobby their own relatives… we understand that our policy is more than the law requires.”

The good news is that Emerson will be giving up her seat in a couple of months. Except that it’s not really good news, since the corruption just gets deeper. Despite winning her re-election bid in November in a landslide, she has lined up a job to lead the National Rural Electric Cooperative Association, a lobbying firm. It is speculated that she will earn nearly $2 million annually in this role. Although she won’t yet be compensated by the lobbyists during her last weeks of Congressional voting, it seems fair to question her allegiance to the people given her upcoming professional trajectory.

4. Even Nevada Democrat Harry Reid, a sponsor of the Senate ethics bill, has some dubious connections. Reid’s son-in-law, Steven Barringer, has worked as a lobbyist for the city of Henderson. The city has spent hundreds of thousands on lawyers, including Barringer, to advocate for certain bills – many of which ultimately failed — but were supported by Reid nonetheless.

Still, Henderson did profit marginally from legislation that Reid helped pass. Then, in 2011, Henderson named Harry’s son, Josh Reid, the city attorney. Harry Reid’s spokesperson gave the usual “Reid’s family did not influence his decisions” statement.

Editors Note:
This article, as the ones above, were taken from Care2. I am posting this article as just a brief example of governmental lobbying that occurs daily not only in the U.S. Congress but also in every state legislature around the country.

93% of Senators Who Rejected Gun Control Paid by NRA

Clipped from: http://www.care2.com/causes/93-of-senators-who-rejected-gun-control-paid-by-nra.html

by Kevin Mathew April 22, 2013

When 90% of Americans want increased gun control policies and their elected officials reject even minimal reform, it begs the question, who exactly are our Congress members representing? Well, as usual, the money tells a significant part of the story: 42 out of the 45 Senators who voted no on the recent bill have received significant donations from the gun lobby.

“Politicians are bought!” “Politics are corrupt!” “Corporate interests over the welfare of citizens!” You’ve probably heard it all before and this kind of thing – sadly – no longer surprises you. But even if it’s something you’ve come to expect, that doesn’t make it any less disgusting or any less important to remind everyone how flawed the system is.

With research conducted by the Sunlight Foundation, The Guardian reported on the donations from the NRA and other pro-gun organizations over the last couple of decades. The NRA alone had given $800,000 to the Senators who helped nix the bill.

Among the top NRA recipients are Roy Blunt (Missouri) with $60,550 and Saxby Chambliss (Georgia) with $56,950. Fellow Republican Senators John Thune (South Dakota), Lindsey Graham (South Carolina) and Jim Inhofe (Oklahoma) have each received well over $40,000 apiece, as well.

While donations of this sort are generally made during election cycles, at least two Senators suspiciously received money from the gun industry in recent weeks. During the month of March, Richard Burr (North Carolina) and Dan Coats (Indiana) had donations from an ammunition manufacturer and shooting group. Considering that these donations came at a time when gun control looked more likely to pass, their potential impact cannot be discredited.

In fact, there may be many more donations made by the gun lobby in recent months that we are not aware of yet. Although that financial information would normally have been made public by now, the ongoing Congressional ricin scare has postponed the filing deadline. Since the NRA and gun lobby have certainly been busy positioning themselves politically since the Sandy Hook massacre, it is not unreasonable to believe these groups put their money where their mouths are.

Of course, these groups have enough financial sway that they do not even need to spend it to get what they want. Commonly, the NRA will stoop to fear tactics to keep politicians on their side. Rather than giving money, the NRA threatens to give politicians’ future opponents significant donations to defeat anyone who they feel has slighted them. President Barack Obama blames these threats on the bill’s failure, explaining, “They worried that the gun lobby would spend a lot of money and paint them as anti-second amendment.” Nevertheless, he vowed that “the effort is not over.”

While there are pro-gun control organizations that have raised money to push the alternative agenda, the capital spent is a fraction of what the NRA spends to oppose these measures.

Although Rand Paul is one of the three Senators who voted no without having recorded gun lobby donations, he does have an affiliation with the National Association for Gun Rights, a group that considers itself a “conservative” version of the NRA. The other two Senators, Heidi Heitkamp and Mark Begich, are both Democrats who have no known notable gun lobby ties.

Notably, four people who voted in favor of the bill had also received money from the gun lobby. Senators John McCain (Arizona) and Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania) were just two out of four Republicans who supported increasing gun control, while Joe Manchin (West Virginia) and Tim Johnson (South Dakota) followed their Democratic party over their former benefactors’ wants.

As much as we have a gun problem in this country, lobbyists and private interest campaign money may prove to be a more dangerous threat. So long as our political system enables a powerful group’s interests to take precedence over the will and well-being of the American people, our safety is constantly at risk.

Editors Note:

This article again taken from Care2 confirms what I believe many Americans at least expected already.

This is also a very good example of why I strongly believe that the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United vs. The Federal Election Commission should be overturned. In that ruling, more commonly known as just Citizens United, the Supreme Court ruled that Corporations are People and that Money was Free Speech thus allowing Corporations and Business to donate large somas of money to politicians. In essence those with the most money have the loudest voice.

Combine that with a loophole in the federal tax law that says Social Welfare Organizations do not have disclose there contributes and you have the reason for this happening with the NRA, among other big Corporations and Businesses, latterly holding Congress hostage by the purse strings.

That is why I am such a strong supporter and volunteer for organizations like Move to Amend and Citizens against Citizens United, just to name a few, who are working to over turn the Supreme Courts decision by petition Congress.

Well enough of that rant for now. You’ll hear more about that in future posts to this blog.

As always please feel free to comment on this post or any other appearing in this blog. Thanks.