Paul to the Romans 12:20
Guest
|
Kildee, Camp distance selves from lobbyist
GENESEE COUNTY
THE FLINT JOURNAL FIRST EDITIONSunday, January 15, 2006
By Marjory Raymermraymer@flintjournal.com • 810.766.6325
Two area congressmen received thousands of dollars linked to tainted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who is at the heart of a political scandal rocking Washington.
U.S. Rep. Dale E. Kildee, D-Flint, has received $19,000 since 1999 from Abramoff clients. Rep. Dave Camp, R-Midland, got $500 directly from Abramoff and another $35,000 from his clients, according to the Center for Responsive Politics Web site, opensecrets.org. Camp's district includes part of Shiawassee County.
Kildee's office disputes some of the financial report's particulars.
Abramoff pleaded guilty this month to several felony charges, including corruption, for providing luxurious trips, meals and money to lawmakers and their staff in exchange for action on bills at Abramoff's request.
The developing investigation could eventually include dozens of lawmakers and staffers.
And that's led to a wealth of public scrutiny about who knew Abramoff and how well - which is why campaign contributions have drawn interest. There is no direct evidence of illegality from reported contributions; it's what wasn't reported that is potentially more damning.
It's a dangerous scandal for those lawmakers facing re-election this year. And rumors already have been circulating about Kildee, now serving his 15th term, potentially facing a challenger from his own party.
Kildee's office said the data on donations isn't entirely accurate. It includes all contributions since 1999 from Abramoff or American Indian tribes that at some point hired him - regardless of whether the lobbyist was working on their behalf for the entire period.
For example, the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe in Mount Pleasant worked with Abramoff only in 2002 and 2003, but all of its donations to Kildee and Camp over the six-year period are included in the totals.
Kildee's office reported that he received $8,500 from Abramoff clients when Abramoff actually was working with them.
In a prepared statement, Kildee said that the donations from tribes should not be looked at any differently than other special interests including unions, General Motors and the Sierra Club - all of which have contributed to his campaigns.
That hardly matters to Rich Robinson, executive director of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network.
"What this is. is corrupt, unethical and normal," Robinson said. "None of these gifts are given to them out of selflessness."
Still, even Robinson - who is highly critical of all special-interest dollars - said donations from Abramoff personally and from his clients are "not the same thing."
All of Kildee's Abramoff-related donations were from tribes.
"As for Mr. Abramoff, I have never met him, nor have I ever talked to him. My campaign has never received a contribution from Mr. Abramoff, his family or his lobbying firm," Kildee said in a statement released by his office.
Both Kildee and Camp are part of the Native American Caucus in Washington, which focuses on tribal concerns. Kildee also serves on the House Committee on Resources, which typically handles legislation concerning tribal affairs.
Camp's district includes the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Reservation, which accounted for $20,000 of his $35,500 Abramoff-related total.
Abramoff's direct donation "was 500 bucks, five years ago" and will be donated to the Red Cross, said Camp spokesman Sage Eastman.
"It was clear that these donations had nothing to do with Jack Abramoff. It had to do with the fact that (Camp) is a leader in Native American issues," Eastman said. "In Michigan, there is a clear and direct and legitimate connection to these issues."
Abramoff was a Republican lobbyist, but members of both parties cashed his checks. His cash has sparked a war of words with both sides questioning the other's ethics while everyone waits for the other shoe - in the form of more grand jury indictments to fall.
Robinson is doubtful Abramoff's web of illegal activity will directly reach Michigan, but he said the state is ripe for lax political ethics.
Michigan does not require lawmakers to divulge their financial interests, wait before becoming a lobbyist after leaving office or limit contributions to political parties or political action committees - all of which have potential to breed misdeeds, he said.
"Who is served (by lawmakers)? I think there is plenty of evidence that they serve those who give," Robinson said.
*** |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Register
Profile
FlintTalk.com Forum Index
> Political Talk
