TOM DELAY
Oh What A Tangled Web
Yesterday was the launch of DroptheHammer (http://www.dropthehammer.org/) , a
campaign " urging consumers to contact businesses
(http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-4918796,00.html) that have
donated to [Tom] DeLay's Legal defense Fund," and the star of the show certainly
came out to shine. The beleaguered Tom DeLay, however, was actually swept up in
defending against the latest
(http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/06/politics/main685923.shtml) ethical
charges -- believe it or not, there actually are more charges -- that he did not
take the time to comment on the all too convenient connection between
legislation that cozies up to the same corporations that have contributed
thousands to his legal defense fund and political action committees. More than
ten thousand people have shown their high regard for ethical standards by
demanding that corporate America drop "The Hammer." (Editorial pages around the
country are denouncing DeLay's conduct. Check out this roundup
(http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=485185.) .) Here are a
few more reasons why it is high time these corporations hear the call.
GETTING DRUNK ON POWER...: Wine and spirits manufacturer Bacardi has contributed
tens of thousands of dollars to DeLay's legal defense fund and political action
committees. Certainly contributions like those do not go unnoticed. DeLay has
been offering help along the way in Bacardi's bitter struggle
(http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=590) regarding the rights to the
renowned, and potentially lucrative, rum label "Havana Club." As reported by the
Palm Beach Daily Business Review, in 2001 DeLay sent a letter to the Commerce
secretary in an attempt to influence "the Bacardi Bill," hearings on the rights
to the Havana Club name, in a way favorable to the rum maker. Two years later,
according to Roll Call, DeLay lobbied to change language in U.S. trademark law
so a World Trade Organization ruling would no longer threaten Bacardi's claim to
the Havana Club brand. Opponents to the proposal noted that DeLay's measure,
under which Bacardi would be the sole beneficiary, was "never vetted by any
committee in either the House or the Senate ... and could potentially harm U.S.
companies that have intellectual or property claims in Cuba."
...AND THEN DRIVING UNDER THE INFLUENCE: Automaker Nissan has given thousands of
dollars to DeLay's legal defense fund. Doing his part, DeLay has steered
industry-friendly legislation in the right direction. Through the years, he has
made fervent efforts to protect automakers from any fuel efficiency standards.
According to the Detroit News, DeLay was the driving force behind a "freeze"
that "prohibit[ed] the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration from
spending any money to even study the possibility of a fuel economy increase.
When the freeze was lifted in 2001, the Crain Automotive News reports that DeLay
sat down with Detroit's Big Three and the group schemed up "ways to head off a
[Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or, CAFE] increase." Attempts to impose new
CAFE rules continue to fail
(http://www.detnews.com/2003/autosinsider/0307/31/b01-231235.htm) .
SKIES MAY NOT BE FRIENDLY BUT DELAY IS: The airline industry has contributed
hundreds of thousands of dollars to DeLay's congressional candidate committee
and American Airlines in particular has contributed thousands to his legal
defense fund. After the tragic events of September 11th, the House of
Representatives drafted legislation that would have mandated security training
(http://www.pcactionfund.org/withoutdelay/facts/) for flight attendants, an
expensive safety measure opposed by airlines. Campaign Money Watch notes that
DeLay then seriously weakened the provision by demanding the insertion of
language that turned the training from mandatory to voluntary.
DELAY FLAILS IN FACE OF CRITICISM: In response to yesterday's DeLay
doubleheader
(http://www.americanprogressaction.org/site/pp.asp?c=klLWJcP7H&b=100480&lftnav=progressreport)
from the New York Times and Washington Post, DeLay's office released a statement
with a rather weak defense: There is "no new news" in either story. As the day
went on, DeLay worked a little harder on his lines: "I can't -- no member can
be responsible (http://thinkprogress.org/index.php?p=587) for going into the
bowels of researching what this organization, how it gets its money or how it's
funded." But then he just went back to doing what he does best, trying to shift
blame off of himself and onto the vast conspiracy supposedly out to get him
(http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/07/politics/07delay.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5094&en=a0c10728f5285f2b&hp&ex=1112932800&partner=homepage)
. Thus far, other conservatives
(http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/04/06/politics/main685923.shtml) have
claimed to be supportive. Their response is somewhat understandable since just
last week Morton Blackwell, a prominent conservative and president of the
Leadership Institute, threatened, "Any politician that's looking for support
(http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-delay3apr03,1,4884584,print.story?coll=la-headlines-nation)
from conservatives in the future had better be seen publicly attacking those who
are now attacking Tom DeLay." |
