Here is the LATEST political scam to ensure power and the hiding of MASSIVE special interest contributions....
Does the name POWELL/FCC ring a BELL....or Bell SOUTH????? No one should be allowed to have this going on ...neither side....
latimes.com
THE SENATORS' SONS
A Washington Bouquet: Hire a Lawmaker's
Kid
Stiffer rules are making it harder to direct cash to a congressman. But you can still put
his family on the payroll.
By Chuck Neubauer, Judy Pasternak and Richard T. Cooper, Times
Staff Writers
First of two parts.
WASHINGTON — Two years ago, when regional
phone companies wanted Congress to make it easier
for them to compete in the high-speed Internet market,
they did what special interests usually do with billions
of dollars at stake: They amassed an army of
experienced lobbyists.
But one of the so-called Baby Bells didn't stop there.
BellSouth also hired a pair of lobbyists distinguished by
their family trees — John Breaux Jr. and Chester T.
"Chet" Lott Jr.
They are the sons of two of the most powerful men in
America when it comes to telecommunications policy:
Sen. John B. Breaux (D-La.) and then-Senate
Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.). Both fathers are
senior members of the Senate commerce committee
and its communications subcommittee.
Soon, the sons and their firms began banking
thousands of dollars a month in BellSouth consulting
and lobbying fees. In Breaux Jr.'s case, the total now
surpasses $280,000, and in Lott's, $160,000, records
show.
The son of another heavy hitter on telecommunications,
Rep. W.J. "Billy" Tauzin (R-La.), was already on the
BellSouth payroll, working in community relations.
While their sons have been getting paid by BellSouth,
Sen. Breaux and Rep. Tauzin have sponsored bills to
loosen federal restrictions on Baby Bells that want to
compete with cable companies in the high-speed
Internet market. They didn't prevail on Capitol Hill, so
the fathers are now pressing the Federal
Communications Commission to lift those restrictions.
Sen. Lott has not taken a position on the issue.
BellSouth's "hat trick" reflects an increasingly popular
maneuver in the age-old game of influence-seeking in
Washington. These days, when a corporation or
interest group wants support from a key member of
Congress, it often hires a member of the lawmaker's
family.
An examination of lobbyist reports, financial disclosure
forms, and dozens of other state and federal records
reveals that at least 17 senators and 11 members of the
House have family members who lobby or work as
consultants on government relations, most in
Washington and often for clients who rely on the
related lawmakers' goodwill.
Perhaps the best-known example is Democratic
Senate Leader Tom Daschle, whose wife, Linda,
represents the aviation industry. She says she does not
lobby the Senate. But her partners do, and her clients
benefited from the airline bailout pushed by the
Democratic leadership.
In addition, Sen. Daschle's daughter-in-law, Jill
Gimmel Daschle, registered as a federal lobbyist in May. She had planned to
lobby the Senate but decided against it on Friday, an aide to the senator said.
Others include Republican Ted Stevens of Alaska, powerful chairman of the
Senate Appropriations Committee, and Democrat Harry Reid of Nevada, the
Senate's minority whip. Virtually every major interest group in their states pays
lobbying, legal or consulting fees to their relatives or relatives' firms.
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert's son Joshua is a lobbyist for technology firms;
Hastert is active on technology issues. And California Democratic Sen. Barbara
Boxer's son Doug works for a lobbying firm representing clients that have sought
her help in Congress on tribal and airport issues.
Without exception, lawmakers contacted by the Los Angeles Times said they
had not been influenced by their relatives' business relationships.
Richard Richards, a retired lobbyist and former chairman of the Republican
National Committee, said, "I'd think members of Congress would be a little
concerned when their kids lobby that there is an appearance of impropriety. If
this trend continues, it is going to get pretty sticky."
Corporations, unions and other economic and political interests have always
sought favors from members of Congress. But successive reforms have made it
harder for individual favor-seekers to distinguish themselves in the eyes of
elected officials through traditional campaign contributions alone.
Offering work to the relatives of important members of Congress, however, can
send an unusually personal message. The practice is unregulated. It is barred by
neither House nor Senate rules.
"It's not an exaggeration to say I get a call once a week with a question about a
relative who's a lobbyist," said J. Randolph Evans, an attorney who advises the
House Republican leadership on government ethics. By his count, about 70
relatives of U.S. lawmakers are lobbying at the federal or state level. "These
numbers are probably on the low side," he said. He declined to add to the list
compiled by The Times.
Some relatives, such as Linda Daschle, a former Federal Aviation Administration
official, draw on years of experience in the subjects on which they lobby. But
many appear to have no such expertise.
When BellSouth hired Chet Lott, for instance, it already had a stable of seasoned
communications lobbyists. Lott was living in Kentucky, running a string of pizza
franchises and playing polo, having earlier dabbled in country music.
In other cases, the companies or interest groups have had long-standing access
to the inner chambers of lawmakers and their support for their positions. A
payment to a relative can take on the appearance of a personal "thank you."
Hiring relatives of legislators seems especially prevalent among industries heavily
regulated by the federal government, such as telecommunications, prescription
drugs and mining.
Thanks in large part to the efforts of Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (R-Utah), for example,
the controversial herbal stimulant ephedra remains on the market as an additive
to dietary supplements promising weight loss.
Hatch played a leading role in drafting a 1994 law that permits supplements to be
marketed without prior scientific evidence of safety and efficacy — the standard
that is applied to prescription drugs and food additives, even the dye used to
make bubble gum pink.
In the last decade, the supplements industry has paid nearly $2 million to
lobbying firms where Hatch's son Scott worked. And when Scott Hatch opened
his own lobbying firm last year, a dietary-supplements trade group and an
ephedra maker were among his first clients.
Although the industry says ephedra products are safe if used properly, the Food
and Drug Administration has linked the stimulant to dozens of deaths. It was
cited by Northwestern University officials last year as a factor in the death of
Rashidi Wheeler, who in 2001 collapsed during a football-conditioning drill. And
a medical examiner concluded the stimulant had contributed to the death of
Baltimore Orioles pitcher Steve Bechler during a workout this spring.
Sen. Stevens has channeled so much federal money into Alaska that so-called
"Stevens money" is considered an engine that drives its whole economy. It has
also furthered his son Ben's career as a consultant.
When the senator helped direct $30 million in disaster relief funds to the
Southwest Alaska Municipal Conference in 2000, the agency hired his son to
mediate negotiations over how to divvy it up.
A dozen Alaska interests benefiting from the senator's efforts have paid Ben
Stevens at least $754,976 in consulting fees for part-time work over the last
three years, financial disclosure reports show.
The question of whether senators' relatives should be allowed to lobby first arose
in 1978, according to William B. Canfield, a Republican who served eight years
as senior staff counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee. The committee was
asked whether the wife of a senator could be a lobbyist, at a time when women
were making strides in the workplace.
"It would have been easier, cleaner to say: 'To hell with a changing society. It's
wrong. You can become a plumber. You can do anything you want. But you
can't lobby,' " Canfield said. "But they said she could, and now we're splitting
hairs 25 years later The horse has left the barn."
Just before the GOP took over the Senate this year, the chamber's ethics
committee was presided over by Reid, who seems to have more family members
working for interests he supports than anyone else in Congress: three of his four
sons, plus his son-in-law.
After The Times began making inquiries about the family-lobby dynamic in
September, Reid instituted a written ban on direct lobbying of himself or his
office by relatives. Sen. Boxer and her son have agreed that he will not lobby
anyone in the Senate. She also said she would recuse herself from anticipated
legislation that would affect an Indian tribe that is a client of her son's firm.
CC |
