Matching Grant Challenge
alexPureWhen I met Alexander Cockburn, one of his first questions to me was: “Is your hate pure?” It was the question he asked most of the young writers he mentored. These were Cockburn’s rules for how to write political polemics: write about what you care about, write with passion, go for the throat of your enemies and never back down. His admonitions remain the guiding stylesheet for our writers at CounterPunch. Please help keep the spirit of this kind of fierce journalism alive by taking advantage of  our matching grant challenge which will DOUBLE every donation of $100 or more. Any of you out there thinking of donating $50 should know that if you donate a further $50, CounterPunch will receive an additional $100. And if you plan to send us $200 or $500 or more, CounterPunch will get a matching $200 or $500 or more. Don’t miss the chance. Double your clout right now. Please donate. –JSC (This photo of Alexander Cockburn and Jasper, on the couch that launched 1000 columns, was taken in Petrolia by Tao Ruspoli)
 Day 19

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)

pp1

or
cp-store

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Not a Roar, But a Whimper

Corruption Reform?

by DON MONKERUD

In November, the investigation of lobbyist Jack Abramoff for bribing Congress sent a chill through Washington. Additional indictments were on the horizon and politicians pledged to tighten restrictions on lobbying and clean up government corruption.

Backed by powerful voices, such as Senator Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-Tenn.), listed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) as one of the 14 most corrupt members of Congress, leaders of the House and Senate took bold steps to clean up the corruption. The House voted overwhelming, 379 to 50, to limit former members who have become lobbyists access to the House floor and the House gym. Since this momentous step, which at one time included a proposal to ban lobbyists from the House lunchroom, the process sputtered.

"There was some momentum for sweeping changes after Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty," says Craig B. Holman, campaign finance analyst for Public Citizen. "The Department of Justice has not provided additional indictments of lawmakers and the fear and momentum for change on Capital Hill faded away."

A number of prominent Republicans involved in the Abramoff bribe scandal remain under investigation. Robert Ney (R-Ohio), head of the House Administration Committee that oversees federal campaign finance laws, accepted a golfing trip to Scotland, a gambling junket to London, campaign contributions and free meals from Abramoff, who persuaded Ney to benefit his lobbying clients.

In September, a Texas grand jury indicted House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.) for funneling illegal corporate contributions to Texas state elections. The indictment followed three rebukes from the House ethics committee for unethical conduct. Delay is being investigated for accepting payoffs from Abramoff, including skyboxes at sporting events, flying his staff to the Super Bowl and the U.S. Open, lavish trips to Saipan, Russia, Korea and London, Broadway shows and expensive meals.

Abramoff, who raised over $100,000 for Bush, implicated other powerful Republican leaders in Congress, including: John Doolittle (R-Calif.), who took illegal campaign funds from Tom DeLay and Jack Abramoff; Senator Conrad Burns (R-Mon.), who received $150,000 in contributions from Abramoff; and 17 current and former congressional aides, half of whom were hired by Abramoff. David Safavian, the White House chief procurement officer, who once worked as a lobbyist for Abramoff, was indicted in October for making false statements involving Abramoff to investigators.

Since 1998, the Center for Public Integrity found that lobbyists spent twice as much-$13 billion-influencing legislation and government regulations as they did on campaign finance. These funds buy influence in Washington, obscured by a federal disclosure system in disarray. Many firms never file required documentation of their influence peddling, over 14,000 documents are "missing," 300 lobbyists lobbied without filing, and thousands of forms were never filed. While the right to petition government is upheld in the U.S. Constitution, the sad truth is Congress promotes a system of legalized corruption.

"Campaign contributions are too high and too lax," says Holman, "Lobbyists solicit contributions, bundle contributions in networks, host fund-raising events, and even serve as campaign treasurers on committees and PACs, major sources of corrupting campaign money within the legal limits. They control the purse strings of office holders."

After the Abramoff scandal, Washington is back to business as usual. In March, The Senate passed (90 to 8) weak legislation requiring lobbyists to file more reports, and Congressmen to receive advance approval for lobbyist-paid trips and abstain from lobbying Congress for two years after leaving office.

The weak bill would not ban lobbyist-sponsored private travel or do away with earmarks, which dole out favors to lobbyists. The Senate rejected (30 to 67) an independent ethics office to investigate illegal lobbying and bribery, and will do nothing to regulate lobbyist money-raising activities for Congressmen who rely on them for most fund-raising activities.

In February, House Republicans challenged nearly every reform proposal and rejected bans on lobbyists-funded travel and limits on gifts. Banning rides on lobbyist’s corporate jets was called "childish," and the restrictions on lobbyists using the gym "would stifle social calls."

The Washington Post reports that lobbyists foresee "business as usual," with new rules only "a nuisance," and "any limits will barely put a dent in the billions of dollars spent to influence legislation." New ways to buy Congressional support with the annual $10 billion spent on influencing legislation and regulations include fundraising, charitable activities, and industry-sponsored seminars such as grass-roots activities, including letters, telephone calls and emails, the fastest growing form of lobbying today.

"We need more indictments of lawmakers to install fear in Congress and the voters need to actually react," says Holman. "There’s strong support among voters for lobbying reform and if voters react in 2006, it will come back on the agenda. If they don’t carry through, we lose."

With the Republicans holding all three branches of the government, corporate interests come first to scale back taxes and regulations, and put corporate interests in the center of the national agenda. The current bill is weak and pathetic.

"Today Capital Hill is being run by and for corporations," Holman says. "The motive here is profit and it has nothing to do with what is good for the country."

DON MONKERUD is an Aptos, California-based writer who follows cultural, social and political issues.