Golf and Abramoff, a Fedora and a Baseball Cap

[A_Clay_Man]

Dan's on the right track but "it" has to be more than just illegal.

That Govenor who abused his constiuents trust, just this last year, was given a year and a day in prison Ouch!. Make that a capital crime and with serious punishment and I bet the weeny politiciaans would never have the balls to break the law. Regardless of ethics.

Just one catch, its those same weenies that have to pass that tough a law. Would they?

[RJ_Daley]

Mr. Carroll says:

THERE ARE NO BAGS OF CASH. SPIRO AGNEW LEFT THE BUILDING A LONG TIME AGO.

You have no idea how hard I am biting my lip on C/I information I have from too many years ago (but well after Spiro's missadventures).  But really, no bags of cash won't be believed by hardly anyone.  Here in recent days, did Mr. Cunningham leave out the same door of the building as Spiro?

[Mike Hendren]

Again, more of the broad brush from the treehouse.  THERE ARE NO BAGS OF CASH.  SPIRO AGNEW LEFT THE BUILDING A LONG TIME AGO.

I beg to differ.  The good ole boys down here still do it the old-fashioned way:

http://www.tennessean.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050528/NEWS0201/505280333&theme=ARREST

Mike

[RJ_Daley]

Our collective americana memory isn't broad enough to recall to mind so instantaneously the countless scandals involving cash to go for public officials.  When was that whole ABSCAM caper again, I forget...

[Jason Blasberg]

So, in order to bring this thread back from OT misery, did anyone realize Mayor Bloomberg is like 5'2" and were's 5 inch lifts?  No joke.

So my GCA question is this:  when designing blind shots do any GCAs every consider human height so that a shot may be blind for Mayor Bloomberg but visable for, say, Mr. Sweeney?      

 

[Dan King]

I wrote:
Works better than the system we have now.
Mike Sweeney writes:
Can you give us some examples?

Two words: Tax code

Sure there are problems with making money given to politicians illegal, but not as bad as the problems we currently have. We can fix the problems.

So Dan, it is back to my same questions - how do we fix the problems? What is your solution? Specificity is the key to problem solving.

What specifics do you want? You start with it being illegal to give money to politicians. You can go from there with campaign finance limits, use of public airwaves, numerous other tools. As long as you have made it illegal to give money to politicians you make the rest of the reform doable. The problem with the current system is as long as it remains legal to bribe politicians, they are going to ensure there are enough loopholes in any legislation so they can still get plenty of money. It is going to be much tougher for them to design piss-poor legislation if you start with it being illegal.

Like I said before, we start with a system that isn't designed to encourage corruption. A legitimate system has workable solutions, a system broken by design can not be patched together.

Are you saying that we need a perfect system before we can trash the current broken one? If you need to wait for perfection, you are going to be stuck with the current corruption a really long time.

Back on topic: A bad course with a great routing can be made into a good to great course. A course with a bad routing is hopeless and the best answer is to start over.

david h. carroll writes:
Again, more of the broad brush from the treehouse.  THERE ARE NO BAGS OF CASH.  SPIRO AGNEW LEFT THE BUILDING A LONG TIME AGO.

Ok, lobbyists rarely resort to bags of cash, you guys have gotten much better at figuring out how to get money and gifts to candidates than the old fashion way. Why bother when there are so many legal ways to get cash and gifts to politicians?

Dan King

No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the source of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power.
 --P.J. O'Rourke

[RJ_Daley]

John K, in their small criminal wise guy minds, maybe the odd selection of hats each day is a signal to his implicated fellow criminals that he is about to do one thing or another, whilst visiting with these prosecutors and investigators.  You know, like in the movies... black fedora means I'm ratting you bastards out if there isn't a boat load of funds depostited into account #880swisscheese69, or if I wear a beige golf hat, everything is cool, I didn't say nothin.

Right on Dan!  gotta start somewhere... tax loopholes are a great start...  flat tax... no writeoffs.  Campaing finance reform. Campaign spending limits.  If you want to get elected, shake as many hands as Proxmire did.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Are you saying that we need a perfect system before we can trash the current broken one? If you need to wait for perfection, you are going to be stuck with the current corruption a really long time.

We both know there is no perfection. I just believe that the broad strokes that I read in your answers eliminates many candidates that I would want. There is a guy here in New York who is going to run for Governor by the name of Tom Suozzi. Tom was my class at BC, but I did not know him well then. He runs Nassau County now, was the Mayor of Glen Cove, LI where my son's school is located and was instrumental in getting that school open, which is for Autism Spectrum kids. Tom probably has an above average lifestyle relative to many, but he certainly cannot fund a campaign for Governor of NY by himself. Long Island Italian Catholic kid who went to BC and then Fordham Law.

His first opponent is Elliot Spitzer who is  a controversial candidate also for the Democratic ticket. He is the NY State Attorney General and comes from a wealthy Jewish Manhattan development family and Princeton* and Harvard Law. He is controversial due to some legal cases he has filed including one against a former poster on this website!

You can't get a better cast on reality TV!

I personally have not decided yet between the two, and I will probably register as a Democrat to vote this race (which may cause my Liberal wife to drop dead!), but how does Suozzi run for Governor without personal money to fund his campaign? I really would like the choice.

[Steve Lapper]

Mike,

    There will be no shortage of campaign $$ for Suozzi, if he chooses to run. Normally conservative & Republican higher-echelon Wall Street exec's are prepared to contribute mightly to his war chest. While it's nationally rare for staunch Republicans to start donating to liberal Dem's, NY is ALWAYS a cross-party, cross-view state for politcal donations and allegiances.

The bigger ?? for him is whether he wants to take the political risk of a brusing and potentially losing intra-party battle? My bet is that he takes a pass (unless Spitzer becomes entangled in something meaningful in the Whitehead spat, i.e., a real smoking gun(threatening) e-mail or letter in uncovered). The NY Democratic political machine has already been considerably oiled for Eliot, and Suozzi may well have to wait his time and perhaps for another position?


BTW...Spitzer went to Princeton undergrad and Harvard Law. I know quite a few people who attended one of those schools with him and it's very interesting to hear their recollections and descriptions of his beliefs. FWIW, they all unanimously say they'd support him for ANY political office (even POTUS!) regardless of the sclae of his ambitions.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Steve,

Laura Spitzer, his cousin and big worker in the UJA and Elliot’s campaign, was at our apartment last night as she is very good friends with Katie. I saw in the NYT’s, I believe, that Ken Langone was going to support Suozzi, or should I say beat Spitzer.

I spoke to Tom Suozzi briefly at a SLCD dinner, and I will be shocked if he doesn’t run. We shall bet a logoed hat from a mutually agreeable New York golf club on it!!

This race may be the end of The Sweeney’s blissful marriage, however my vote will go to the candidate (Republican, Democrat, Libertarian....) that best supports SLCD where we are building a new middle and upper school in Woodside, Queens! We have the support of Mayor Bloomberg and Superintendent Joel Klein, but we really need NY State more for political reasons.

[ForkaB]

I still remember my first (and hopefully/thankfully(?) last) fullblown IRS audit in the mid-80's.  The examiner would not even take a glass of water or a cup of coffee from me.  A bit extreme, I thought at the time, but not a bad example for any politician to follow.  And, there is at least one of those that I personally know, who pretty much adheres to that standard (and, no, I will not name names)......

[Mike_Sweeney]

I was asked off line about the following:

SLCD is my son's school that Ran and many people on this website have supported www.slcd.org

UJA-Federation is one of the great charitable organizations in New York and the country. http://www.ujafedny.org/site/PageServer?pagename=aboutus

[Steve Lapper]

Steve,

Laura Spitzer, his cousin and big worker in the UJA and Elliot’s campaign, was at our apartment last night as she is very good friends with Katie. I saw in the NYT’s, I believe, that Ken Langone was going to support Suozzi, or should I say beat Spitzer.

I spoke to Tom Suozzi briefly at a SLCD dinner, and I will be shocked if he doesn’t run. We shall bet a logoed hat from a mutually agreeable New York golf club on it!!

This race may be the end of The Sweeney’s blissful marriage, however my vote will go to the candidate (Republican, Democrat, Libertarian....) that best supports SLCD where we are building a new middle and upper school in Woodside, Queens! We have the support of Mayor Bloomberg and Superintendent Joel Klein, but we really need NY State more for political reasons.

Mike,

   You have a wager(PS...if the Whitehead stuff goes to scandal levels, no bet) and your vote in this race (as I'll not be able to do) is certainly admirable.....just remember that the school may not benefit from having it's advocates removed from their positions of greatest service to the school.....just a thought. That said, I think better of Suozzi already!

[Mike Hendren]

I understand the baseball cap sports a Cascata logo, seriously.

No comment.

Mike

[david h. carroll]

Yes, Cascata as confirmed in the Washington Post with a good bit of editorial wit:

"The hat was embroidered with the word "Cascata," which is a fancy golf resort outside Las Vegas. Cascata's Web site says that "few places on Earth offer such extravagance."

For a man who had just pleaded guilty to bribing government officials with fancy golfing trips -- albeit to a resort in Scotland -- his choice of headgear seemed brazen, inappropriate and not very smart for anyone interested in projecting dignity through attire. But then maybe Abramoff figures dignity, at this stage, is a pipe dream. A hat -- any hat -- at least offers a false sense of camouflage and protection. It's what celebrities wear when they don't want to be recognized."

[A_Clay_Man]

It seems few of you have ever had anything to do with Haseeds? Or know what they like to wear on their keppies,

[RJ_Daley]

Geez Mike Sweeney, here you put up this example of this apparently good fellow who by what ever means went to BC and Fordam, working his way through local regional politics, and lamenting he may not have "enough" money to run for Gubber.  Then this discussion of all the big shots on Wall Street and who they will support.  Spitzer and his whitecollar crimebusters causing one of his targets to support the other guy, and blah blah blah.  The whole discussion is about who raises enough money and wins the most influential backers, for their money, not any ideas on programs or legislation needed by the people to allow our lives to move forward towards more opportunity health and successful society.

Why not give these candidates equal access to free public airtime, debates, and let local rags line up based on policy statements, and go shake a million hands and let the people decide, rather than swooning monied interests on Wall Street being first consideration on whether a good man runs.  Cap them on how much they can spend on a campaign, and let that portion of the field be level.  Then let them set forth ideas and debate their merits.  NOt perfect, but a better system than chasing the biggest bag of money.

[Doug Siebert]

Hmmm, ideas to fix the system?

1) No one in Congress or the executive branch (and this would include staffers, political appointees, civil servants and military officers) can become a lobbyist for at least 5 years (and perhaps life for some of the highest positions) after leaving public service.  Don't whine about "freedom of speech", lobbyists are already required to register so it obviously isn't a free-for-all today.

2) Make taxes immune to political favors and givebacks by going to something like at www.fairtax.org so the only knob the government can mess with is the rate.  No political favors for certain industries or individual companies (it was introduced in the House in early 2005 with 45 cosponsors but died in committee of course)

3) Put control of congressional districting out of the hands of politicans and have it done either by computer or if you don't like that some sort of bi-partisan committee that would have to unanimously approve the districting

4) Better yet, replace House districting with parlimentary style proportional representation.  Any party wishing to participate and meets some very minimal standards to get on the ballot can put up a slate of candidates ranked in order.  Say CA has 50 districts, everyone votes for the party they like instead of the person, and if Dems get 50%, Reps 36%, Greens 8% and Libertarians 6% then you get the first 25 listed Dems, first 18 Reps, first 4 Greens and first 3 Libertarians.  That way voting for a third party isn't a waste of your vote for the House, even if it still would be for Senate and President (but at least this would provide a way for them to get some recognition and possibly begin to change that)

[Mike_Sweeney]

Doug,

Thanks for your well thought out answers.

Dick,

I am a political novice with no real interest. However, I am thrust into the local politics of NY State vs NYC due to opening the upper school for my son's school in Queens and my role on the fundraing committee for the new school.

The things that Dan King was saying in his post, I probably agree with. However, based on my 4 short months of experience, change comes really really slow in NY politics and specific small steps solutions such as Doug's would appear to have a better chance. Right now I am not trying to change the system, just understand it and work with it to accomplish our goal - build a middle and high school in Queens that will serve 150+ families of Autistic children from NYC, Westchester and Long Island.

[Jeff Goldman]

Sorry folks, you can change the rules, but you cannot stop the game.  No set of convoluted rules and prohibitions will prevent pigs from eating the slop.  If you ban contributions to politicians, you'll just have organizations spending money to support them, "without" the politician's input.  

The best you can hope for is full and complete disclosure of all payments to politicians and contributions to political causes (though requiring the latter may be unconstitutional).  Opposing groups and politicians can use the contribution lists as a political weapon.  That's it.  

Recall that the first amendment was designed to protect political speech above all else (notwithstanding the present Court's idiocy on commercial speech), and money talks.

[Patrick_Mucci]

RJ Daley,

How does a candidate put himself on a level playing field when the other candidate is the media's "darling" ?

Read "The Last Hurrah" by Edwin O'Connor or rent or buy the movie version (1958).  I think you'll enjoy them both.

The methods used to garner votes have changed, and the media has become a powerful force, one that can predispose the electorate and even determine the outcome of a race.

If the media favors one candidate how can the other candidate offset that influence without the infuson of considerable sums of money ?

I happen to like extremely wealthy candidates because they DON"T need the money and tend to run for and manage their office on their philosophical beliefs.

I was never concerned that the Rockefeller's, Kennedy's,
Brown, Bloomberg and Corzine were seeking public office to line their pockets and I respected them all for that.
However, that doesn't mean that I agree with all of their philosophies.  It just means that I have a comfort zone in that they're not the primary beneficiaries of their efforts in office.

Everyone forgets that Ross Perot warned about the influence of lobbyists years ago.

Seeing as how a small number of people are making vital decisions that affect all of our lives, perhaps, like teachers, we should pay them more, say, $ 2-5,000,000 per year, and then couple increased pay with term limitations.