View previous stories
	We are fools to pretend we have no need to partner with the world community by Robert Steinback The Miami Herald   Jan 2006   After my Dec. 26 column about how fear of terrorism has affected U.S. policy, I received this e-mail from Australia: "I just wish to comment that from the outside, the U.S.A. has in fact gone completely mad. As you point out, the U.S.A. of pre-9/11 is almost a distant memory - a memory of a Camelot-like society that appeared to value principles of freedom and human rights.   I have been an observer of the U.S.A"s fall from grace. Where once [the Americans] were the consummate global diplomats, using clever tactics and strategies to guide and manipulate the world toward their interests and goals, now they are military bullies who have failed at almost every diplomatic endeavor. Not only is the U.S.A. a far poorer place for the changes, so is the entire world.   "I am hunkered down, bearing my own local loss of freedoms and liberties `in the name of terror." My saddest realization is that governments have forgotten what "freedom" means; they simply equate freedom with an absence of physical harm instead of the protection of the many rights encapsulated in the United Nations" 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights. I had thought that in my country and yours it had become a part of the legal framework. Yet our governments both publicly and secretly have torn it apart." - D.R., Perth, Western Australia.   It has become fashionable since 9/11 for supporters of President Bush to display a blustery swagger about how little we need care what the rest of the world thinks of us. We don"t need anyone, went the refrain, and we answer to no one.   This posture struck me as shortsighted and peevish. It also was sharply incongruous with our simultaneous expectation - almost as an unearned entitlement - to be admired as the world"s cultural and economic leader. It"s as if we figured on being selfish and loved at the same time.   This mind-set hasn"t been fruitful. In breathtakingly short order, the United States has squandered the legacy earned through 20th-century victories over fascism, Nazism and communism, as well global sympathy after 9/11.   Seventeen nations that were once part of the U.S.-led coalition to invade Iraq have pulled out of ground operations, or will shortly.   Political aspirants in various venues - even our smaller mirror image, Canada - earn points by distancing themselves from Washington. The Spanish people dumped their government, and the Italians are restless to do likewise, in part over alliances with the Bush administration. Only Germany has bucked the trend, where conservative Angela Merkel dislodged Gerhard Schroeder, a Bush antagonist.   As we lose friends, we gain enemies -- the election of an anti-U.S., anti-Israel president in Iran may have extinguished a quietly nascent progressive movement there.   In our hemisphere, leftist administrations dominate in Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and Chile, and now Bolivia has elected as president an indigenous leader who proudly declared that "the coca leaf is beating the U.S. dollar." This has much to do with the administration"s lack of interest in helping assure that workers, the poor and the public share in the bounty of free trade. That has enabled President Hugo Chávez in Venezuela, for one, to don the mantle of popular hero by dispersing the nation"s oil wealth rather than allowing oil multinationals to siphon it away.   Meanwhile, on the horizon looms the huge shadow of China, which is challenging the customary Western marriage of capitalism and democracy with its ominous alternative: capitalism with dictatorship. The danger is that China"s formula may prove more nimble and aggressive than Western capitalism, which is weighed down by the popular vote and shifting political environments. If Bush has a strategy to counter this - other than beating China to Iraq"s oil - it isn"t yet evident.   We are fools to pretend we have no need to partner with the world community and, where prudent, to compromise in the interest of a greater good. It is in our interest to lead, not spurn, the global campaign for human rights, human dignity and a healthy standard of living.   D.R. sounds genuinely crestfallen that both his nation and ours now seem to have no greater mission than self-interest and self-protection. America became a great nation because of its ideals. We will cease to be a great nation if we continue to neglect them.
	Biggest corruption scandal in Washington for decades by The Washington Post / The Independent .. USA   04 January 2006   "The $4 Billion Industry that is America"s Guilty Secret", by Rupert Cornwell. (The Independent)   Lobbying is Washington"s grubby secret. Some say lobbying is part of the democratic process. Others claim it is legalised bribery, even corruption. But love it or loathe it, it is the way Washington works.   Usually you hear little about the quiet meetings, the lavish lunches and junkets that lubricate American politics. But every once in a while something comes along to open the system to what it hates most: daylight. The case of Jack Abramoff, influence-peddler extraordinaire, is one of those somethings.   Once Mr Abramoff claimed to have done nothing illegal, that his only sin was to have been too good at his job. But now his career is in ruins, a jail term of nine years or more beckons - an incarceration that would be even longer but for the plea bargain he reached yesterday with federal prosecutors.   For Mr Abramoff only contrition is left: "Words will not ever be able to express my sorrow and my profound regret for my actions and mistakes," he said in court yesterday. As for the two dozen members of Congress and their aides reputedly under investigation, they can only tremble.   If Mr Abramoff spills the beans, they may soon be contemplating a similar fate. This is potentially the biggest Congressional scandal of the modern era. It is largely (though not exclusively) Republican, and may mark the beginning of the end of the party"s 11-year dominance of Capitol Hill.   Lobbying per se is nothing new. The right to "petition the government for a redress of grievances" is enshrined in the first amendment of the Constitution. Back in 1913, Woodrow Wilson said Washington was "swarming with lobbyists ... you can"t throw a brick in any direction without hitting one".   But the 28th president cannot have imagined how access-peddling would blossom into a $4 billion industry. There are 14,000 registered lobbyists, and as many again who are not registered. Between 1998 and 2004, foreign companies spent ($620 million) bending ears in Washington.   Lobbying thrives in the US for two reasons. In the US the executive and legislative branches are separate. The former is headed by the President, the latter consists of Congress, which writes laws and appropriates money for government spending. Although George Bush"s Republicans have majorities in both House and Senate, he has no direct control of the bills they consider. That power rests with dozens of powerful committee chairmen and ranking members, all with their fiefdoms, whose yea or nay is decisive.   The other key ingredient is money, the colossal sums needed to fight election campaigns. In Britain, the curbs on such spending are strict. In America, by contrast, the sky"s the limit. Total spending for the 2004 elections, presidential and congressional, reached $4 billion.   The summit of extravagance was the 2004 Senate race in South Dakota, one of the least populous and less affluent US states. The two candidates spent a combined $40m. In an average state, the cost of defending a Senate seat is $20m. This means an incumbent has to raise $9,000 every day of his six-year term. At which point, enter the lobbyists.   The trade-off is simple. Corporate and other donors provide cash in a bid to secure the legislation they want. The intermediaries between the two sides are lobbyists. And the more people a lobbyist knows on Capitol Hill, the more effective he or she is.   Unsurprisingly, ever increasing numbers of them are former legislators. The Washington-based pressure group Centre for Public Integrity, says almost 250 former Congressmen and senior government officials are now active lobbyists.   Jack Abramoff and his ilk are key figures in Washington"s power networks. And no network was mightier than the one embracing Mr Abramoff, the former House majority leader Tom DeLay and Grover Norquist, president of the arch-conservative Americans for Tax Reform, one of the most powerful special interests groups in Washington.   January 4, 2006 (Washington Post)   At least 20 members of the US Congress may face criminal charges after powerful Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff pleaded guilty to fraud and conspiracy charges and agreed to co-operate with a corruption investigation.   In what could be the biggest corruption scandal in Washington for decades, Abramoff has agreed to name politicians he allegedly bribed, in exchange for leniency.   The bribes are said to have included campaign contributions, free meals at his upmarket restaurants and lavish overseas trips, including golf tours to St Andrews in Scotland, in exchange for favours for his clients.   Among those under threat from his plea bargain is former Republican leader of the House of Representatives Tom DeLay, who is already facing money-laundering charges. DeLay once described Abramoff as "one of my closest friends". Three other senior Republicans, representatives Bob Ney and John Doolittle and senator Conrad Burns, are already facing serious misconduct allegations and there will be many more to come.   Abramoff, 47, who was the most powerful and influential lobbyist in Washington until he was indicted on more than a dozen charges of fraud and other offences six months ago, had organised political contributions to 220 members of Congress totalling almost $US2 million ($A2.7 million) between 2001 and 2004. Some 201 of those members are still in Congress and most are Republicans.   Since Abramoff was indicted, many of these members of Congress have been trying desperately to find ways of returning the donations to him.   During his brief court appearance in Washington on Tuesday, Abramoff, told Judge Ellen Huvelle that he had engaged in a conspiracy that involved the corruption of public officials including members of Congress and congressional staff.   "Words will not ever be able to express my sorrow and my profound regret for all my actions and mistakes," he said. Abramoff pleaded guilty to fraud, conspiracy and tax evasion and agreed to pay back $US25 million, which represents only a fraction of the money that he defrauded from Indian tribes seeking casino licences.   Under the plea agreement, prosecutors will recommend a sentence of about 10 years for him, depending on how much "singing" he does. He was facing 30 years" jail and is still to appear in court in Miami on separate fraud charges.   Abramoff dealt with both political parties, but he is a longtime Republican Party activist and his closest ties — and biggest campaign donations — involved Republican members of Congress.   He hired the spouses of members of Congress and congressional staff as "consultants" and in return received unmatched access on Capitol Hill for his clients. He was known to organise the best junkets in Washington, and only the best food and wine were served free to grateful members of Congress and their staff at his restaurants.   The Abramoff scandal, which could run for months, is a major blow to the White House, coming just weeks before Mr Bush"s State of the Union speech on January 31 and with the Administration desperate to build some momentum after a year of ongoing political setbacks.   With mid-term congressional elections set for November, the affair threatens to end the careers of a significant number of politicians — either as a result of court decisions or voters tossing them out of office.   Jack Abramoff represented the most flamboyant and extreme example of a brand of influence trading that flourished after the Republican takeover of the House of Representatives 11 years ago. Now, some Republican strategists fear the fallout from his case could affect the party"s efforts to keep control in the November mid-term elections.   Abramoff was among the lobbyists most closely associated with the K. Street Project, initiated by his friend, former House majority leader Tom DeLay, of Texas. It was an aggressive program designed to force corporations and trade associations to hire more Republican-connected lobbyists in what at times became an almost seamless relationship between Capitol Hill politicians and firms that sought to influence them.   Abramoff has now become a symbol of a system out of control. His agreement to plead guilty to three criminal counts and co-operate with prosecutors threatens to ensnare congressmen and their aides.   At a minimum, the developments put both sides of the politician-lobbyist relationship on notice that some of the wilder customs of recent years — lubricated with money, entertainment and access — carry higher risks. In the post-Abramoff era, what once was accepted as business as usual may be seen as questionable or worse.   "In the short run, members of Congress will get allergic to lobbyists," said former representative Vin Weber, now a lobbyist. "They"ll be nervous about taking calls and holding meetings, to say nothing of lavish trips to Scotland. For a period of time now, members of Congress will be concerned about even legitimate contact with the lobbying world."   The initial impact of a scandal could be changes in the way politicians and lobbyists interact. In the longer term, Congress will be pressured to revisit and toughen rules on gifts and travel that politicians and their staff may accept. Some former congressmen said even bigger changes may be needed to restore public confidence in the political system.   Jan 4, 2005   The Republican "moral revolution" revealed as cesspit of corruption, by Robert Scheer . (Yahoo)   Top Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff is set to testify, and his long list of former buddies in Congress and the Bush Administration are quaking in anticipation of possible indictments stemming from the consummate Beltway hustler"s crass reign as the king of K Street.   "Casino Jack," a former head of the College Republicans and a "Pioneer" grade fundraiser for the Bush 2000 campaign, pleaded guilty to three felony counts of conspiracy, mail fraud and tax evasion in D.C. yesterday and is set to appear in Florida today to plead guilty to fraud and conspiracy on separate charges. Abramoff and other defendants also must repay over $25 million to defrauded clients and $1.7 million to the IRS.   But most important for the nation is that Abramoff is now detailing the massive web of corruption he spun inside the Beltway which has already snared a top Bush official, procurement chief David H. Safavian, on charges of lying and obstructing a criminal investigation, and reportedly threatens dozens of other D.C. players.   "When this is all over, this will be bigger than any [government scandal] in the last 50 years, both in the amount of people involved and the breadth to it," Stan Brand, a former U.S. House counsel who specializes in representing public officials accused of wrongdoing, told Bloomberg News. "It will include high-ranking members of Congress and executive branch officials."   Some of the Wild West feel of this Beltway corruption was captured in Saturday"s Washington Post expose, "The DeLay-Abramoff Money Trail." It documents in chilling detail how, among other scams, Abramoff funneled a portion of the millions he had been skimming from Indian casino operators with a cool million from two Russian energy moguls through a shell organization called the U.S. Family Network—and from there into the coffers of politicians in a position to help his clients.   Ironically touting its commitment to "moral fitness" for the nation, the front group with the multi-million dollar budget had a single staff member housed in the backroom of a capital townhouse it owned and rented out to other organizations linked to Abramoff and Tom DeLay--the latter"s staffers called it, ominously, DeLay"s "safe house." This is apparently why DeLay felt the need to tout the U.S. Family Network in a 1999 fundraising letter as "a powerful nationwide organization dedicated to restoring our government to citizen control."   It was run by Edwin A. Buckham, DeLay"s former chief of staff, whose lobbying firm, the Alexander Strategy Group, carried Delay"s wife Christine on its payroll. But the moral "fitness" of such cronyism pales in comparison to the scandal of how Abramoff drummed up support for his varied clients under the cover of conservative morality.   For example, in order to block the ambitions of a rival tribe to the Choctaw Indians who had paid Abramoff millions, the U.S. Family Network sent a mailing to Alabama residents warning shrilly that, "The American family is under attack from all sides: crime, drugs, pornography, and one of the least talked about but equally as destructive – gambling. We need your help today to prevent the Poarch Creek Indians from building casinos in Alabama." The letter conveniently failed to mention, however, that the U.S. Family Network had received at least $250,000 from the gambling proceeds of the Choctaws.   In another scam detailed in the Post story (which could be quickly optioned by Hollywood for a thriller), players in the mafia-dominated Russian energy industry slid a cool $1 million payment through a now-defunct London law firm into the U.S. Family Network"s account – which was, de facto, a slush fund for the Abramoff-DeLay network.   Citing the Rev. Christopher Geeslin, who served as a titular leader of the U.S. Family Network, the Post reported that Buckham told the reverend the payment was intended to secure Delay"s support on legislation forcing the International Monetary Fund to bail out the faltering Russian economy without demanding the country raise taxes on its energy and other profitable industries. Right on cue, DeLay found his way onto Fox News Sunday to take up the Russian"s viewpoint: "They are trying to force Russia to raise taxes at a time when they ought to be cutting taxes in order to get a loan from the IMF," he said. "That"s just outrageous." The IMF backed down.   This is just an initial peek into the sordid world being revealed by Abramoff and two of his key cronies now spilling the beans to federal investigators. But in the bigger picture, what we are witnessing is the death throes of the Republican "revolution" which once promised to restore morality to Washington but instead sank far deeper into corruption.   Click on the link below to read " Let''s Save Our Democracy by Getting Money Out of Politics", by Bill Moyers published by the Washington Spectator on April 6, 2006. Visit the related web page
	View more stories