Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ethics. Show all posts

Monday, September 20, 2010

Ethics, Ethics, Ethics

Today marks the official starts of the Fall TV season.  I am reading in the newspaper about shows like “No Ordinary Family, about ordinary people who suddenly have super-powers, then there is “Lonestar” about a con-man living in two parts of Texas with two different women, Finally over on HBO comes “Boardwalk” a show of crime and corruption during the early days of prohibition in Atlantic City.

8th District Congressman, Jim Moran, caught in story that feels like it belongs in the movies not in real life! 

Have you ever read a story in the newspaper that as you were reading it you thought to yourself is this for real?  Some stories seem so fantastic that you wonder, “Am I still reading the entertainment section?”  These stories read like the synopsis of some Hollywood movie that has just came out rather than the columns of a legitimate newspaper.

This weekend I was not sure if I was reading the latest synopsis of Michael Douglas in the upcoming movie “Wall Street; Money Never Sleeps” or a true news article.  There before me were all the elements of a great movie:

Plot, Character, and twists and turns as the headline screamed “Ex-lobbyist to plead in earmarks probe”.  This latest tale of Washington Ethics that began bad has now taken a turn for the worse.  On August 20th, Paul Magliocchetti pleaded not guilty to an 11-count felony indictment. This weekend it was reported that this week he will change his plea from not-guilty to guilty in return for his cooperation in an ethics probe that could be far-reaching.  He is charged with paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in illegal contributions to scores of campaigns dating back to 2003 to enrich himself and increase his firm's influence with public officials.

And contribute Magliocchetti did: A Center for Responsive Politics analysis indicates that he and his spouses together donated more than $792,000 to federal-level candidates and political committees since the 1990 election cycle.  The majority of that total -- $475,000 -- came recently, during the 2004, 2006 and 2008 election cycles, the Center's analysis finds.  Democrats on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee, where Magliocchetti once worked as a staffer, became favored recipients of donations by lobbyists in Magliocchetti’s firm, PMA Group Inc.

Among the top recipients of Magliocchetti cash:
In 2007 and 2008 alone, three top Democrats on the House defense subcommittee directed $137 million to defense contractors who were paying Magliocchetti’s PMA Group to get them government business.  The three were subcommittee chairman John Murtha of Pennsylvania, James Moran of Virginia, and Visclosky.

The indictment says Magliocchetti directed his firm’s lobbyists to write donation checks from their personal accounts to specific candidates and reimbursed their donations either through personal checks or the company’s coffers.

Recently in a June report by two nonpartisan organizations generally critical of earmarks, Taxpayers for Common Sense (TCS) and the Center for Responsive Politics (CRP), it was reported that Congressman Jim Moran of Northern Virginia was the House leader in campaign contributions received from earmark recipients.  The report showed Democrat Jim Moran got $89,700.

According to virginiawatchdog.org, "Moran received more than $80,000 from executives, political action committees and lobbyists of companies to whom he’s directed earmarks. In total, Moran has received $82,700 total from these committees and individuals, according to Federal Election Commission reports. MobilVox, Inc. tops the list of donors, contributing $8,300 to Moran and receiving a $2 million earmark.


(Further) Moran requested earmarks for donors totaling more than $50 million. The largest earmark requests were $3 million each, requested for EM Solutions, Inc., Argon ST and DDL Omni Engineering. All of the earmarks given to donors of Moran were defense appropriations. Finally, it’s true that more than 20 percent of Moran’s $396,952 in donations last year came from these committees and individuals."


My Dad use to always say, “If you want to truly know the heart of a man, follow the money”.  So, here we have Jim Moran receiving significant money from soon to be guilty felons and companies he has delivered earmarks for.  On the other hand, his opponent, Patrick Murray, has been running a “grass roots” campaign that even with some big name hosts, such as John McCain and George Allen showing up to host fund raisers, still is dwarfed by the war chest of Jim Moran.  It is tough to compete against someone who is the recipient of an allegedly illegal lobbying machine as Jim Moran has been.  While Jim Moran’s has avoided congressional ethics violations…. so far…. One has to wonder what revelations will result in this change.  Regardless, another saying of my dad is “Where there’s smoke there is fire.”

So, I again pose the question, Who do you want working for you?  A man who receives campaign money from soon to be guilty felons and recipients of earmarks or one who is being funded by people like you and me?  Which of these two candidates is more likely to act on the needs of the nation and will of the people? and which is more likely to be beholden to the greedy companies receiving our taxpayer money?

Join me in ending this run of unethical behavior from an unrepentant Jim Moran and let’s send a man of honor and a decorated veteran of the Iraqi Freedom campaign to congress instead.

Retire Jim Moran
Elect Patrick Murray

Let Freedom Ring

Tuesday, August 3, 2010

Culture of Corruption

"Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it."


Milton Friedman

Rep. Maxine Waters of California probably broke ethics rules, House panel finds


An ethics report released Monday found that Rep. Maxine Waters probably broke conflict-of-interest rules in urging federal aid for a bank where her husband had served on the board and owned hundreds of thousands of dollars in stock.
 
Below are some comments posted from readers associated with this story that may be of interest here...
 
Hairless wrote:


Aren't the Democrats in the majority on the ethics committee? (Just as they are everywhere in Congress) Couldn't Ms Water's buddies have stopped this with their majority? Guess it's President Bush's fault that this is happening to poor Ms. Waters.
 
ignoranceisbliss wrote:


AP wrote: WASHINGTON – California Democrat Maxine Waters faces a House trial this fall on three charges of ethical wrongdoing, setting the stage for a second election-season public airing of ethics problems for a longtime Democratic lawmaker.

The charges focus on whether Waters broke the rules in requesting federal help for a bank where her husband owned stock and had served on the board of directors. She denied the charges Monday.

Persons familiar with the case said Waters is accused of violating:

_A rule that House members may not exert improper influence that results in a personal benefit.

_The government employees' ethics code, which prohibits granting or accepting special favors, for the employee or family members, that could be viewed as influencing official actions.

_A rule that members' conduct must reflect creditably on the House.

The persons were not authorized to be quoted by name on allegations not yet made public.
The House ethics committee's announcement comes just days after it outlined 13 charges against Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., including failing to disclose assets and income, delayed payment of federal taxes and improper use of a subsidized New York apartment for his campaign office.

Another great reason for term limits for the House and Senate. No more lifer politicians. Waters is a DISGRACE.
 
ajon1600 wrote:
If Speaker Pelosi want the continued support of the party, she should let these two accused law breakers fend for themselves, and concentrate on November.
She pledged to "drain the swamp", now is the time to deliver on that pledge.
I don't care how much pressure comes from the CBC, she will have much more public support if the let the legal process take it's due course.
Personally, I think both Rangel and Waters have been around too long and are not really very useful anymore. We need new blood and new ideas and energy.

concernedcitizen3 wrote:


The Waters and Rangel cases serve to remind us that possibly the only reliable difference between Democrat and Republican politicians is that Republicans generally exhibit some semblence of shame and resign when they get caught disgracing their office. Democrats no longer feel the need to do so. And no, I'm not a Republican.
 
Do you have a thought?  Who else do you think may be guilty of questionable ethics?  Congressman Jim Moran?
 
Let Freedom Ring

Thursday, July 29, 2010

Good Judgment; Poor Judgment

My Dad use to tell me when I was growing up, if you want to know the heart of a man (or woman) watch what he does with his money.  Another Dad’ism was, “Always Follow the Money”.  Here he meant that you can predict a persons loyalties by considering where his money comes from.

I will state up front, I have worked for AT&T for over 15 years and many of my points of view, especially as it comes to questions associated with telecommunications, reflect a point of view that reflects my pride in my company, the offers that we have and our philosophical approach to the marketplace.  My opinions are my own and do not reflect official company positions, occasionally I disagree with company decisions and feel embarrassed with our mistakes, still my sympathies lie with the company that rewards my work.

My point in stating this is to acknowledge that it is human nature to, at minimum, be sympathetic to the sources of our funding.  That is why it is so important to disclose and try to avoid situations where our ethics may be compromised by the potential influence from whoever provides our funding.  As a private citizen, where I am not responsible for the people's money, the standards of ethics applied to me are at one level.   Disclosing who I work for and that it might influence my judgement is consistent with what most people expect of a private citizen.

When you are a public official, I submit, you must operate at a much higher ethical level.

A tale of two politicians

This morning, it was reported that Virginia State Attorney General, Ken Cuccinelli, has decided to give up the questionable donations made to him by Bobby Thompson, a Florida man who served as a director of a charity under investigation in at least four states, including Virginia.

This demonstrates, principled good judgment on the part of Cuccinelli so that he can avoid both the substance and appearance of improper influence by this man under investigation.

Moran[1]Sadly, this same kind of principled good judgment can not be said by our 8th District Congressman, Jim Moran.  Hiding under the cover of recent exoneration by the Democratically controlled, House ethics committee, Congressman Moran continues on his path of accepting contributions by business leaders associated with companies he obtained millions of dollars in federal earmarks.

Again, as my Dad use to say, “you want to know how a person is likely to behave, follow the money.”  It is a pretty strong bet that Congressman Moran will have sympathies for these companies and will look for opportunities to funnel more federal dollars to them.  Bringing home the bacon has been a time-honored political practice, but when your campaign accepts donations back from these companies, it strains credibility that your judgment will not be compromised, just ask former Congressman Randy Cunningham.

I ask the voters in the 8th District to join me in demanding that Jim Moran stop the practice of accepting donations from companies he has delivered earmarks to and return the money he has already accepted.  I mean, who do you want your congressman working for, you, or a small handful of local businessmen?

Let Freedom Ring.