Yes, yes, we know, it was very strange. Notorious ex-Super lobbyist Jack Abramoff at Public Citizen?! Don’t you remember what he had to say about Native Americans?! What’s the deal with him being a blogger at United Republic?! Is he promoting his book? Didn’t you read this article in Mother Jones? Yes. Sadly, yes. Not sure. Probably, though no copies here. And, of course.
However, as Public Citizen President Robert Weissman explained to the Washington Post: “We’re not inviting him here to give him a citizen of the year award.” Said Weissman, “He has credibility in explaining how lobbyists exert influence.” And, he also has some pretty radical ideas. For example, Abramoff thinks that to truly reform government anyone with pecuniary interest (from government contractors, to corporations lobbying for a tax break) should be prohibited from donating to campaigns. He also has aggressive views about the revolving door problem in Washington. While ethics laws were passed after his scandal requiring a “time off” period between when a congressional staffer could work on the Hill and take a job at a lobby shop, Abramoff thinks former staffers should, in fact, be prohibited from working as lobbyists forever.
Abramoff said of those he lobbied on the Hill, “It seemed 90-percent of staffers wanted to come work for me.” Their motivation was a better-paying job. The motivation for politicians themselves to interact with and ultimately to do favors for lobbyists: time. He explained that the way to get a politician in your pocket was by bringing them a check for their campaign that could save them a few hours of dialing up potential donors and trying to raise the same amount the next afternoon.
When Abramoff entered our “temple of good government” he admitted, “If somebody told me a number of years ago that I’d be sitting in this room, in this building, talking to all of you and not have handcuffs on or something– I’d never have believed you.” He is still a conservative and there are lots of things with which we would never agree with him on. Nevertheless, as he pointed out when it comes to many money and politics issues, “It is not conservative to defend this system, this corruption.” And, as Peter Overby from NPR observed:
“. . . [Abramoff] posited that these reforms are something that conservatives and liberals can agree on. Nobody at Public Citizen disagreed.”
John McG
I appreciate why you would go to an expert on lobbying to talk about lobbying, but I wouldn’t trust Abramoff as far as I could throw k street. He wants political redemption and a second chance so he can have a second run at power. He is not suddenly an honest guy trying to fix the world. He is using every outlet that will have him to clean up his image. People like him should be shunned. There are plenty of us that have thought of nailing shut the revolving door. His ideas are radical but not new.
February 10, 2012 at 11:13 pm
John McG
Right after I wrote my last message Ralph Reed comes on CNN to give the White House advice. Ralph Reed was Abramoff’s partner and up to his neck in Abramoff’s scandals. He should also be shunned, but instead he gets invited on national TV. There are plenty of honest people that could be on TV, why do we need slime?
February 10, 2012 at 11:18 pm
The amount people had to raise to participate in a “policy roundtable” at a Washington, D.C., fundraiser for GOP presidential contender Mitt Romney this week; 10,000 DOLLARS « Eslkevin's Blog
[...] at Public Citizen?! It happened this week, and oh boy, did Abramoff’s appearance make a splash. Read some of the coverage and watch the video. 25,000 people say: Obama, fix the FEC A petition on the White House website calling for President [...]
February 11, 2012 at 6:49 am
Larry Jordan
Jack Abramoff strikes me as genuine. A guy who not only recognizes and admits what he did that was wrong in the eyes of the law, but what he did that was legal is wrong. His prescription for change comes from a thorough examination of the lobbying environment through the eyes of one who played the game and has seen the effects.
February 11, 2012 at 8:39 am
steve conn
I hope you took him on regarding his exploitation of Indian tribes.
February 11, 2012 at 10:53 am
Jenny
Very interesting. If things are going to change then having the culprits behind it on our side is the only way forward. And an excellent way to prove this stuff happens; I know plenty of people with their head in the sand saying it doesn’t.
February 11, 2012 at 11:20 am
art wegweiser
This slime sack spent less time in the slam than a kid shop lifting a $100 cell phone or caught with 2 joints.
And your “security” code thnig is a swift pain in the ass. There are better and easier systems.
February 11, 2012 at 12:24 pm
myrna shreve
I certainly agree with Abramof’s sentiments about money in government and our need to curtail the influence of lobbyists. Even more than this, though, I wish to point out that
There is a way to fix our form of government.
Every democracy in the world, except the United States, is a parliamentary democracy. The countries we helped regain their footing after WWII all are parliamentary democracies, as is our neighbor Canada. They all are able to govern effectively. They all have health care and excellent educational programs for all their citizens. We, too, can have these things (and more) for ourselves if we do the following: We need to exchange our broken constitutional government (which came about because our founding fathers were trying to avoid the abuses of crazy King George III) for an American Parliamentary Democracy.
I thoroughly believe that if enough people object to being governed by a system designed to counter the whims of a crazy king, we can convince our Congressional legislators to effect the change that is needed.
We can keep our Bill of Rights. All parliamentary democracies have their bills of rights. An Amendment to our Constitution, passed by our Congress, stating that henceforth the United States will be governed as the American Parliamentary Democracy would correct many of our current governmental problems. A special election, where Propositions for Ratification of the Amendment would appear on the ballots of every state, would allow voters to ratify The Amendment in short order. One way to bring about the single legislative body of the parliament could be to add the 100 seats of our Senate to the 435 seats in the House of Representatives. Doubling that number would give greater representation, and our new parliament would total 1070 seats.
In Canada, this is how elections take place: Every seat in parliament is up for vote in each election. There is no set time for an election, but once called, the election takes place in approximately 32 days; this keeps legislators current with the issues, and after election they can immediately set about governing the country. Any number of parties can vie within an election district for the district’s one seat in parliament. The head of the party with the most seats in parliament becomes the prime minister. If the party with the most seats is in the majority, then the prime minister can begin passing legislation to carry out his platform. (Otherwise a coalition government is formed with members of other parties.) Because party members are obliged to vote for the party platform, legislation is passed without filibuster and other obstruction. If the prime minister cannot succeed in carrying forth the wishes of the people, an election is called. In Canada during an election no person or company can donate more than $10,000 total to the process. Between elections no money can be used to influence legislators (this is strictly enforced, with penalties to both purchasers and receivers).
Let us have a parliamentary democracy that can carry out the platform of our leader. No citizen needs a government designed with the expressed purpose of avoiding the whims of a crazy king. Our government should function to effectively and ethically legislate to meet the needs of the citizens of our country.
If you agree, forward this message to your friends and ask them to forward it to their friends. If we 99% make enough noise about wanting an American Parliamentary Democracy, it will come about! (To learn more about my thoughts, visit my blog: myrnashreve.com.)
Sincerely,
Myrna Shreve
February 13, 2012 at 4:05 am