Huggy Bear ♥ lobbyists

It should come as no surprise to anyone that despite his mavericky reputation and rhetoric, Huggy Bear actually is far more tied to special interests and lobbyists than the right-wing corporate media would have you believe. Does the name Vicki Iseman ring a bell?

You wouldn't know it from watching the news, but just when Huggy's campaign should be hitting its stride, staffers are resigning left and right ... well, no, actually, just right -- he is a Republican, after all ... because of their links to lobbyists. The fifth one left the Straight Talk Express yesterday.

Tom Loeffler, the national finance co-chairman for Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign, resigned yesterday because of his lobbying ties, a campaign adviser said.

He is the fifth person to sever ties with the campaign amid a growing concern over whether lobbyists have too great an influence over the Republican nominee. Last week, campaign manager Rick Davis issued a new policy that requires all campaign personnel to either resign or sever ties with lobbying firms or outside political groups.

"The campaign over the last week or so obviously had a perception problem with regards with this whole business of lobbyists and their work," spokesman Brian Rogers said. "This is really all about setting a policy so that we can just get through that perception problem and the issues that come up with regards to lobbyists affiliated with the campaign and move on."

McCain has built his reputation in Congress on fighting special interests and the lobbying culture, but he has been criticized for months about the number of lobbyists serving in key positions in his campaign. Until recently, his top political adviser, Charles R. Black Jr., was the head of a Washington lobbying firm. Black retired in March from BKSH & Associates, the firm he helped found, to stay with the campaign. Davis ran a lobbying firm for several years but has said he is on leave from it.

Black, in particular, remains in the cross hairs of McCain's critics. Campaign Money Watch, a nonpartisan watchdog group in Washington, yesterday praised Loeffler's departure but renewed its call for Black's departure. The group has launched a Web site, http://www.firethelobbyists.com, to urge McCain to rid his campaign of their influence. Loeffler's lobbying for Saudi Arabia and other foreign governments was revealed over the weekend.

What's that? Huggy Bear is a hypocrite? No one could have predicted that! And I actually don't blame Loeffler and his predecessors in resigning. Let's see: you could hitch your wagon to a loser and spend the next six months on a sinking, doomed campaign, or you could stick with your high-paying K Street job and keep paying the mortgage on your Chevy Chase manse. Hmmm, tough decision there ...

In actuality, it is becoming clearer and clearer to the vast majority of Americans -- at least the sentient ones -- that a vote for Huggy Bear is a vote for keeping the same failed policies, the same corruption, the same "I've got mine, screw you" mentality that have characterized the Bush crime syndicate since 2001. In most presidential races, it's the campaign of the lagging candidate that sees defections and resignations and "leaving to spend more time with one's family" ... and so I can conclude only that, while it's still just May, the Huggy Bear campaign already sees the futility of their efforts. Couldn't happen to a better dessicated, goiter-ridden near-corpse, if you ask me.

Talk about an expensive date ...

I know it will come as a shock to those of us who know how deeply Katherine Harris values her faith and integrity, but she seems to have gotten herself mixed up with some rather nefarious characters ... I'm sure it's just a big misunderstanding, though, right, Kitty?

A campaign contributor who once wined and dined former Rep. Katherine Harris agreed Wednesday to pay a $1 million fine -- the second-largest in the Federal Election Commission's 32-year history -- for breaking campaign laws by funneling corporate contributions to Harris and another member of Congress.

The fine came as defense contractor Mitchell Wade reached a settlement with the FEC, acknowledging that he used $78,000 in corporate funds to reimburse employees and their spouses for contributing to Harris, a Sarasota Republican who lost a 2006 race for U.S. Senate, and Rep. Virgil Goode, R-Va.

My goodness. Harris in the mix with Mitchell Wade and Virgil Goode? You remember Wade, don't you? He's the guy who pleaded guilty to bribing disgraced former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Of Course) of California. As for Goode, you may recall his bigoted rant about Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), a Muslim, using the Koran for his swearing-in ceremony. So, that's a real bunch of winners you're hanging out with, Kitty.

On the campaign trail in 2006, Harris acknowledged that Wade had picked up a $2,800 dinner tab when the two dined at the upscale Citronelle restaurant in Washington. She said then that the bill was so high because Wade bought several expensive bottles of wine to take home and that she had expected her campaign to "reimburse" Wade for her share of the meal. She said she would give $100 to charity -- the cost she calculated for her part of dinner.

Wade time was angling for multimillion-dollar government contract. Harris sponsored, but did not secure, a $10 million earmark that would have benefited MZM.

Some years ago in Tallahassee, I met with a member of Gov. Bush's cabinet. When I tried to pick up the tab for lunch, the cabinet member demurred and explained that because of finance rules, we would have to pay for our own meals separately. It's kind of surprising to me, therefore, that a member of Congress wouldn't know that allowing a lobbyist to pick up the tab for a $2,800 meal might be illegal.

Or maybe she did know and just didn't care? It would be irresponsible not to speculate ...

Who needs ethics?

This is why I love Washington. There are new ethics rules in Congress, so naturally the first thing lobbyists do is ... learn to comply with the rules? Hell, no! They're figuring out ways to circumvent the new rules!

The new statute bars lobbyists from taking lawmakers on trips. But lobby groups, particularly corporate lobbyists, are checking to see whether they can partner with colleges and nonprofit foundations to provide free travel to lawmakers despite the ban. The rules allow universities and charities greater latitude in providing the benefit.

Along the same lines, lobbyists, who are banned from organizing travel for lawmakers, are thinking about asking their assistants to do it -- an action that would skirt the prohibition.

The new law generally limits "fact-finding" trips by organizations with lobbyists to a single day. That would seem to make it hard for the Nuclear Energy Institute, the lobby for the nuclear industry, to sponsor its oft-taken trips to the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste disposal site in Nevada.

Not so. Those trips can still go on, the association says. Although the organization is still double-checking with ethics lawyers in Congress, it is confident that lawmakers and staffers can "travel on Monday, do their tour on Tuesday and travel back on Wednesday," a spokesman said. In other words, not much change.

In order to continue providing meals for lawmakers and their staff members, a few lobbyists are considering inviting their government guests to a happy hour, ordering drinks and chips, and calling the event a reception -- the kind of widely attended party that the rules still allow.

Well, you get the idea. There are plenty more examples like that.

And people wonder what's wrong with government. I don't think it's the politicians necessarily; I mean, who would turn down free trips and meals if they're being thrown at you all the time? Sure, politicians have plenty of flaws, but the action on K Street is the primary reason nothing ever really changes in Washington.

K Street is going through withdrawal

Happy Thanksgiving to all ...

In today's news, we find lots of job opportunities for Democrats on K Street.

But stuck in the middle of the article describing how trade associations and other organizations are recruiting Democrats was this little bit of tid:

Drug companies are particularly hungry for Democratic help, including the industry's trade association. "We woke up the day after the election to a new world," said Ken Johnson, spokesman for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. "We're going to have tough days ahead of us."

A post-election e-mail to executives at the drug company GlaxoSmithKline details just how tough. "We now have fewer allies in the Senate," says the internal memo, obtained by The Washington Post. "Thus, there is greater risk over the next two years that bad amendments will be offered to pending legislation." The company's primary concerns are bills that would allow more imported drugs and would force price competition for drugs bought under Medicare.

The defeat of Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) "creates a big hole we will need to fill," the e-mail says. Sen.-elect Jon Tester (D-Mont.) "is expected to be a problem," it says, and the elevation to the Senate of Rep. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) "will strengthen his ability to challenge us."

The e-mail also mentions that Sen. Robert Menendez (D-N.J.) "has worked closely" with the company and that the firm's PAC had supported six Democratic senators who faced reelection. "These relationships should help us moderate proposals offered by Senate Democrats," the e-mail says.

Explaining the memo, GlaxoSmithKline spokeswoman Patricia Seif said: "It's important that we're knowledgeable about the positions of the members of the next Congress."

She added, "That way, we can plan ahead for how the Democrats are going to screw us."

That word ... running through my head again ... schadenfreude. How sweet it is.