The New York Times
August 19, 2010 Thursday
Late Edition - Final
A State Unconvinced That Its Culture of Corruption Will Ever Fade
CHICAGO -- This state's long, troubled, expensive episode with Rod R. Blagojevich,
the former governor, appears far from over.
But as prosecutors prepare to retry Mr. Blagojevich on the most serious corruption
charges against him -- charges that a federal jury found itself deadlocked over on
Tuesday -- one thing does seem to have come and gone: the impetus to cleanse
Illinois's political system, long derided as corrupt.
That system molded the career of Mr. Blagojevich, as well as that of his predecessor,
George Ryan, currently serving a prison sentence for corruption, and, literally,
hundreds of others convicted of public corruption crimes in recent decades.
Though prosecutors are expected to retry Mr. Blagojevich -- convicted of a single
count of giving false statements to the Federal Bureau of Investigation -- the jury
deadlock added a puzzling ingredient to the public conversation about what amounts
to corruption and what does not. Many here seemed surprised by the trial's outcome,
concerned that a costly retrial might bring a similar result, and leery of the thought
that politics will ever change much around here.
''What's really at the core of our problem isn't one politician, but this notion of a
culture of corruption,'' said Patrick Collins, a former federal prosecutor appointed by
Mr. Blagojevich's successor, Gov. Pat Quinn, to lead a commission to find ways to
end the pattern of corruption. He added later, ''We've been disappointed so many
times.''
After Mr. Blagojevich was arrested on charges that he had turned state business into
money-making enterprises for himself and his friends, reform groups sprung up all
over the state, from within the capital to citizen brigades. But two years later, the
results, many here say, have been disappointing.
''We had a perfect storm of events which sort of cried out for fundamental reform,''
Mr. Collins said. In the end, Mr. Collins said the changes accepted by state
lawmakers amounted not to a ''half a loaf,'' but to ''some breadcrumbs.''
With the passing months, ethics reform has largely faded from the collective mindset in Illinois, thanks, in part, to the votes on elements of an overhaul by state
lawmakers, mounting alarm about the increasingly dire economic picture in the state
and, especially, a growing sense of Mr. Blagojevich as a singular, unusual character.
It was hard to imagine a situation more shocking than the one people here woke up
to on Dec. 9, 2008: Mr. Blagojevich, a Democrat in his second term as governor, had
been arrested and accused of, among other things, trying to sell an appointment to
the United States Senate seat vacated by the newly elected president, Barack
Obama.
So began the jokes on late-night television. The essential theme: What was wrong
with Illinois? With Mr. Blagojevich's conviction for false statements, he becomes the
fourth Illinois governor in recent memory to be convicted of a crime, and the fifth of
the last eight elected governors to be charged with wrongdoing.
By some estimates a thousand public officials and business people in Illinois have
been convicted of public corruption in the last 40 years alone -- a fact driven in part
by decades without limits on political contributions to state candidates. The price of
corruption to taxpayers in the state? More than $300 million a year, according to a
2009 study from the University of Illinois at Chicago.
The immediate reaction to the accusations against Mr. Blagojevich in Springfield, the
Democratic-dominated state capital, was outrage. Mr. Blagojevich was vastly
unpopular even among fellow Democrats, having clashed with leaders in Springfield
about nearly everything. He was quickly impeached (the State House voted 114 to 1)
and removed (the State Senate was unanimous, 59 to 0).
Changing the way politics is done was more complicated.
In 2009, lawmakers purged the state's pension boards, which had struggled with
scandal, and made it easier to obtain public records and to see the results of
government inspectors' investigations, and Illinois became one of the nation's last
states to restrict how much an individual or corporation can give a candidate in a
state race.
But other efforts failed, including an initiative to remove partisan politics from the
state's decennial redistricting. (The current method still involves breaking certain tie
votes by pulling a name from a stovepipe-style hat.)
The state's campaign finance restrictions do not go into effect until next year, and
some of those deeply involved in reform, like Mr. Collins, said they are too lax, still
allowing state party leaders to give large amounts to races.
Some politicians and analysts argue that the new laws should not be
underestimated.
''For this state, it is a massive change,'' Cindi Canary, director of the Illinois
Campaign for Political Reform, said of the passage of campaign finance restrictions.
''It's almost an earth-shattering change.'' Still, she said, the culture here has shifted
less.
Not surprisingly, Republicans, who are in the minority in both chambers of the
legislature, were particularly dismissive of the notion of any true change. ''It's kind of
business as usual,'' said Representative Tom Cross, the Republican leader. And
Senator Christine Radogno, who leads Republicans there, said she was still seeing
''some very Blagojevich-esque behavior going on.''
Part of the difficulty with using Mr. Blagojevich's actions to push reform was the
developing portrait of Mr. Blagojevich himself.
Through his trial Mr. Blagojevich came to be viewed ever more as a lone, odd, offthe-rails politician -- isolated, it seemed, from just about everything else, including
any broader, systematic problem in the state. (One state lawmaker refers to him not
as a Democrat but as the sole member of the Blagojevich Party.)
In recent months, too, the dreadful economy came to eclipse the once statewide
conversation about ethics reform. For many, worries about Illinois's $12 billion
deficit, unpaid bills and unfunded pension obligations seemed to drown out the
Blagojevich soap opera.
None of which is to say there were no lessons learned from Mr. Blagojevich's journey
so far. As Jeffrey Cramer, a former federal prosecutor, said, the politics here may
have changed little, but ''people may be more careful talking on the phone.''
On Wednesday, Scott Dantuma, a financial consultant who was having lunch at a
McDonald's and said he did not support a retrial because the case was weak, said the
practice of corruption would look slightly different now. ''It will just be more
underground,'' he said.
Newsday (New York)
August 19, 2010 Thursday
ALL EDITIONS
Big cases on his resume; Lawyer hired to probe Suffolk ethics panel praised
by colleagues
The lawyer appointed to investigate the Suffolk County Ethics Commission's handling
of Executive Steve Levy's financial disclosures is the former chief federal prosecutor
on Long Island who handled high-profile cases ranging from a doctor who killed his
patients to a fraudulent owner of the Islanders.
The Suffolk County Legislature's selection of Joseph Conway, 51, now a prominent
defense attorney in Mineola, drew high praise from his former colleagues in the
Eastern District U.S. attorney's office and from defense attorneys who both work
with him now and whose clients once were prosecuted by him.
"Joseph Conway is a consummate professional with the background, character and
experience to conduct a fair and impartial investigation," said Richard Haley, an
Islandia defense attorney. "His integrity is beyond reproach."
Gary Brown, who was Conway's deputy at the U.S. attorney's office, says his former
colleague "has the great instincts and superior investigative skills, and at the same
time he is unequivocally evenhanded and fair." Brown is now senior vice president of
CA Technologies, the company formerly known as Computer Associates.
As a federal prosecutor, Conway headed the team that investigated one of the
largest cases of political corruption in Long Island history - the BPA insurance
scandal in the late 1990s which cost Nassau County $70 million and resulted in the
convictions of a number of people, including former Chief Deputy County Executive
Robert McDonald and former Suffolk Republican Party head William Blake.
Conway also successfully prosecuted John Spano, who fraudulently took brief control
of the Islanders, and Michael Swango, the physician convicted of murdering three of
his patients at the Northport VA Medical Center.
Conway left the U.S. attorney's office in 2004 to start the Mineola law firm of
LaRusso and Conway. Since then he has represented a number of high-profile
clients, including lawyers involved in the school pension scandal; Lindsay Lohan's
uncle, Paul Sullivan; and Adam Kidan, an associate of disgraced ex-lobbyist Jack
Abramoff. Conway is a member of the Independence Party.
Before joining the U.S. attorney's office, Conway attended St. John's University and
Brooklyn Law School, both at night. He paid for his education by working as clerk
and then served as a law clerk for former U.S. District Court Judge Mark Costantino.
In private life, Conway, who grew up in Flushing, has been active as both a coach
and executive in his local CYO and Little Leagues, even after his children went to
college.
THE CONWAY FILE
Mineola attorney Joseph Conway had been an assistant U.S. attorney for 14 years.
Among his high-profile cases were:
Michael Swango, a doctor convicted in 2003 of killing four patients, including three at
the Northport VA Medical Center. Swango was suspected in dozens of other patient
deaths in the U.S. and Africa.
John Spano, who pleaded guilty in 1997 to fraud charges in his short-lived purchase
of the New York Islanders.
Chief Deputy Nassau County Executive Robert McDonald, who pleaded guilty in 2004
for his role in a scheme to defraud the county of more than $70 million through a
failed self-insurance scheme.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
August 18, 2010 Wednesday
Main Edition
Ethics chief calls for criminal probe; Donations to Oxendine campaign
questioned.; Insurance firms, PACs hinder investigation, commission says.
The head of the State Ethics Commission on Tuesday said the state should seek
possible criminal charges against two insurance companies and a group of political
action committees she said are stonewalling an investigation into their donations to
John Oxendine's gubernatorial campaign.
Stacey Kalberman, the commission's executive secretary, told the board that it was
"time for you to consider turning this matter over to the prosecutor."
The recommendation was seconded by Stefan Ritter, a top official in the attorney
general's office who cited "potential criminal violations" by the insurance companies
and the Alabama-based PACs in not handing over requested financial information
when the commission issued subpoenas.
The commission's investigation into the 10 PACs and two Rome-based insurance
companies stemmed from reports in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution last year that
the companies used the PACs to funnel $120,000 to Oxendine, the state's insurance
commissioner who lost a bid for the GOP nomination as governor.
The insurance companies are suing the commission, alleging that the investigation is
politically motivated. They sought to have the subpoenas stopped, but a state judge
ruled against them. Their case against the commission is still pending.
In May 2009 the AJC reported that State Mutual Insurance Co. and a subsidiary,
Admiral Life Insurance Co., sent almost 10 times the legal amount of campaign
contributions to Oxendine using 10 PACs. The PACs were started by Donald V.
Watkins Sr., a banker who sits on the State Mutual board. The PACs operate out of
his bank, Alamerica, in Birmingham. The insurance companies are headed by Delos
Yancey, a friend of Oxendine's. Watkins' son, Donald V. Watkins Jr., runs the PACs.
Georgia's Ethics-in-Government Act prohibits elected officials from taking money
from companies they regulate. The law also prohibits funneling money through PACs
to get around contribution limits of $12,200 per candidate in a normal election cycle.
After the initial AJC report, Oxendine returned the donations and the Ethics
Commission launched an investigation. This May the commission issued subpoenas
for financial records from the insurance companies. The companies sued and have
provided no information. The PACs have given over documents that were "basically
nothing," Kalberman said.
Both Kalberman and Ritter said the board might want to consider adding
respondents to the case. Currently, the two insurance companies, the PACs and
Oxendine are named as respondents in the investigation.
A spokesman for the insurance companies said they did not attend the hearing and
had no comment. Donald V. Watkins Sr. and Donald V. Watkins Jr. did not return
calls for comment.
Oxendine's attorney, Stefan Passantino, said the investigation has shown his client
did nothing wrong.
The board decided to take up the issue at its next meeting in the fall.
Also at the commission meeting, Kalberman sounded a warning that the state's
expanded ethics law --- passed this spring following last year's scandals regarding
then-House Speaker Glenn Richardson --- amounted to "an unfunded mandate" that
her understaffed and underfunded department could not enforce. The law was
trumpeted by House Speaker David Ralston, R-Blue Ridge, as new, tighter rules for
Georgia politicians. But the law provided no extra funding for the new duties.
Marshall Guest, a spokesman for Ralston, said "implementation of this new law is
important to Speaker Ralston."
"We look forward to working with the commission as we go through the
appropriations process to determine the necessary level of funds so it can carry out
its duties and enforce the new law," Guest said.
Kalberman said the new law requires her 10-person staff to take on an additional
61,000 reports, many from local candidates. She said the commission's computers
could not handle the added workload and would crash unless their capacity is
expanded.
The commission's budget is slightly more than $1 million --- not including an
expected 4 percent cut. She said more cuts have been suggested.
"If we have ethics reform and can't enforce the laws, it's actually a step backward,"
Commissioner Kent Alexander said.
Charleston Daily Mail (West Virginia)
August 18, 2010, Wednesday
Helton got exemption for new job; Official says he approached Ethics
Commission before negotiating with firm
State Department of Revenue Secretary Virgil Helton said he received an exemption
from the state's conflict-of-interest rules before negotiating for a job with a private
company.
It was announced on Monday that Helton is leaving state employment Aug. 31 for a
job with Fast Enterprises. The company recently completed a four-year, $22.3 million
contract to modernize the state's tax systems.
"I went straight to the Ethics Commission when there was just a general inclination
from Fast that they might have an interest," Helton said. "I said I couldn't talk
because of my position and because you (Fast) have a state contract."
Helton requested an exemption from the state Ethics Act that prohibits full-time
public officials from seeking employment with persons and businesses subject to
their personal regulatory authority and from seeking employment with a vendor that
has a contract with their agency over which they, or a subordinate, has authority or
control.
In an Aug. 4 written notice, Ethics Commission Executive Director Theresa Kirk
granted Helton a temporary exemption from the conflict-of-interest rule.
Kirk noted that there are 10 agencies in the Department of Revenue, including the
state Tax Department. "Arguably. . .the Tax Department regulates every business in
West Virginia," she wrote. "As such, you would not be able to seek employment with
any business in WV if an exemption is not granted.
"From our conversation, it is my understanding that if you are granted an exemption,
you will not take action on any companies with which you are seeking employment,"
Kirk wrote. "Instead, you will have another employer in your agency handle such
matters."
Kirk said that under the authority vested in her, "I hereby find that you will be
adversely affected if you are unable to seek employment with West Virginia
businesses. I am granting you a temporary exemption which permits you to contact
vendors, regulated persons and businesses in your search for a full-time job in the
private sector."
Helton said on Tuesday that even though as secretary of the Department of Revenue
he oversees the state Tax Department, "I have not been involved with the Fast
contract."
He said he's well aware of conflict-of-interest rules. "I know it's one of the rules I
work under as cabinet secretary," he said. "I would never intentionally do something
that was not appropriate. I've been a certified public accountant for well over 30
years. We have certain ethics requirements. I've been in state government for 13
years, with tax and lottery."
At Fast Enterprises, "I will be primarily involved in business development throughout
North America and, at some point in the near future, possibly Europe and Asia,"
Helton said.
Helton said it is his understanding that Fast Enterprises doesn't do any lobbying and
"I have no intention to do any lobbying work in West Virginia on behalf of Fast."
Fast Enterprises is headquartered in Colorado but Helton said he will work from
Charleston, at least for the foreseeable future.
Moves from the public sector to the private sector became an issue in January when
Larry Puccio, Gov. Joe Manchin's longtime chief of staff, stepped down and then
registered to lobby the Legislature for several businesses including Consol Energy
and what is now known as Hollywood Casino at Charles Town Races.
In March Tax Commissioner Christopher Morris left state government to become the
top lobbyist for West Virginia American Water Co.
Fast Enterprises performed the biggest overhaul of tax systems in West Virginia
history. The company installed a commercial, off-the-shelf, integrated tax-processing
system that has helped the Tax Department reduce errors and reduce the time
required to issue tax refunds.
The New York Post
August 18, 2010 Wednesday
GOV SCORES PREMIUM YANKS TICKETS: PRICELESS! - UH ... ACTUALLY,
THAT MAY BE $96,375
ALBANY - That could be one of the most expensive baseball games ever.
The state's top ethics watchdog wants to slug Gov. Paterson with a $96,375 fine for
allegedly shaking down the Yankees for free tickets to Game 1 of last year's World
Series.
The Public Integrity Commission requested the historic penalty - the first of its kind
sought against a governor - after a lightning-quick hearing in the agency's Albany
office yesterday.
The recommendation will be passed along to an administrative law judge who will
decide the matter, which could take months to resolve.
The proceedings, including the damning testimony of Paterson's former spokesman
and three top Yankees officials, were conducted without the governor, who refused
to attend.
Three chairs saved for the governor's legal team sat empty throughout the hearing,
which lasted barely two hours.
Paterson had argued the commission should have held off until a special counsel
finished a spin-off investigation into whether Paterson perjured himself during the
agency's original probe.
Paterson's failure to pay for five VIP seats behind home plate - a potentially illegal
gift worth $2,125 to $6,000 from the Yankees, a registered lobbyist - was first
reported last November by The Post.
Commission lawyers credited the newspaper with calling Paterson out on the alleged
ticket-taking scheme.
"In fact, the governor never intended to pay for any of the tickets until Fred Dicker of
the New York Post started asking questions," commission counsel Bridget Holohan
said in her opening statement.
State law bars top public officials from accepting gifts of anything but "nominal"
value from entities such as the Yankees that employ lobbyists or that attempt to
influence official decisions.
Special Counsel Jeff Schlanger said Paterson "intentionally misled" the commission
and added that the governor's ethical standards "sadly and widely missed the mark."
Paterson has said he attended the ballgame in his "official capacity" and has denied
any wrongdoing.
The commission found the "official business" argument didn't hold water because
Paterson didn't participate in any public ceremonies, events or speeches during the
game.
And even if he had performed an official act, that would not have covered the other
four attendees, two aides and the two youths, who were at the game with the
governor.
Yankees executive Lonn Trost - wearing a pair of World Series rings while in the
witness chair - was the first of three Bombers officials to explain how Paterson aides
invited themselves to the game and insisted that the gover nor would not pay for the
tickets.
More damning, ex-Paterson Communications Director Peter Kauffmann, who quit
because of the scandal, said Paterson claimed the Yankees invited him - only to later
recant the story.
He said the governor and top aide David Johnson insisted they didn't have to pay for
the tickets - another stance they later abandoned.
"Mr. Johnson was very forceful and adamant about this point," Kauffmann said. "
'The governor doesn't have to pay for these tickets. These tickets are free.' "
The state's former top judge, Judith Kaye, is investigating the Yankee tickets case
after being appointed special counsel by Attorney General Andrew Cuomo.
As of July, Paterson had spent $866,000 from his campaign account on legal fees
and public relations to defend himself in the scandal.
He had $616,000 on hand to pay any potential fine.
South Florida Sun-Sentinel (Fort Lauderdale)
Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Business News
August 18, 2010 Wednesday
Brand new ethics code headed back to voters for re-write: Anonymous
complaints would be banned, and city officials, employees brought under
Inspector General
Aug. 18--Broward County's Code of Ethics that became law a week ago Tuesday is
headed to the November ballot for a rewrite that would cast an investigative
spotlight over hundreds of politicians, government employees and contractors.
As originally adopted, the anti-corruption law is flawed, Commissioner Stacy Ritter
told her colleagues, urging them to shed "pandering and posturing" and vote "yes" in
favor of modifying it.
As written, the code is "not very well researched and not very well thought out and
not very responsible," she said.
Commissioners stripped Ritter's proposal of some of its more controversial elements,
then voted 6-2 to send the result to voters for approval or rejection Nov. 2.
The code, as created by a committee of volunteers, still includes a ban on politicians
and family members taking gifts from lobbyists, new transparency about lobbyistpolitician lunches and e-mails, and tight restrictions on commissioners and their
family members who moonlight as lobbyists.
As changed, it would expand the purview of the new Office of Inspector General from
just the nine county commissioners to hundreds of city politicians and city and
county employees and government service providers in Broward.
Two separate ballot questions will also be put to voters in November on whether to
apply the new rules in the Code of Ethics to politicians in the county's 31 cities, and
to the sheriff, clerk of courts, property appraiser and supervisor of elections.
Ritter's sugggested changes, approved by five other commissioners, would bring the
office of Inspector General in line with Palm Beach County's and Miami-Dade's, in
that anonymous complaints could not be used to prompt investigations, anyone
alleging misconduct would have to file a sworn affidavit, and accusers could be sued
for legal and investigative fees if their complaint was found to be malicious or
reckless.
Ritter's changes also require accusers to swear to having "personal knowledge" of
any alleged wrongdoing. The inspector general would be able to open investigations
"on his or her own initiative."
Mayor Ken Keechl voted against the modifications, saying the public would
misinterpret attempts to tinker with a rulebook just one week old.
"No matter what we do with regard to this item, no matter how good we try to make
it,"' Keechl said, " ... it's going to appear that we are just trying to thwart the will of
the ethics commission."
Vice Mayor Sue Gunzburger voted in favor of the retooling, then changed her vote to
"no" about 15 minutes later. Both Keechl and Gunzburger are facing tough reelection fights this year, and ethics reform has been a top campaign issue in a
county where one recent county commissioner is in prison and another just resigned
to face corruption charges.
No estimate has been calculated yet for how much the new inspector general's office
will cost taxpayers. But the figure will be ready in time to be shown on the Nov. 2
ballot.
Ritter's proposals won their most vocal support from commissioners Ilene Lieberman
and Kristin Jacobs.
Commissioner John Rodstrom said he liked Ritter's requirement that anyone accusing
public officials of misconduct have to identify themselves.
"I guess people outside this dais don't care about our reputation," Rodstrom said,
and voted "yes" in favor of Ritter's suggestions.
Anchorage Daily News (Alaska)
August 17, 2010 Tuesday
'Open government' group faces record fine
A group that poured tens of thousands of dollars into a ballot measure that aims to
be against government corruption faces penalties topping $300,000 for failing to
publicly report its contributions and donors for months.
If the fine proposed for Alaskans for Open Government holds, it would be the largest
penalty for a campaign money violation in Alaska.
Backers of the controversial Ballot Measure 1 say it targets sweetheart deals and
seeks to curb undue influence by government contract holders and unions.
Opponents say it would crush the ability of many Alaskans to lobby government and
have a voice in political campaigns. Even a village mayor would be barred from
traveling to Juneau to lobby, they say.
The measure is on the Aug. 24 primary election ballot.
Alaskans for Open Government was the top financial contributor to Clean Team
Alaska, the group behind Measure 1, but it didn't file its first financial disclosure
report to the state -- revealing the source of its money -- until June, long after
various deadlines had passed, according to a letter sent this month by the Alaska
Public Offices Commission.
The June report shows that the money Alaskans for Open Government pumped into
the "yes" on Measure 1 campaign came from two groups led by Howie Rich, who
made a fortune in Manhattan real estate and has been linked to similar campaigns in
other states to rein in government.
APOC is proposing to fine Alaskans for Open Government $339,650. The group
intends to challenge that, its Anchorage attorney Ken Jacobus said. It has $197.83
left in its bank account, he said.
Separately, the election watchdog agency is proposing to fine Clean Team Alaska
more than $90 for failing to file a report that was due July 26. That report still hadn't
been filed as of Monday.
THE BATTLE LINES
The proposed big fine is just the latest twist in the battle over Measure 1.
The backers of it, including former state Rep. Dick Randolph, say it's been
misinterpreted. They are no longer actively campaigning, though they want it to
pass.
Those opposed include groups with varied interests organized as the Stop the Gag
Law committee: unions and local governments, the AARP and the Alaska State
Hospital and Nursing Home Association, the Resource Development Council and
various chambers of commerce.
The state Attorney General's office says the proposal would prevent public money
from being spent for political campaigns and lobbying. It also would bar people with
government contracts from making campaign contributions and extend that
prohibition to relatives, the analysis says. The initiative defines relatives broadly as
including in-laws, grandparents and grandchildren, nieces and nephews, aunts and
uncles. Legislators and their aides would be barred from working for a government
contract holder for two years.
Violating the law would amount to a crime.
The two sides disagree on what Measure 1 would do.
Opponents say school districts, villages, cities and other governmental organizations
wouldn't be allowed to send leaders to Juneau to make a pitch for funding because
that would amount to using public money for lobbying. They say a restaurant owner
with a contract to cater food for government couldn't make campaign contributions,
and neither could anyone in the person's extended family.
Backers say it wouldn't go that far.
AMASSING THE FINES
Alaskans for Open Government is in trouble with APOC for filing financial disclosures
late -- in some cases over a year late:
• Under state law, the group was supposed to report each contribution of $500 or
more to Clean Team within 30 days of making it. In June, it reported 21 such
contributions made over the previous two years -- with 20 of them violating the 30day rule. The APOC is proposing a $276,600 fine for this.
• State law required Alaskans for Open Government to register as a group by Aug. 7,
2008, as its Clean Team contributions ramped up. It registered June 2, 2010. The
APOC is proposing a $33,200 fine for this.
• The APOC is proposing a $29,850 fine for the group's late filing of its year-end
2008 and 2009 reports. The group filed one report June 12, 2010, covering both
years.
Alaskans for Open Government was the main source of money for Clean Team, at
least as of February when Clean Team last filed a financial disclosure to APOC. In all,
it gave Clean Team $140,220 since May 2008, according to its APOC filing dated
June 26.
Jacobus said Alaskans for Open Government didn't initially file reports with APOC
because he didn't think it had to.
"We're really not in the interest of keeping anything secret because part of the
initiative is for transparency," Jacobus said, referring to a provision of Measure 1 that
would require the state to post its contracts on the Web.
Clean Team backers dropped its campaign June 10 just as the state was pushing
Alaskans for Open Government to disclose its finances.
THE VIRGINIA CONNECTION
So where does Alaskans for Open Government get its money? From two groups,
according to its recent disclosures to APOC: Americans for Limited Government and
the Legislative Education Action Drive, both at the same Fairfax, Va., address. Most
of the money came from Americans for Limited Government.
Rich founded and leads both groups. He didn't respond to e-mails sent through the
conservative Website Townhall.com , where his columns appear.
He is described on Wikipedia as "a Manhattan-based real estate developer who is
notable for funding Libertarian-oriented political initiatives such as term limits, school
choice, parental rights regarding education, limited government and property rights."
According to Clean Team's Web site, he's also a longtime associate of Randolph, the
former Fairbanks legislator and Libertarian governor candidate in the 1980s.
Did the money provided to Clean Team originally come from Rich? Jacobus said he
doesn't know.
Anyway, Americans for Limited Government "didn't want APOC to try and dig into
where their money came from and submit themselves to the jurisdiction of APOC
because apparently they had some problem in another state related to that," Jacobus
said.
THE OTHER SIDE
The Stop the Gag Law group had spent more than three-quarters of a million dollars
as of late July, much of that on radio and television ads trying to convince Alaskans
that the measure would have far-reaching and unwanted consequences. By the time
of the election next week, the group expects to have spent $1 million.
They say even though there's not an organized campaign for Measure 1, it has
populist appeal as "anti-corruption" and they must work hard to provide information
on what it would really do.
"The more people know about this, the more apt they are to vote against it," said
Josh Applebee, campaign manager for Stop the Gag Law committee.
His group's biggest contributors are the National Education Association, which had
put in $400,000 as of July 23, the Alaska State Employees Association, with
$100,000, and the Alaska Public Employees Association. While the latter had donated
$35,000 as of the July report, it since has put in additional money to become a top
contributor, Applebee said.
The next reports to APOC are due today.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
August 15, 2010 Sunday
Main Edition
Connections count at law firm; For Atlanta's McKenna Long & Aldridge,
politics can be fertile ground.
The world of politics and government is increasingly a confusing, raucous and messy
place. There are endless ethics complaints, sweeping health care changes, everpresent lobbying scandals and desperate attempts to stimulate the economy.
But that's all good for McKenna Long & Aldridge.
The Atlanta- and Washingtonbased law firm has continually --- and unashamedly --- positioned itself to be a
player in the corridors of power, where a phone call to the right official can make
things happen.
"People in the firm have relations in and knowledge of government," said Clay Long,
the 74-year-old lawyer on the firm's nameplate. "Sometimes you have to know
where to go and how to get in the door to allow you to make your case."
And making your case in the public arena may be more important than ever. The
economy is more government-money driven, meaning companies need people with
sharp elbows and insider skills negotiating and fighting on their behalf.
McKenna Long & Aldridge
is big in hiring former, and influential, public officials.
Many are nonlawyers because the political connections and government experience
are sometimes more valuable than a law degree. The strategy has worked. In the
amount of money brought in from lobbying, McKenna Long & Aldridge
ranks 10th
nationally among law firms, according to the National Law Journal. The $22.8 million
in lobbying fees last year was the largest for an Atlanta-based firm, double its
nearest rival, Alston & Bird.
Simply put, "They provide influential people to capitalize on their relations with
elected officials," said Bill Bozarth, the Georgia director of Common Cause, a
government watchdog. "I've seen it again and again."
The once predominantly Democratic firm now covers all political spectrums. On staff,
there's former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean, a senior strategic
adviser focusing on health care. And Republican Eric Tanenblatt, Gov. Sonny
Perdue's first chief of staff, heads the governmental affairs group. You want a foot in
both camps? Well, there's Zell Miller, Georgia's former Democratic governor and U.S.
senator who supported former President George W. Bush for re-election and holds
the same title as Dean.
"Mostly everyone on our (government affairs) group has served in government, often
numerous times," said Tanenblatt, who also served under U.S. Sen. Paul Coverdell.
McKenna Long & Aldridge
is hired to help businesses maneuver the minefields of
toughened ethics laws, make sense of new regulations or get government contracts.
Scandals like the case of Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist convicted of defrauding Indian
tribe clients of millions, are a boon to the firm because laws are tightened in
response, bringing more scrutiny on companies operating in the governmental or
political realm. This means businesses and politicians will come to places like
McKenna Long & Aldridge
to stay out of trouble.
"They have a finger in every campaign," said Neill Herring, a lobbyist for the Sierra
Club, who has spent decades at the state Capitol. "They have certainly done that
with the governor's race."
The firm had strong connections to the leading gubernatorial candidates.
Tanenblatt was once runoff candidate Karen Handel's boss in the Perdue
administration and donated $5,100 to her campaign. He served as the former
secretary of state's finance chairman until she lost to Nathan Deal last week. Randy
Evans, an insurance litigator who is Newt Gingrich's confidant and who recently
represented Sarah Palin, is fighting an ethics complaint lodged against Republican
runoff candidate Deal. So far, Deal's campaign has paid McKenna Long & Aldridge
$59,000 in legal fees, according to disclosure reports.
Members of the firm have contributed more than $46,000 to Democrat Roy Barnes,
far more than any other law firm has given to any other gubernatorial candidate.
McKenna Long & Aldridge
lawyers Keith Mason, a Zell Miller aide and Clinton
administration official, and Buddy Darden, a former Democratic congressman, are
working hard in their private lives to put Barnes back in the job he lost in 2002.
Mason and Darden terminated their longtime statehouse lobbying registrations,
allowing them to donate money to Barnes, who has vowed not to take lobbyist
money.
Chuck Clay, a former state senator and GOP chief, has a firm that lobbies and does
law.
He said McKenna Long & Aldridge
has been ahead of the curve.
"I have to give them credit," Clay said. "It was the first of its type in the region. A lot
of lobbying clients have legal issues, and legal clients have government issues. It
works both ways. You can bill them coming and going."
Mason agrees. "It's a good segue into other traditional types of law work," Mason
said, noting that most of the firm's business is traditional corporate law work. But,
often, that work starts with a political or personal connection.
Getting involved in civic affairs and politics is often good business, Long said. During
the 1980s, Long chaired the MARTA board, a contentious, time-consuming job that
took him away from tending to his fledgling business. But the MARTA gig built his
public profile and connections with political insiders. This proved valuable when he
vied for the legal work for the massive redevelopment of Underground Atlanta in the
late 1980s. His firm won the job.
"I would have never had a shot at that work without my time at MARTA," he said. "It
put us on the map."
In 2002, Long's firm merged with Washington-based McKenna & Cuneo, which had
expertise in government contracting. Three years later, Long handed over the reins
of the firm to Jeffrey Haidet.
Long said the firm's bipartisanship was evidenced by his being picked by Barnes to
head the administration's green space committee and by Perdue to head his
conservation plan.
The public work also led to the firm representing Georgia in the ongoing tri-state
water wars. The firm billed the state nearly $6.7 million from 1996 until last summer
when a federal judge ruled Georgia has illegally drawn water from Lake Lanier for
decades. The judge gave Georgia, or Congress, three years to work out a deal with
Alabama and Florida. After the ruling, the state brought in a former solicitor general
to head the appeal, but the firm has still billed the state $868,000 in the past year.
"They've done very well. The state hasn't," Herring said.
The firm had revenue of $269 million last year, posting a healthy $830,150 profit per
equity partner, up $55,000 from 2008 for each of the 88 equity partners, according
to the Fulton County Daily Report's annual survey. The firm has 163 of its 440
lawyers based in Atlanta, making it the city's sixth largest firm in the number of
attorneys based here.
"In political law, there's going to be a lot of growth," said Tanen-blatt. "You see
ethics complaints and ethical compliance issues. There's a lot of gotcha politics going
on."
The word in political circles is the firm is getting known as the place to go for
Republicans in ethical trouble. But Haidet said Democrats get in trouble, too. And, of
course, he wants them calling the firm.
Stefan Passantino, one of the firm's lawyers who is making his name fighting ethics
complaints against politicians, agreed his resume "screams Republican." But he said
the bipartisan nature of the firm "gives clients comfort that they are not getting
advice filtered by any political ideology," he said. "Once they get past the initial
shock of the lions and lambs together here, they realize there's a benefit."
Bozarth, the Common Cause director, said he often sees McKenna Long & Aldridge
lawyers being hired to fight ethics complaints. "I have seen again and again the
difference between getting your case dismissed in the initial hearing (before the
state ethics commission) and getting it referred for further investigation is often a
matter of how good a lawyer you have.
"It comes down to who makes the best points and, of course, a lawyer making $400
an hour makes better points."
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
August 15, 2010 Sunday
Main Edition
Lobbyists pay for Ralston; House speaker says it's work, not vacation.
Business groups spend thousands to bring legislators to resorts.
Don't blame Georgia's statehouse lobbyists if House Speaker David Ralston failed to
get a tan or gain a few pounds this summer.
Special-interest business associations had Ralston shuttling to posh resorts up and
down the Georgia and Florida coast. The speaker, who made ethics one of his
highest priorities when he took office earlier this year, gave speeches to associations,
schmoozed with business leaders, attended pricey dinners and even got in a few
rounds of golf.
Despite the ritzy accommodations at the many conferences and annual meetings,
Ralston said he was working, not vacationing.
"For all of that time on the coast, I didn't even get to the beach," he said. "It was
work. I played golf a couple or three times."
The speaker complained about the resort hopping.
"I think we had a run of having five of those over a seven- or eight-day period," he
said. "I told some of them I want those things in the mountains next year."
During one period of about three weeks in June, Ralston had this schedule:
First the Railroad Association on Jekyll Island. Then the Georgia Oilmen's
Association, the Cable TV Association and the Georgia Chamber of Commerce on St.
Simons Island, the Georgia Health Care Association on Amelia Island, Fla., the Wine
& Spirits Association back on St. Simons Island and finally the Georgia Industrial
Loan Association in Ponte Vedra, Fla.
From May 1 --- days after the end of the 2010 legislative session --- to July 31,
lobbyists spent more than $7,000 on meals, lodging and golf for Ralston, according
to disclosures reviewed by The Atlanta Journal-Constitution.
It's unclear what the full total is because the AJC found that not every lobbyist
disclosed what lawmakers received. Some, like the Industrial Loan Association,
hosted the new speaker for two days at a resort in Ponte Vedra, Fla. June 25-26, but
reported spending nothing. Others only disclosed the cost after being contacted by
the AJC. The AJC found multiple examples of associations not fully disclosing the cost
of having lawmakers attend their events.
Under state ethics law, registered lobbyists are required to report a gift of value
provided to legislators. If they do not, they can be fined up to $1,000 per violation -- though the small State Ethics Commission staff almost never audits lobbyist
reports. Legislators are not required to report gifts they receive.
Overall, lobbyists reported a decline in spending on lawmakers this summer
compared to last. From May to the end of July this year, they spent about $120,000,
compared to about $210,000 in 2009.
Some of that decline was due to lawmakers spending their summer running for
election and being unable to visit conventions. Lobbyists said the slow economy also
cut spending on legislators. And some of the decline appears to stem from lobbyists
simply not disclosing what they spent, even though it's required by state law.
The summer beach and resort season has long allowed lobbyists and the people they
represent to spend time with top lawmakers. Legislators get to hear their concerns,
and maybe get in a little golf and beach time with their families.
"Some people look at it as junkets, some don't," said veteran Rep. Alan Powell, DHartwell, who has attended plenty of summer conventions over the years. "One
man's junket is another man's business."
Ralston was elected speaker after the scandal-plagued Glenn Richardson resigned in
disgrace at the end of last year. He quickly left office after his ex-wife publicly
claimed he had an affair with a lobbyist, among other charges. Ralston took over this
year promising stronger ethics laws and more transparency for the House.
Legislators proposed a host of reforms, including limits on how much lobbyists could
spend on lawmakers. But Ralston opposed limits. The legislation he pushed and
lawmakers approved during the 2010 session had no limits, but increased reporting
requirements for lobbyists.
Lobbyist expenditures on the House speaker certainly haven't abated since the
Richardson scandal. In May through July last year, lobbyists spent about $4,000 on
Richardson, slightly more than half of what they spent on Ralston this year.
Second to Ralston this year on the lobby spending list was Senate Majority Leader
Chip Rogers --- about $6,300 during the three months after the session. He is also
among the lawmakers who occasionally takes family to the conventions.
Rogers, R-Woodstock, said he paid all his travel expenses and for most of his meals.
He said he only ate food paid for by associations if it was a convention luncheon or
dinner.
"I didn't have to, but I did it just to be on the safe side," Rogers said. "All I ask for is
they cover the hotel, and I think is reasonable."
The Georgia Utility Contractors Association reported spending $1,483.32 on June 14
for Rogers, his wife and four children to attend its convention at Myrtle Beach
Marriott Resort at Grande Dunes in Myrtle Beach, S.C.
Rogers was a speaker at the convention and named legislator of the year. Rogers
said his family stayed in one room.
The Georgia Mining Association and the China Clay Producers Association held their
annual conventions in July at the Ponte Vedra Inn & Club luxury resort in Ponte
Vedra.
Lee Lemke, lobbyist for the group, said before the economic downturn, Georgia
Mining Association conventions would draw about 300 people. Last year they had a
record low turnout. This year, with a concerted push, Lemke was able to get 245.
Part of the sales pitch for members to attend, Lemke said, was bringing top state
leaders. He said paying for legislators is fair because "they are taking time to come
down and meet with us."
"I don't look at it as partying," Lemke said. "I look at it as them doing us a favor by
coming down to talk with our members and other business leaders."
Lemke reported spending about $3,600 on Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle and four state
lawmakers.
The AJC found that some associations hosting gatherings reported only part of their
expenses, or nothing at all.
The Georgia Industrial Loan Association reported spending nothing for its Florida
conference, even though it was attended by Ralston.
When asked about the issue, the association's president, Gary Allen, said he didn't
know why nothing was reported and said he would get back to the AJC. He did not.
The Georgia Bankers Association hosted House Banking Chairman James Mills, RGainesville, and House Ways & Means Chairman Larry O'Neal, R-Bonaire, at its
Charleston conference in June. The association reported spending about $400 on
dinners for the two. After being contacted by the AJC, it amended its report to
include another $215 spent on golf for O'Neal. But it didn't report lodging expenses.
David Oliver, spokesman for the Georgia Bankers Association, said the association
didn't think it had to report the rooms, since they were complimentary for booking
the event.
He is wrong, according to Stacey Kalberman, executive secretary of the State Ethics
Commission. She said complimentary rooms have to be reported.
"It is something of value and they should report it," she said.
But it's not something the commission likely would catch. Kalberman said the Ethics
Commission has only one full-time auditor and the panel does not audit lobbyist
financial disclosures unless someone files a complaint.
"We're just not going to get to it," she said.
Jon S. Howell, president of the Georgia Health Care Association, the nursing home
lobby, only reported his group paying for the cost of a dinner when Ralston and Rep.
Mickey Channell, R-Greensboro, attended a June get-together at the Ritz-Carlton on
Amelia Island.
When asked why his lobbyist report included no expenses for lodging, Howell said
the dinner was the only expense the association paid for. He then said the
lawmakers stayed in complimentary rooms the Ritz had given the association for
booking the event at their hotel.
"Maybe I should amend the report," Howell said during a conversation with a
reporter. Hours later, he did, listing a cost of $1,554 for rooms used by Ralston and
Channell.
Most costly summer conferences, meetings
Lobbying groups spent big money hosting lawmakers over the spring and summer at
beach conferences and annual meetings. Below are some of the most expensive
ones.
Georgia Chamber of Commerce:
Spent: $14,313
Location: St. Simons Island
Lawmakers: 33 lawmakers, including House Speaker David Ralston, House Speaker
Pro Tem Jan Jones, House Ethics Chairman Joe Wilkinson, Senate Regulated
Industries Chairman David Shafer.
Georgia Association of Convenience Stores
Spent: $5,990
Location: Amelia Island, Fla.
Lawmakers: Rep. Carl Von Epps, Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers, House
Speaker Pro Tem Jan Jones, House Majority Leader Jerry Keen, Rep. Kip Smith,
House Ways & Means Chairman Larry O'Neal, Senate President Pro Tem Tommie
Williams.
Wine & Spirits Wholesalers of Georgia
Spent: $4,442.72
Location: St. Simons Island.
Lawmakers: House Speaker David Ralston, House Majority Leader Jerry Keen, State
Revenue Commissioner Bart Graham, Rep. Alan Powell, House Ways & Means
Chairman Larry O'Neal, Rep. Carl Von Epps, Senate Regulated Industries Chairman
David Shafer.
Independent Insurance Agents of Georgia
Spent: $4,010.92
Location: Amelia Island, Fla.
Lawmakers: House Insurance Chairman John Meadows, Rep. Rich Golick.
Cable Television Association of Georgia
Spent: $3,722.23
Location: St. Simons Island.
Lawmakers: House Speaker David Ralston, Rep. Don Parsons, Rep. Chuck Martin,
Sen. Freddie Powell Sims, Senate Majority Leader Chip Rogers.
Busy summer travel schedule
House Speaker David Ralston did a lot of traveling this summer, attending
conferences and lobbyist-subsidized meetings. Here are some of his June trips, along
with what lobbyists reported spending on him:
June 3: Railroad Association meeting, Jekyll Island, $547.86.
June 5: Georgia Oilmen's Association, St. Simons Island, $670.
June 7: Cable TV Association of Georgia, St. Simons Island, $840.88.
June 8-9: Georgia Chamber of Commerce, St. Simons Island, $407.68.
June 14: Georgia Health Care Association, Amelia Island, Fla., $593.
June 24-25: Wine and Spirits Association Convention, St. Simons Island, $279.80.
June 25-26: Georgia Industrial Loan Association, Ponte Vedra, Fla. No expenditures
reported.
Concord Monitor (New Hampshire)
August 15, 2010 Sunday
Kuster's lobbying career; House candidate gained expertise, had influence
When Ann McLane Kuster announced her campaign for Congress last June, the
Hopkinton attorney and activist noted she had never run for political office. A year
later, Kuster remains the only major 2nd District candidate running for the first time.
But Kuster, a Democrat, is no newcomer to the legislative process. For 20 years
before her campaign announcement, she worked the halls of the New Hampshire
State House as a lobbyist representing a range of clients. Kuster's governmentrelations work accounted for perhaps half of the comprehensive legal services she
offered, in addition to her practice arranging private adoptions, she said last week.
Kuster's lobbying work allowed her to gain expertise in education and health care
policy while requiring her to take public stands on behalf of a long list of clients. It
also honed her ability to negotiate with lawmakers of all political leanings. A review
of her record at the State House shows how two decades working with lawmakers
shaped the political portfolio of a candidate who identifies herself as a newcomer to
the campaign trail.
"I think I have excellent experience in terms of how to bring people together to get
things done," Kuster said in an interview last week. "In New Hampshire, it's often in
a partnership with the nonprofit community, the business community and the state
legislators that we solve issues that can help people in their real lives."
Lobbying has taken on a bitter resonance in the 2nd District's Democratic primary.
For weeks, opponent Katrina Swett has hammered Kuster about her career, which
Kuster's campaign studiously refers to as "advocacy," rather than "lobbying." When
the New Hampshire Union Leader reported last week that Swett had been registered
as a lobbyist in Washington, the Kuster campaign denounced Swett's apparent
hypocrisy. And after uncovering an old website for a Swett lobbying firm listing
Katrina Swett as an associate and a company in "global sourcing solutions" as a
client, the Kuster campaign brought out unemployed workers to laud their
candidate's support for job creation.
Swett has denied lobbying, and her campaign continues alerting reporters to Kuster's
past work.
'Resource for legislators'
In March 1999, Kuster was at work outside Representatives Hall in the State House
when she described the job of a lobbyist to a Monitor reporter.
"What I do is advocate for my clients and serve as a resource for legislators," Kuster
said. "Here in the State House they don't have the staff and resources to do all the
research they need to do, and that's where I can help."
During her time in the State House, Kuster represented dozens of businesses,
nonprofit organizations and professional associations, but within a few years she
focused her practice on education and health care. She lobbied throughout her
career for Dartmouth College, where she earned her undergraduate degree in 1978,
and Dartmouth Medical School. Other longtime clients include the Bedford
Ambulatory Surgical Center, Fidelity Investments and the New Hampshire College
and University Council.
Kuster earned more than $1.3 million in lobbying fees from 1989 to 2009, according
to reports she filed with the state. She earned approximately $460,000 from
ambulatory surgical centers, $420,000 from Dartmouth and associations of schools
and colleges, $150,000 from investment companies and associations of investment
companies, and $145,000 from pharmaceutical manufacturers and their association.
During the course of 21 years representing clients at the State House, Kuster would
have followed a large number of bills. Looking at even a few bills and projects that
took significant attention on her part shows her handling of complex policy issues
and legislative politics.
State Rep. Sharon Nordgren, a Hanover Democrat who chairs a finance
subcommittee focused on health issues, said she interacted with Kuster whenever
budget discussions turned to the money the state sends Dartmouth Medical School to
save seats for New Hampshire students. Nordgren, a public supporter of Kuster's
campaign, said Kuster was the first person she would approach for accurate
information.
"We all on our committees have lobbyists," Nordgren said. "We use them in various
ways, and there are some we trust and some we don't trust. With Annie, she was, at
least in my perception, more informational and making sure we had the proper
information."
Whenever Kuster or her campaign are asked about her lobbying work, they point to
her central role in the development of two state programs. When attention was
focused on the rising costs of prescription drugs in the late 1990s, Kuster worked
with lawmakers, medical providers and her client, the Pharmaceutical Research and
Manufacturers of America, on the New Hampshire Medication Bridge Program, which
allows people with low incomes to access free prescription medications. The Kuster
campaign featured that program on a TV ad that began airing last week. The other
program, a college savings program, allows families to pay very little tax on money
saved in particular accounts.
Shawn LaFrance, who directs the Foundation for Healthy Communities, worked with
Kuster during the development of the Medication Bridge program. The program was
created in an attempt to connect people who needed long-term medication to
prescription assistance programs offered by pharmaceutical companies, LaFrance
said.
Executive Councilor Beverly Hollingworth, then president of the state Senate, had
learned of local organizations that were helping patients access the programs, and
she asked the Foundation for Healthy Communities to help create a statewide
network. Kuster was charged with finding the startup money to organize the
program but took a greater role, LaFrance said.
"She was helping way beyond just getting a contribution from the pharmaceutical
association," LaFrance said. "She was working really closely with Bev and ourselves
to make sure this thing had enough resources to take off."
Hollingworth said Kuster went back to the drug companies to sell them on the
Medication Bridge program and succeeded.
"She had to spend time convincing them this was the way to go," Hollingworth said.
The program launched in 2001 and at its peak served 17,000 people, LaFrance said.
Those numbers dropped after the federal government began offering a prescription
drug program through Medicare and now stand at about 8,000 enrollees, he said.
LaFrance said pharmaceutical manufacturers have remarked upon the success of the
program.
"Pfizer and some of those companies have said to us, 'Whoa, what's going on up
there? We have these huge numbers of people from New Hampshire using our
(prescription assistance program),' " LaFrance said.
Kuster was also instrumental in the creation of the UNIQUE College Investment Plan,
a savings plan that allows families to save for college in tax-deferred investment
accounts, said Kathleen Salisbury, associate vice chancellor for government affairs at
the University System of New Hampshire. Kuster drafted legislation and approached
state Sen. Sylvia Larsen, now Senate president, about sponsoring the bill, Salisbury
said.
"I don't think this would have happened without Annie," Salisbury said. "She really
worked this bill hard, explaining to members of the House and Senate why this
would be advantageous to families."
PhRMA's voice
At the start of the 1995 legislative session, a Republican lawmaker from Charlestown
introduced a bill that would require pharmaceutical manufacturers to sell drugs at
the same price to all purchasers. The bill was intended to eliminate disparities in
pricing when drugs were purchased by hospital pharmacies or HMOs, which landed
competitive deals with manufacturers, and independent pharmacies, which paid a
much higher price. As a representative of PhRMA, Kuster twice submitted testimony
opposing the bill. After the bill was retained a year for study, Kuster wrote in October
1996 to the chairwoman of the House Commerce Committee, informing her that
PhRMA would oppose any regulation controlling prices.
"We believe health care reform should rely upon market forces to insure access to
medicine, contain cost, preserve quality of care and stimulate innovation," Kuster
wrote.
Kuster drew upon her familiarity with the bill's progress, reminding the chairwoman
that members of a subcommittee had concluded mandatory pricing should not be
legislated in the upcoming session. She noted a federal class action lawsuit had been
brought by community pharmacies against brand-name drug manufacturers and said
members of the subcommittee expected the topic would be addressed in the courts
and U.S. Congress. Three days later, the Commerce Committee voted 10 to 3 to kill
the bill.
Regulatory debate
Kuster represented the Bedford Ambulatory Surgical Center for 15 years, and in the
late 1990s she engaged in a debate about state regulation of independent surgical
centers. Proponents of such centers, which offered surgery at a lower cost than
hospitals, said the enforcement of a law requiring state approval for significant
spending on medical buildings was inhibiting entrepreneurial growth and keeping
prices high for healthy patients who did not need hospital care. A group of hospitals
opposed the centers, saying their expansion would threaten the hospitals' business
model.
In written testimony submitted when she appeared before the House Health, Human
Services and Elderly Affairs Committee in March 1999, Kuster argued that outpatient
care was the indisputable future of health care, as technological advances allowed
more surgeries to be performed beyond the setting of a comprehensive hospital. She
offered evidence that the majority of multi-specialty surgical centers then in New
Hampshire were affiliated with hospitals and that the development of surgical centers
had not threatened community hospitals.
"This debate is not about whether ambulatory surgical centers are good (since
hospitals are developing and supporting them) or whether community hospitals will
close (as shown by Claremont and Moline (Ill.) )," Kuster wrote. "Instead, this
debate is whether physicians themselves will be able to play an important role in the
development of ASCs, or whether hospitals will be able to continue their dominance
of health care services. We believe patients should have a choice."
The Legislature decided that year to study the issue further. The topic of state
oversight of medical construction has surfaced in years since, and last year a
committee of legislators was convened to study the review process. Its report is due
in November. Ambulatory care centers have continued to operate despite the
continued existence of the review, and several have since partnered with private
hospitals, said Rep. Peter Batula, a Hillsboro Republican on the Health, Human
Services and Elderly Affairs Committee then and now.
In January 2004, Kuster testified before the Senate Ways and Means Committee in
support of a bill to exempt private schools from paying the educational property tax.
Kuster was representing the New Hampshire College and University Council, a group
including the University of New Hampshire and Colby-Sawyer College, and New
Hampshire Independent Schools, which included St. Paul's School and the Tilton
School.
She testified that New Hampshire private schools bear a heavy tax burden, even
though they educate a large number of New Hampshire students.
"As a result of the property taxes imposed on private schools, you're ultimately
imposing a burden on families who choose to send their children to New Hampshire
colleges compared with sending them out of state," Kuster said, according to a
transcript of the hearing. "We're usually in here whining about the impact on the
institution, but it truly is an impact on New Hampshire families and the New
Hampshire economy."
The bill died in the Finance Committee because of its $2 million price tag, said a
sponsor, state Rep. John Hunt of Rindge. Hunt said he will not vote for Kuster
because he is a Republican, but he once gave her a job recommendation. Hunt was
impressed with Kuster's work, and when Fidelity Investments asked for a tip on a
good lobbyist, he said he suggested her. Hunt said Kuster, like other successful
lobbyists, was able to work with lawmakers across the political spectrum.
"At theof the day what you want to do is get a positive vote of the committee, so
you're going to lobby all the members of the committee regardless of party," he said.
Hollingworth said her own judgment as a legislator was often informed by hearing
from lobbyists on both sides of an issue. She said Kuster took part in such
conversations, explaining the facts behind her client's position.
"She was willing to sit down with both sides in the room so they could both debate
the issue, which I appreciated because to me that's the only way you get the whole
truth out," Hollingworth said.
Lowell Sun (Massachusetts)
August 14, 2010 Saturday
Doherty: Ban on lobbyists in campaigns
LOWELL-- Calling out his opponent for using a political strategy firm that employs
lobbyists as advisers on her campaign, Democratic state Senate candidate Chris
Doherty said this week that, if elected, he will sponsor legislation prohibiting lobbying
firms from working as paid consultants on political campaigns.
" Beacon Hill lobbyists have no place in political campaigns," said Doherty's
spokesperson Victoria Bonney. "The practice of political candidates hiring lobbying
firms, which also represent special interests on Beacon Hill, is an obvious conflict of
interest. It's time Eileen Donoghue end her relationship with Beacon Hill lobbying
firms and join Chris in taking a principled stand against special interests in political
campaigns."
Doherty's Democratic rival Donoghue has used the Liberty Square Group, a firm that
provides campaign strategy, communication, and state and federal lobbying services,
in both her 2007 Congressional bid and this campaign.
According to records at the Secretary of State's Office, LSG took in more than
$160,000 in revenue from lobbying in the 2009 fiscal year.
Donoghue, however, pointed out that the people working on her campaign Scott
Ferson, Conor Yunits and Matt Patton are not registered lobbyists, which was
confirmed by the Secretary of State's office.
While not a registered lobbyist, Ferson, a former press secretary for the late Sen.
Ted Kennedy, advocates for legislation on behalf of clients. Two weeks ago he was
quoted in the Boston Herald, as a spokesman for Raynham Park, championing the
importance of racinos in regard to the state's proposed gambling bill.
Asked for her thoughts on Doherty's proposed legislation, Donoghue said she has not
given it much thought.
"I'm focusing more on my campaign than antics and gimmicks," she said. "I am out
speaking to voters about the important issues."
Doherty and Donoghue will face off in the Sept. 14 Democratic primary in the race to
fill the First Middlesex district seat currently held by Sen. Steve Panagiotakos, who is
not seeking re-election. The district includes Lowell, Westford, Groton, Dunstable,
Pepperell and Tyngsboro.
The two Democrats are also debating Monday night at 7 p.m. in the Little Theater at
Lowell High School. The debate is open to the public.
Republican James Buba and independent Patrick O'Connor are also running for the
seat.