Hard Out Here for a Shill

It's not enough for a city to have a Representative in Washington, they need to pay a lobbyist as well.

Since 1998, the number of public entities hiring private firms to represent them in Washington has nearly doubled to 1,421 from 763, as places like Treasure Island, population 7,514, have jumped onboard with behemoths like Miami that have long had lobbyists.

[...]

Enlisted almost exclusively to land earmarks, lobbyists for local governments have boomed alongside a broader explosion in such appropriations, to 12,852 items worth $64 billion last year from 4,219 pet projects totaling $27.7 billion in 1998. The prolific earmarking does not change the overall budget's bottom line, but how the pie is cut: dollars are doled out, often in secret, at the whim of a lone legislator -- often under the influence of a lobbyist -- rather than through a competitive process.

Rep. Jerry Lewis of the San Bernardino area recommended a lobbyist for his own district. Because he can't be bothered to get things done for them himself.

All of this is why lobbyist contracts are up to $2.36 billion dollars annually. This is what the Republican "pay to play" system breeds; as time goes by, clients have to pay more and more for lobbyists, who justify these fees by pointing to the legislation they're getting from the lawmakers, who they reward with extravagant contributions or outright bribes. Everybody gets richer: the politicians, the lobbyists, the private business clients, everyone but the American people, that is. Washington has become a place where legislators print money to give to their friends, who then give some of it back to them.

So absolutely nobody should be surprised that a Republican Congressman and his wife have refined the process so much that, instead of the Congressman handing cash out to wealthy contributors, he just gives it to her:

In the past two years, campaign and political action committees controlled by Rep. John T. Doolittle (R-Calif.) paid ever-larger commissions to his wife's one-person company and spent tens of thousands of dollars on gifts at stores such as Saks Fifth Avenue and Tiffany & Co. and a Ritz-Carlton day spa.

The use of such committees, especially "leadership" PACs, for purposes other than electing politicians to Congress is a common and growing phenomenon, but campaign finance watchdogs say Doolittle has taken it to new heights.

Doolittle's wife, Julie, a professional fundraiser, has collected 15 percent of all contributions to Doolittle's leadership PAC and additional commissions on contributions to his campaign committee -- a total of nearly $140,000 since 2003, according to Federal Election Commission records.

"I don't know if there's anything comparable," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a watchdog group that called last month for an investigation of Doolittle by the House ethics committee. "If this is okay, it is a road map for how to convert substantial sums of campaign money to personal use."

She's just skimming off the top of campaign contributions, and getting fat and happy off of it. This is the worst kind of campaign fund abuse, but it's not substantially different than cutting lobbyists in on the take after pushing through legislation that they wrote. And, using "leadership PACs" as a personal slush fund is a growing practice:

Kenneth A. Gross, a campaign finance lawyer at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom, said "personal use" restrictions that govern campaign committees do not apply to leadership PACs, which lawmakers set up largely to help other candidates fund their campaigns. Because of the lack of regulations, leadership PAC expenditures have regularly generated controversy.

The leadership PAC of Rep. Richard W. Pombo (R-Calif.) lists $22,896 in hotel expenditures for donors and $320 worth of baseball tickets. Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) received attention in February when the news media reported leadership PAC expenses at a Starbucks near his Virginia home that totaled $558 since 2001, as well as payments to Wal-Mart, Burger King bills totaling $50 and 11 meals at Arby's worth $118.

"Leadership PACs are the Wild West of campaign money; they are the political slush funds of this decade," said Meredith McGehee, policy director for the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center.

The Doolittles ought to be sent home rather than continue this personal aggrandizement worthy of a kleptocrat. Charlie Brown is Doolittle's opponent this year, a 26-year Air Force veteran involved in every US conflict from Vietnam to Desert Storm. I had the pleasure of meeting and talking to Mr. Brown at Yearly Kos, and his district deserves his voice in the Congress. Charlie has been blogging about the race, and he's now challenging Rep. Doolittle to debates. See his campaign site for more.