Drawing the lines
Posted 1/08/2009 09:02:00 PM
By Carter Bundy
Between the Blagojevich and CDR investigations, there have been literally thousands of articles and hundreds of hours of talking-head analysis. I haven’t read or watched all of it, but what amazes me most is the lack of frank discussion of what constitutes corruption and what drives it.
There seems to be an almost intellectually lazy approach to the analysis of these investigations: Either a person is good or bad, and we’ll know corruption when we see it. Not only is that a sloppy way of addressing the actual present-day issues, it encourages us to ignore systemic problems that will linger long after prosecutors rest their cases in Illinois and New Mexico.
Some behavior is obviously over the line, and we owe it to ourselves as taxpayers and citizens to establish what those lines are. But it’s usually more complex than the near-universal media game of labeling “good” and “bad” politicians.
Patsy’s vindication
I’ve been itching to say this for two years, but never found the right context until now: You know who got this right? Patsy Madrid, even though both the media and voters skewered her for it. In her not-so-terrific debate against Heather Wilson, General Madrid said that contributors didn’t get favors, but they do get access. Well, duh.
Anyone who has ever been to a fundraiser (which requires, not surprisingly, a contribution) knows that a warm, intimate setting with wine and lovely snacks, usually at a posh restaurant or fancy home, is a pretty good setting in which to chat with elected officials about issues that the donor thinks are important.
Or at least a far better place than a rope line after a speech, with scores of fellow attendees jostling for pictures and autographs.
An important side note is ex-Congresswoman Wilson’s audacious hypocrisy in that debate: She said that everyone, donor or no, gets the exact same access to her. Baloney. While Wilson’s staff would meet with us and was polite, we never got to meet with the congresswoman. And it certainly wasn’t as intimate or warm as if we’d attended one of her fundraisers.
While Patsy’s statement wasn’t a political winner, it had the virtue of being true. That’s far better than the political snow-job the voters got from Heather in response.
What’s a quid pro quo?
At the heart of CDR and Blago-gate is our system of private campaign finance. If CDR had never given a dime to any candidates in New Mexico, there wouldn’t be any investigation no matter how many contracts they’d been awarded. Period. But they did, and here we are.
Problem is, hundreds of contractors give money to New Mexican politicians every cycle, and my guess is most all of them get a contract at some level -- the City of Albuquerque, a county somewhere, school boards, higher education or the state.
In other words, it’s not enough to blithely say that anyone who contributes and then gets a contract is corrupt. (Well, maybe it is, but then we’d have to put almost everyone in jail, and with the cost of incarceration and our current deficit, that’s a tall order.)
There are two lines in particular that should be used to separate the wheat from the chaff: Quid pro quo deals, and personal enrichment. The allegation in the CDR case is of a quid pro quo deal, but that’s an incredibly nebulous line.
Oil and gas give big money to the GOP and then get tax breaks and the right to drill in our most pristine places. Is it a quid pro quo, or did oil and gas just do some research and figure out which party’s energy and environmental policies gave them the best chance to turn massive profits?
I’ll include unions for a point on the other side. Unions contribute to both parties, but generally significantly more to Democrats than Republicans. Dems do things like allow unions to exist. Wouldn’t it be a bit stupid for unions not to support Dems?
Examine any industry, individual or advocacy group who makes contributions, and there is a grey area about what is a quid pro quo and what is simply supporting people who share your beliefs. Blago’s really egregious crossing of this line wasn’t even over the Senate seat -- it was his alleged threat to withhold hundreds of thousands of dollars from a children’s hospital if some of its leaders didn’t fork over big bucks to his campaign. Now that’s a pretty clear quid pro quo, if true.
Contrast that with CDR: Was there an explicit quid pro quo? So far, there’s no smoking gun at all. They seem to have had access, but is that any different from what virtually every campaign contributor gets?
The second line that should never be crossed is personal enrichment. When a politician gets a kickback for awarding a contract or doing something else within his or her purview, like appointing a particular person to the U.S. Senate, that’s over the line.
Here, too, Blagojevich stands out for allegedly insisting that his wife get a sweet corporate board of directors gig with a large salary in exchange for the Senate appointment. But from reports thus far, no one at CDR ever gave or promised any personal enrichments to New Mexico politicians or staff.
We have met the enemy
Under our current privately-financed campaign system, there is always a connection between contributors and policy. The only question is whether it’s legal or not, and as long as the politicians, staff and companies are smart enough to stay away from crossing the two lines above, they’re usually going to be on the legal side. It appears Blago wasn’t that savvy, and only time will tell what happened here in New Mexico.
Not very satisfying, is it? We have no one to blame but ourselves. We elect our Legislature and executive at the local, state and national levels. When we don’t insist on reforming campaign finance, we’re the only ones we can really blame. Politicians are just playing by rules that we allow them to play by, and it takes something as egregious and careless as Blagojevich’s alleged activities and statements to land someone in jail.
Bundy is the political and legislative director for AFSCME in New Mexico. The opinions in his column are personal and do not necessarily reflect any official AFSCME position. You can learn more about him by clicking here. Contact him at carterbundy@yahoo.com.
Labels: Bundy columns, GRIPgate, State government
6 Comments:
Well, won't the investigation reveal whether the company granted the contract was in fact the best/lowest bidder? I heard that CDR was not even in the running until it made contributions to Richardson's PACs. It does not look good.
It is like sitting and watching while kids play with matches, and then acting surprised and upset when fires get started.
Excellent editorial, Carter. You're absolutely right. Why wait around for costly, lengthy federal prosecutions to root out the crooks (if there are any in this case) and embarrass New Mexico in the process, when we could change the structure of the system so this kind of horrific storyline couldn't happen in the first place? You often hear legislative opponents of ethics reform say that "you can't legislate ethics." That's the real Oscar Meyer baloney. New Mexico is far behind the curve in putting policies in place that would make this kind campaign contribution scandal impossible. Personally, I think the wider public has already made it crystal clear that they want this to change. It's just certain legislative leaders who haven't heeded the call. Numerous statewide polls bear this out. Plus, when reforms such as public campaign financing go directly before the voters--in 2005 in Albuquerque, in 2008 in Santa Fe--they pass by overwhelming margins. When the same reforms go before our state legislature, they're virtually ignored. Here's hoping the 2009 session leads to a more positive result. How much more humiliation can our state suffer?
Steven Robert Allen
Executive Director
Common Cause NM
Nice column Carter. To establish the quid pro quo we could look at hard facts. If we take the list of appointees and the list of contributors and see a correlation beyond randomness, we might infer that to be appointed, a contribution must already be in that politician’s bank.
So, how many appointees contributed to Governor Rod Blagojevich or Governor Bill Richardson before their appointment in their respective states. If the answer is nearly 100 percent, then there appears to be quid pro quo. Is it illegal? Depends on who you ask, but if the issue is you want to know if there is the appearance of “pay for play,” this shows that… eh?
The answer is to get rid of ALL money in politics and require public financing of campaigns. I should have the same access as a CEO of a billion-dollar company. Bidding should be based on competence, experience, and ability. Taxpayer money should be treated with respect and reverence. Think of the billions this will save in the long run when the earmarks and corruption are gone. We the people will have to get some spine for this to happen because politicians will never vote for this voluntarily.
No surprise that a representative of the payers (AFSCME) can rationalize even the black hole of corruption that created and sustains the New Mexico poverty industrial complex. While tens of millions of dollars were squandered buying politicians in New Mexico this year, our food banks were running out of food and people were dying from a lack of health care.
I am running a new food bank in Peñasco because the community asked us to help them eat. In the communities where I live and work people are suffering. Very few people in the blogosphere are showing up for days old bread and broken pinto bean pieces but around the state, people are waiting in line for this and any other food they can get to feed their families.
By the way, nothing will vindicate Ms. Madrid. I refer to her behavior through the years, not an honest comment of her political philosophy during the infamous debate.
When corruption is ubiquitous, no one sees it any more. It is what I call The Rules. Here in Rio Arriba, The Rules (you pay, you play) are so ingrained no one even has to talk about them anymore. It is time to get the money, coercion and corruption out of politics, not apologize for its existence.
Carol Miller
Post a Comment
<< Home
Published comments have been deemed by Heath Haussamen to be in compliance with this site’s comments policy. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Heath Haussamen or this site. If you know of a person who is abusing this site’s comments system by impersonating someone else or in other ways, please report it by clicking here.