| Blagojevich's style is aggressive, arrogant and in-your-face blunt. He sounds more like a mafia styled thug than a state governor. His language is direct and brutal. He very likely tells a contributor "donate $50K to my campaign and I'll make things happen for you."
In Texas the lawmakers, by contrast, use a far more passive, indirect and subtle approach in their pay-to-play scheming. One won't openly say give me $50K and I'll deliver the goods, but in the end lawmakers' campaigns will invariably take the money and later deliver on the implicit promises made. If questioned about one's loyalty a lawmaker will routinely respond with something like Company or Person X gave to my campaign because he/she/it is impressed by my track record, leadership skills and stand on XYZ issues.
And there is also cheap ocean front real estate right smack in the middle of the Mojave Desert, too.
In effect we-the-people-of-Texas have little or no real representation because there are no limits on campaign donations. Deep pocketed and powerful fat cat donors can buy elections for their politicians of choice. It is as simple as that, folks. This is outrageous because it is downright anti-democratic and the evil practice should be illegal but most, if not all, of our Republican lawmakers and their sugar daddies do not agree.
When big money propels a candidate to office only a naïve fool would believe a lawmaker would work hard and exclusively for the interests of the people who voted him or her into office.
According to Chris Bell Texas is one of only five states that places no limits on campaign contributions.
Nothing contributes to Texas's "pay-to-play" culture more than our absurd rules regarding campaign finance. Texas is one of only five states that place no limits on how much individuals or political action committees may contribute to candidates running for state offices. Therefore, you have individuals contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars and, in some cases, millions of dollars, usually in statewide campaigns.
Boyd Richie correctly nailed the pay-to-play game as "Tom Delay-style politics" where
elected officials are up for sale.
"Nathan Hecht and Bob Perry are perpetuating the atmosphere of scandal and corruption that has continued to plague Texas under Republican control," said Texas Democratic Party Chair Boyd Richie. "This is classic pay-to-play Tom Delay-style politics where the elected officials are up for sale and their special interest donors have plenty of cash to bid. It's a sad day when Bob Perry finds it much easier to buy off judges than to actually comply with their ruling."
As we all know the former U.S. House Speaker, Tom Delay, is so ethically challenged that his own Party shunned him in Washington. The D.C. establishment ran the once powerful Delay out of town in a New York minute. Maybe the former Hammer dude will occupy a cell next to his dearest and closest friend Jack Abramoff one day when the U.S. Justice Department gets back into the business of upholding and enforcing the law.
Perhaps the mere notion of upholding the law blindly and equally for everyone, including the fat cats and powerful politicians, particularly in the ethics department, will trickle on down to Texas.
Meanwhile here in Texas the unsavory and ethically challenged Delay-styled politics continue as usual. According to a 2006 article in the Dallas Morning News Governor Rick Perry's top donors received appointments and business contracts.
A handful of super-rich political contributors, giving at least $25,000 a year, will put at least $10 million into Gov. Rick Perry's re-election treasury - forming an elite fundraising corps that the campaign calls the Century Council.
In exchange, donors who pledge to give at least $100,000 get invitations to private luncheons with the governor. And many are beneficiaries of government business, plum appointments and other state largesse.
Three Century Council members have lucrative contracts to help build Mr.Perry's multibillion-dollar toll-road initiative. The state has deposited millions in investment funds operated by three other top-tier givers. And 16 are Perry appointees to coveted boards, including the Parks and Wildlife Commission and state university regent boards.
And, based on an article written in the Lubbock Online 141 wealthy Texans give the lion's share of contributions to political campaigns.
In the 2005-06 election cycle, which set a record for political donations because of some hotly contested races, Houston homebuilder Bob Perry distributed more than $7 million to 143 state candidates, mainly legislators and judges, and San Antonio physician James Leininger dished out $5.5 million to a smaller number of politicians, McDonald said. Fred Baron, a Dallas trial lawyer, gave $2.1 million to an even smaller group.
Over the years, Perry and Leininger have given generously, mainly to Republican candidates and GOP causes, while Baron's money has gone mainly to Democrats - he hopes to rebuild the party in Texas, McDonald explained.
Altogether, 141 wealthy Texans - who in some instances, like in Perry's, Leininger's and Baron's cases, list their spouses as contributors - gave a minimum of $100,000 each for a combined $51.9 million to candidates, political parties or to social causes, according to a report Texans for Public Justice published last year.
That's not all.
Almost 2,000 political action committees raised $307 million during the same two-year period, the report said.
"This is outrageous," said John Cobarruvias of Houston, a Democratic Party activist who monitors campaign finance reports in his spare time. "There is so much influence peddling in Austin."
Naturally Cobarruvias finds little support for campaign finance reform.
Cobarruvias said in addition to watchdog groups like Texans for Public Justice, people like himself and David Palmer, a California resident who has exposed other officials in Texas and across the nation, are exposing the influence of big money and the misuse of campaign funds among some elected officials because the state government is unwilling to police itself.
Instead of the Ethics Commission, which he calls worthless because it seldom investigates officials accused of wrongdoing, the state ought to have a citizen ethics commission, like one in Colorado, with the authority to investigate the misuse of funds or set limits to campaign contributions, Cobarruvias said.
But some lawmakers don't see any campaign finance reforms approved anytime soon.
R.G. Ratcliffe, writing for the Texas Politics blog revealed the donor list of Tom Craddick's rival, Joe Straus.
As a reader commented:
So it looks like Holt, Zachary and Red owns this guy.
Indeed. Buying access obviously works in Texas. We live in a state in which there is representation for the fat cats and by the fat cats' go-to boys and girls in Austin.
"The kinds of people who step up to the plate to give this kind of money tend to be people who want something from government," said Andrew Wheat of Texans for Public Justice, a nonprofit group that tracks campaign contributions.
The pay-to-play game driving the lawmaking process is also an anti-democratic process that should be abolished this minute, but I am not holding my breath given the reality that the big moneyed power brokers are running this game, too. In the case of lobbyists, those that pay get to play. They participate in our lawmaking process by writing drafts of legislation in a manner, of course, that is favorable to them.
According to the Texas Ethics Commission lobbyists exert enormous influence on our lawmaking process here.
For example, lobbyists often write the original drafts of bills to be introduced in the legislature, a time-consuming endeavor requiring in-depth knowledge of the relevant issues. Not surprisingly the legislative process often seems to favor those interests that pay to play.
The Texas Ethics Commission also revealed that lobbyists have influence over lawmakers even when the Legislature is not in session.
Spending on lobbyists is only a portion of the total spent to influence the Legislature. Interests contribute large sums to legislative election campaigns, many reported to the Texas Ethics Commission but stored in a separate database. Other spending on electoral politics and on lobbying activity goes unreported because the law does not require it. Beyond the financial influence lobbyists wield with legislators, lobbyists themselves often become interested and vital additions to legislators' limited staff resources.
Pay to play has even pervaded conservative think tanks. Jack Abramoff would pay these organizations, including the Texas-based Institute for Policy Innovation, to write articles that extolled the virtues of issues important to him, such as gambling on Indian reservations and a free market economy. The think tanks willingly complied.
The story also named Peter Ferrara, of the Lewisville, Texas-based Institute for Policy Innovation. Ferrara who admitted to receiving money from Abramoff, was at first quite cavalier about the situation: "I do it all the time," he said. "I've done that in the past and I'll do it in the future."
I wonder what Ferrara thinks of Jack Abramoff's new digs in a federal prison?
It seems that our lawmakers in Texas, especially the Republicans do not want anything to do with campaign finance reform that would limit contributions and require more transparency.
"We got discouraged," said George S. Christian, president of the Justice League. "We'd like for something to be done to cut big donations, but there wasn't any widespread interest" among lawmakers.
Rep. Charlie Howard, R-Sugar Land, a member of the Elections Committee, said he opposes the legislation.
"Why do you think we're being bought off?" Howard asked a bill sponsor. "This is what's implied."
Another committee member, Rep. Dwayne Bohac, R-Houston, said he fears that limiting campaign donations protects incumbents.
"An incumbent knows 100 people who can give him $1,000," he said. "Challengers don't know 100 people who can."
He said a challenger might have to rely on one big donor.
Austin Democratic Rep. Mark Strama, who is carrying a bill to curb campaign spending, disagreed.
"A challenger should have a breadth of support, not one sugar daddy," he said.
Rep. Lon Burnam, D-Fort Worth, an Elections Committee member, provided some levity. With tongue firmly planted in cheek, he asked, "Don't you think the wealthy elite are better investors in state government?"
In yesterday's the Houston Chronicle, R.G. Ratcliffe's article about House Designate Joe Straus gives us a glimpse into the pervasive force of pay-to-play and the evils of limitless campaign contributions.
When Republicans joined with Democrats in 2005 for legislation to grant property tax relief to homeowners with expanded homestead exemptions, Craddick pressured his fellow Republicans into killing the bill instead because the measure didn't give businesses any tax breaks.
Of course everyone has known for some time that Craddick works for his sugar daddies. After years of a reign of Delay/Craddick styled terror, Craddick, like his DC soul mate in D.C., received a seriously overdue boot from office.
I certainly hope folks are not uncorking the champagne over Craddick's departure for his influence and that of Tom Delay lurks rather pervasively in the background.
The Wicked Wizard of West Texas may have been ousted but the Legislature will continue to be mired in Delay/Craddick styled politics. The only difference will be in its practice which, will undoubtedly be more subtle and courteous than blunt and boorish.
While Blagojevich has been shamelessly aggressive, thuggish and arrogant in his style of pay-to-play politics, Texas politicians have played a far more passive and subtle game.
As far we-the-people are concerned it does not matter much what style of pay-to-play approach our revered elected officials choose. For in the end, whether passive or aggressive, we the people are the ones who are the real and hard time losers.
Our uninsured residents will remain uninsured. Large urban hospitals will continue to be over-extended and overloaded. Overcrowded, sub-standard schools will remain overcrowded and sub-standard. Property taxes will continue to increase with little return in services for the residents who pay them. Torn up roads will grow even bigger potholes, if that is possible. Urban gridlocked highways will continue to rob Texans of their time at home with their spouses or partners, children and loved ones.
Pollution will continue unabated with no state oversight. Efforts for improved and expanded public transportation, e.g. light rail expansion in Houston, will be met with the same obstruction as it has had for years, beginning with who else but Tom Delay who pulled every rabbit out of every hat he had in order to shut the whole project down when it was first launched.
Insurance companies will keep on stone walling when payouts are needed for victims of floods, tornadoes and hurricanes.
Yes folks, Delay/Craddick styled politics will continue as usual.
Profit generating schemes, whether selling pigs, stealing private property for privately owned and profit driven big highways, the destruction of private property and the theft of quality of life from residents for drill-baby-drill efforts, will resume unchecked.
Until there is campaign finance reform that includes energetic oversight and glaring transparency, we the people of Texas will continue to be among the biggest losers of them all.
In Texas life can be hell when one is not a fat cat.
|
