Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Capuano, Meehan on Murtha’s lobbyist list

By

Well, this doesn't look so good …

More than 100 House members secured earmarks in a major spending bill for clients of a single lobbying firm — The PMA Group — known for its close ties to John P. Murtha , the congressman in charge of Pentagon appropriations.

…Those House members, plus a handful of senators, combined to route nearly $300 million in public money to clients of PMA through that one law (PL 110-116).

Capuano and Meehan were among those House members: Capuano secured (with help from other members) a total of $2.8mill, and received campaign donations of over $54k. Meehan helped secure another $2.8 mill.

Of course, there's nothing necessarily illegal or even unusual about this, but the PMA Group is under federal investigation now.  Earmarking is the way of the Congress. The amount of money for one lobby shop suggests that there may have been some pay-to-play conducted by Murtha, a very powerful chairman.

So I expect we should see statements from both of our guys soon.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. To put it mildly, there seems to be a disturbing trend here.  Just waiting for Chris Dodd and Charlie Rangel to get taken out (if the NYT has finally turned to Dodd, his time is not long).  At some point, someone will have to look long and hard at Chris Dodd’s performance as Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee and his refusal over the last 2 years to even consider any nominees to the Fed Board of Governors.  My guess is that the economic historians 20 years from now aren’t going to look too favorably at Dodd or Frank.

    <

    p>Being in a profession that is regulated by the IRS and ultimately by the Secretary of Treasury, I do take offense with Geithner’s appointment.  If I did what he did, I would be out of work permanently.  His “mistakes” are pretty ridiculous for supposedly a smart guy; we aren’t talking esoteric treatment of depreciation, just filling out Form SE for payroll taxes (and we won’t even comment about writing off his kid’s $20k summer camp as “child care”).

    <

    p>As a GOPer it’s amusing; but as a citizen of the US in a state of turmoil it’s infuriating.  We don’t have time to screw up here, and that is about all I’ve seen since 1/20/09.

    <

    p>We have a Stimulus Bill that seems to have been crafted with the spirit of Smoot and Hawley guidnng the fine details (maybe we should have had a chance to look at this after all).  This “USA, USA” stuff sounds great, but it really didn’t work so well back in the 30s, and it certainly isn’t going to work now.  Think that we are basically screwed at this point.

    • Didn’t you hear there was a “CRISIS” in the country? We can’t let good quality people be held back by “innocent mistakes”. We have to ram as much through during this “CRISIS” as we can or as Rahm Emanuel said “You never want a serious crisis to go to waste” and they haven’t wasted a single bad headline.

      <

      p>I made severe mentions of Geitner’s mistake and how anyone working i that business would be fired immediately. I’m hoping the GOP, Independents and maybe even Democrats will stop the mob mentality that anything goes. The sad truth is anything DOES go and nothing ever changes (look at Beacon Hill, makes me want to puke). The 92% of Americans who pay their mortgages, watch their spending, work hard and PAY THEIR TAXES are not about to subsidize the losers, slackers and irresponsible borrowers who have brought on this mess.

      <

      p>It’s time for Americans to say NO!!!!

    • There’s a reason that people pay millions to get jobs that pay thousands.  American politics has always been and will always be “what’s in it for me?.”  The sap believe the campaign promise.  Who won in the last bailout?  Nancy’s SunKist,did well, Senators Byrd and Rockefeller. Do you expect Republicans to be the beneficiaries?  (Maybe something for the senators of Maine…).  More will come to light as the package is read and understood in the context.  I wouldn’t worry about Cong. Murtha.  He’s been successfully dodging since Abscam.  Geithner’s tax delinquencies will blow out in the press as will Emmanuel’s ethics.  When the public has the choice of looking at the Britney Spears news or the John Murtha news, Britney wins out every time.  All politicians plan around the downside of their actions.

      <

      p>You’re just ranting with a sour grapes attitude.  Democrats have the White House now.  The GOP had their time to take and they took well.  Now the rules of the game allow the Democrats to take.  The money was there for the harvest.  It had to be spent somewhere.  

      • Look around at the Economist, the Financial Times, or any Euro sites:  the Stimulus Bill is all set to drive us off a protectionist cliff.  Just look now at Schumer backtracking on the fallout from TARP recipient = no H1-B workers.

        <

        p>I’m worried.  And I’m not even thinking about which congressman/woman gets what.

        • I heard today about this “RAT” board provision. Do you know if this provision is in the Stimulus Bill? Does anyone else find it bothersome that the White House may be able to STOP an investigation?

          <

          p>From

          <

          p>

          The RAT hiding deep inside the stimulus bill.

          The provision, which attracted virtually no attention in the debate over the 1,073-page stimulus bill, creates something called the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board – the RAT Board, as it’s known by the few insiders who are aware of it. The board would oversee the in-house watchdogs, known as inspectors general, whose job is to independently investigate allegations of wrongdoing at various federal agencies, without fear of interference by political appointees or the White House.

          In the name of accountability and transparency, Congress has given the RAT Board the authority to ask “that an inspector general conduct or refrain from conducting an audit or investigation.” If the inspector general doesn’t want to follow the wishes of the RAT Board, he’ll have to write a report explaining his decision to the board, as well as to the head of his agency (from whom he is supposedly independent) and to Congress. In the end, a determined inspector general can probably get his way, but only after jumping through bureaucratic hoops that will inevitably make him hesitate to go forward.

          When Iowa Republican Sen. Charles Grassley, a longtime champion of inspectors general, read the words “conduct or refrain from conducting,” alarm bells went off. The language means that the board – whose chairman will be appointed by the president – can reach deep inside a federal agency and tell an inspector general to lay off some particularly sensitive subject. Or, conversely, it can tell the inspector general to go after a tempting political target.

          • You are correct, that the RAT Board has the authority to ask that an inspector general (of a federal agency) conduct or refrain from conducting an investigation. The stimulus bill goes on to say,

            <

            p>

            If the Board requests that an inspector general conduct or refrain from conducting an audit or investigation and the inspector general rejects the request in whole or in part, the inspector general shall, not later than 30 days after rejecting the request, submit a report to the Board, the head of the applicable agency, and the congressional committees of jurisdiction, including the Committees on Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives. The report shall state the reasons that the inspector general has rejected the request in whole or in part.

            <

            p>Got that? The board can ask that an inspector general conduct or refrain from conducting an investigation. The inspector general, in return, can refuse the request.

          • Upon re-reading, I see that the “ask” language is in your excerpt. But it’s a point worth re-iterating, and I don’t think that this is really “jumping through bureaucratic hoops”. It’s a report. One report, and the inspector general can keep on keeping on.

            <

            p>Of all the things in the stimulus bill, this doesn’t seem to be the thing to get worked up about.

Archives