The right to lobby is one that is enshrined in the Constitution. This might surprise some people who are reading the reports of favors, golfing trips and influence peddling, but then again I'm not sure that the framers really intended the 'right to petition for redress of grievance' to turn into a multimillion dollar old boy's network of the well-heeled, their aides, former Congressmen and Senators and their staffs. Intent or not though, it is the way of things that those who have money will have more access than those who do not - even without lobbyists, money buys you airtime, op/ed columnists, think tanks, and in extreme cases, 24 hour news networks.

Scandal seems to be a cyclical phenomenon in Washington. It is approximately ten years since Newt Gingrich's 'Republican Revolution' swept the House with a call for less corruption, smaller government, and a Contract With America. Very grand and impressive claims of a new start, but after ten years at the trough the likes of Jack Abramoff always seem to return. And why not? The money is excellent, it's indoor work, you get to schmooze with the rich and powerful, and best of all, since you're behind the scenes you get all of the trappings without the accountability - at least, until you get too greedy even for the beltway.

Catching the ear of the powerful and connected has always been part and parcel of politics. What makes things slightly different in this case is the extent to which lobbyists and the GOP leadership were intertwined, to the point that lobbyists were offering highly paid jobs to personal staffers (and family members) of the House leadership, and being -consulted- on proposed legislative changes by Representatives, to boot, rather than the other way around. Corruption of a single official such as Randy Cunningham is easy to pass off as a 'bad apple'. It's much harder to do this when the collusion is in the open and not only is it not prevented - it's almost encouraged as 'the way we do business here'.

As scandals go, this one has the potential to be quite a doozy. Not only has it single-handedly caused Tom Delay to abandon all hopes of recovering his leadership position, it has caused quite a few sleepless nights in the capitol among other representatives (and no doubt, their staffs). The public are not impressed in the least, and it just may be that the newly exposed greed at the top will topple the GOP from power in a manner the Democrats could only wish they could achieve. No doubt they will attempt to make as much hay from this as possible, but it is somewhat ironic that the GOP are the ones who have ultimately damaged their own standing.

Personally, I'm not surprised by it. The old saw that power corrupts holds as true today as it ever had; those who seek power root out corruption, while those who have power seek to maintain it. It's astonishing how things suddenly become palatable once you're the party in charge - things that while in opposition were the grist for the mill of attack politics. Politicians scratching their heads and wondering why the general public thinks 'a pox on both their houses' don't have to look all that far for the reasons. The incestuous relationship between Lobbyists, Politicians, their relatives and staff all combine to form a conflict of interest a mile high - or at least, the length of K Street.

Will this scandal bring down some House members? I'm looking forward to see if it does. In the meantime, the GOP is starting a race for the new House Leader and making earnest sounds about 'cleaning up the lobbying game'. House Majority Whip Roy Blunt is pushing hard for the post, while calling for new limits on lobbying. This is somewhat ironic, given his own son is a lobbyist and he has amassed a political operation to rival anything Tom DeLay amassed; whether the American people will be impressed by the fox earnestly declaring that these chickens are safe with him, is as yet an open question. Whoever wins, it seems likely that the winner will be as enmeshed in the 'new system' as anybody else on the Hill - with its inevitable impact on public trust in government, and those who govern.

Good to see another entry from you, always enjoy reading your stuff. Thought we might have lost you over the New Years. ;-)

Great post, UJ, but I'm intrigued about the earring-on-a-rooftop story. You've almost upstaged your entry with your prelude. Spill?

There's not much to tell there regarding the earring, except that it was one of those occasions where I was very pleased that my natural pessism was proved wrong (As I tell people, being a pessimist isn't all bad; you're only ever PLEASANTLY surprised, if you do it right).

The lady in question had a -very- nice set of diamond earrings recently gifted to her by her hubby, and had been sporting them all night. By the time we got to the rooftop though, one of the clasps must have come loose, because the earring simply dropped off and into the packed snow. She stood stock still and said 'oh, shit'. My immediate reaction was 'that thing is gone'.

Fortunately, more optimistic minds won the hour (or minds that were not going to see $700 earrings cast to the wind without a fight) and we found a garbage can lid and packed it with all the snow we could find in a three foot radius around her feet. Then we took the heaped snow to the apartment and carefully sifted it in the sink.. and low and behold, earring AND clasp were found. Good thing; it would have put an extreme damper on New Years, otherwise... the moral of the story is don't listen to pessimists! Always keep searching the snow.

You are such a clever gentleman, Jack! I really must get in with the roof top crowd.

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)