You could call the Tea Party by any name, be conservative or liberal, and they would be winning elections only because there are tens of millions of voters WHO ARE FED UP WITH D.C. and will vote for anyone who has no political history. We NEED a clean sweep…people are crying for a clean sweep. We have NO CONFIDENCE in DC for leadership, for competency or for making decisions that SERVE the people of this country. We KNOW that politicians have sold out OUR COUNTRY’S FUTURE for the purpose of pushing their own idealogy or enhancing their power/wealth, and “the public be damned”. Time for a change…and the change is already happening. Only this time, “change” will not be  political rhetoric or a campaign slogan. It will be a mantra for voters, with real results, not empty words. The American people are much smarter than Washingtonian bureaucrats give us credit for, and we already see the results of not ours, but our elected leaders stupidity. Just keep demonizing everyone and you’ll all be packing up and moving further and further away from the Potomac.

First the money trail:

Sources for the 2010 and 2008 Money Cycles:

House Committee on Financial Services (only)
http://hr3149.blogspot.com/2010/03/democracy-and-money-why-hr3149-is.html

Equifax:
http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00143867&cycle=2010

Trans Union:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00313700&cycle=2010

Experian:

http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/pacgot.php?cmte=C00379768&cycle=2010

2008 Cycle:

Trans Union
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?commid=C00313700&page=campaigns&order=TOTAL&cycle=2007-2008

Equifax
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?commid=C00143867&page=campaigns&order=TOTAL&cycle=2007-2008

Experian
http://www.congress.org/congressorg/bio/fec/?commid=C00379768&page=campaigns&order=TOTAL&cycle=2007-2008

Even though I’m just a lowly average American citizen, I’m not so naïve as to not know that after reviewing the above links you’re presently splitting your sides laughing that I think the above represents real MONEY. Compared to what you’re used to seeing the amounts of money are a joke. Here is the part that is NOT so obvious, virtually no company or corporation wants HR3149 passed (because they think they own “the people” and their privacy). Now do you start to see the big picture? You know far better than I just how many millions of dollars that figure represents. Also please consider that the big three credit bureaus are not some huge defense contractor vying for some billion dollar contract against some other huge defense contractor. The only fear or competition the credit bureaus have for the ear of Congress is a lowly rag-tag group of common American citizens with no money and bad credit. A good Cuban cigar and some cocktails would by out our interests in Washington . . . the money is just a value add for selling us out.

The legislation was introduced way back last July and is still sitting stalled in the House Committee on Financial Services. In just the 2010 cycle alone (excluding 2008), members of Congress have accepted $258,000+ in PAC money from the big three credit bureaus in exchange for trying to kill HR3149. Just in the House Committee on Financial Services alone, during the 2010 cycle, almost half of its members (38+ %) stuffed their wallets with a total of $104,000+ in credit bureau PAC money. At the top of the money list, during the past two cycles, is Committee Chair Barney Frank who took $25,000 during in the 2008 cycle. This quid pro quo money for killing the legislation deal is NOT DEMOCRACY! With that said, the death of democracy pales in comparison to the suffering of the American people caught in a catch 22 of bad credit = no job and no job = bad credit.

In survey after survey, including a recent MSNBC survey, more than 90 percent of the American people say that workplace discrimination based upon someone’s personal credit report is wrong and should be illegal. The practice was always wrong and from the start has always been a gross invasion of Americans’ personal privacy. The information is used by employers to low ball wages and intimidate employees based upon the level of desperation depicted in their credit report – while employers use the smoke screen of saying the information is used to protect them from fraud and theft. It’s “the people” that need protection from corrupt politicians and dirty corporate money . . . not the other way around!

Does a private employer expose their financials or credit report to a new hire? Do they advise employees when they are getting ready to ship their jobs overseas or close their doors? Did someone applying at Enron know the books were being cooked before they quit a good job and then subsequently lost every dime in retirement money they had with Enron? It’s currently a one-way street all tilted to the corporate side of the table. Credit reports for employment are already illegal in three states, but that’s not solving the problem for the millions of other Americans being locked out of the workforce in a catch 22 of no job = bad credit and bad credit = no job.

NOT ONE SINGLE study or shred of evidence exists to demonstrate that Americans with damaged credit reports steal or commit fraud at a higher percentage than other Americans. If there were any correlation between a credit report and theft, then American CEOs such as Bernie Madoff, Ken Lewis, Kenneth Lay, Dennis Kozlowski, Bernard Ebbers and Richard Fuld wouldn’t be either already convicted or under investigation for “stealing” millions and millions from their companies. The American elite, Wall Street and Congress operate by different rules when it comes to credit reports, corruption and stealing. The more corrupt they become, the better their credit reports get while “the peoples” credit reports suffer to a point of never being allowed to work again.

Quite frankly, we’re almost out of time. A preliminary hearing was held a couple of weeks ago in the House Committee on Financial Services on credit issues in general – which means the HR3149 hearing could be announced at any time. The preliminary hearing was “kangaroo court” with seven corporate witnesses and one privacy advocate speaking on behalf of “the people.” If we can’t expose the money being funneled into the committee, it will be the same for HR3149 when the hearing occurs . . . a sham hearing with votes bought and arms twisted to thwart the will of “the people.”

We’ve tried writing the American media but they all work for corporations and are being threatened with their jobs if they report the corruption and pay offs. So a watchdog group like yours is looking like our only hope at this point. Please, please, please take up our cause. The research and money trail is available at your fingertips via the Internet. When your fellow Americans, devastated by Wall Street’s greed that wrecked the economy, are losing everything that have with no way out . . . is asking for your help not warranted?

I realize that Washington, D.C. hasn’t been hit as hard by this economy as the rest of our nation, but please realize that people are truly suffering and there is no way out for the millions of people permanently locked out of the workplace forever unless HR3149 passes. You hold the key to passage of HR3149. Please help to disclose the political corruption behind the stalling and attempted killing of HR3149. Millions of Americans are depending on you . . .

Bruce Eggum

Congress fails to continue to grasp a simple fact:
Democratic Republics in a free market capitalism economic system CANNOT create wealth or jobs. They can only redistribute it, which is occurring now. OR Congress is smart and taking advantage (as Rahm Emmanuel so succinctly reminded us ) of a crisis to redistribute that wealth, with an underlying disdain for capitalism. Either way, the people of this country will not stand for a Congress or an Administration that does not represent the values of the majority. (NOT the minority of citizens)

So, they either change the current policies before November or get ready for a huge ruling party turnover. And, I’m sure that 2012 is very much up in the air for the Presidency, unless Obama learns (as Clinton and other have) to govern from the center, which is where the voters are…
If not, well…Hillary and Bill will be picking out new china for the White House in 2012.

Let me list the ways…

1. You live in bubbles while people across this country are losing their jobs, having their wages frozen or reduced.

2. Wages are stagnant, but food, gas, healthcare costs continue to rise.

3. Day after day, we see OUR money being used to line YOUR pockets. Corruption in US Government is so out of control that it is sickening.
This reason alone is enough to incite riots and anarchy – don’t you see that people will only take so much before they “push back at you?”
Both Democrats and Republicans have severe and real credibility issues with the people.

4. Many feel deceived by Obama – the only “change” has been the party in office, and not the way business and politics is done in DC.

5. People are scared. Fear often leads to anger, as does ignorance. Why are they scared? Because the world and the country has some severe
problems and they have NO FAITH IN THE COMPETENCY OR INTEGRITY of our elected officials in DC.

6. TWO SIMPLE ISSUES ARE ALWAYS IGNORED BY ALL POLITICIANS:

A. A constitutional amendment for 8 yr term limits in ALL offices (both houses) , not just the President.
B. A constitutional amendment for a mandated BALANCED BUDGET EVERY YEAR.

7. Many people believe (and you prove them right every day) that you could care less about “serving the people” and could not even utter the words “servant leadership”. You only are in office to grab power, money, or satisfy your ego,  probably all three…

NEW YORK – Federal prosecutors have charged a wealthy fundraiser for Hillary Rodham Clinton and other top Democrats in an alleged $292 million pyramid scheme that spanned more than a decade, saying he used some of the proceeds to support election campaigns.  In an indictment returned Monday in U.S. District Court in Manhattan, Iranian-born Hassan Nemazee is charged with bank fraud and aggravated identity theft.  “For more than 10 years, Hassan Nemazee projected the illusion of wealth, stealing more than $290 million so that he could lead a lavish lifestyle and play the part of heavyweight political fundraiser,” U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said in a statement. “Today’s indictment exposes the sheer brazenness of Nemazee’s schemes and marks the end of his decade of deception.”  He used some of the proceeds of the fraud to make donations to the election campaigns of federal, state and local candidates as well as to political action committees and charities, prosecutors said. They didn’t name the candidates or groups. Nemazee’s lawyer did not immediately return a call for comment Monday.

The indictment boosts the allegations against the 59-year-old Manhattan resident, who was arrested in August on charges that he used forged documents to obtain a $74 million loan. Prosecutors now allege that he fraudulently obtained loans worth hundreds of millions of dollars from three banks between 1998 and this year. They said he used fake documents and signatures to show the banks that he had hundreds of millions of dollars worth of collateral. Maserati sports car Prosecutors said Nemazee also used some of the money to buy property in Italy and to make monthly maintenance payments on properties in Manhattan and Katonah, New York.

The government is seeking $292 million in forfeitures against Nemazee, including his interest in five properties, 16 corporate entities and a hedge fund, 14 securities accounts, 32 bank accounts, a 2008 Maserati Quattroporte automobile and a 2007 Cessna aircraft.  Nemazee served as national finance chairman for Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign and later raised money for President Barack Obama after her primary defeat. He also was Sen. John Kerry’s finance chairman in New York for his 2004 bid for president.

Nemazee is under house arrest as part of a $25 million bail agreement. If convicted, he could face 30 years in prison on each of three counts of bank fraud and a mandatory two-year prison term on the aggravated identity theft charge.

Lawmaker trips sponsored by outside groups have decreased by 56 percent since the ethics and lobbying overhaul law was enacted two years ago, according to a CQ MoneyLine study of congressional travel.

Since then, more than 2,300 former sponsors of lawmaker trips, including many corporations, government contractors and other groups that lobby, have stopped paying for such travel. Meanwhile, the average amount of money still spent on lawmaker-related travel by outside groups has dropped from $250,000 a month to $110,000 a month.

“This is a sign that the law is working as intended … It takes most of the influence peddling out of these trips,” said Craig Holman of Public Citizen, one of the watchdog groups that pushed for tougher ethics restrictions on lawmakers and lobbyists.

The law (PL 110-81), which was enacted in 2007 in response to of the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal, was designed to prevent lobbyists and their clients from using trips to help push an agenda or influence specific legislation. But it did not eliminate all outside-sponsored trips, and many groups and institutions — like universities and other educational organizations — are still allowed to sponsor “fact-finding” trips for members of Congress and their staffs.

In all, former sponsors that no longer pay for trips spent nearly $15 million on lawmaker-related travel between 2000 and 2007.

Among the groups still funding a large number of member trips is the Aspen Institute, which leads every other organization with nearly $1.1 million in travel expenditures since the lobbying and ethics changes were enacted two years ago. Also at the top of the list — the American Israel Education Foundation with $488,000 spent and the International Management & Development Institute with $100,000.

Law Firm Co-Founder Melvyn Weiss Must Pay $10M, Could Face 33 Months In Prison

Melvyn Weiss, the co-founder of a prominent New York law firm, pleaded guilty Wednesday to a racketeering conspiracy charge in a kickback scheme involving some of the largest corporations in the nation.  The 72-year-old Weiss entered his plea under a previously announced agreement with prosecutors. He has been ordered to pay nearly $10 million in fines and forfeiture penalties, and could be sentenced to up to 33 months in prison at a later hearing.  Asked by U.S. District Judge John F. Walter if he was pleading guilty, Weiss said, “Yes I am.”
“I take responsibility for everything,” said Weiss, who wore a navy pinstriped suit. “My direct participation differed as to each” incident.
Federal prosecutors have said they will ask Walter to impose the full 33-month term.

Attorney Benjamin Brafman, who represents Weiss, said he was hopeful the court would consider during sentencing that Weiss had acknowledged the criminal conduct and remained “one of the true legal giants of his generation.” Prosecutors have said the Milberg Weiss firm made an estimated $250 million over two decades by filing legal actions on behalf of professional plaintiffs who received $11.3 million in kickbacks.  The firm dominated the industry in securities class-action lawsuits, which involve shareholders who claim they suffered losses because executives misled them about a company’s financial condition. The kickback scheme allowed the firm’s attorneys to be among the first to file litigation and secure the lucrative position as lead plaintiffs’ counsel, according to court documents. The firm’s lawsuits targeted companies such as AT&T Inc., Lucent, WorldCom, Microsoft Corp. and Prudential Insurance. Prosecutors said Seymour Lazar, 80, was paid about $2.6 million to be a professional plaintiff and help the law firm, previously known as Milberg Weiss Bershad & Schulman, in its pursuit of the lawsuits.
The retired attorney was ordered to spend six months in home detention and two years probation. He also was fined $600,000 after pleading guilty to obstruction of justice, subscribing to a false tax return and making a false declaration to the court.
The seven-year investigation also resulted in guilty pleas by three of Weiss’ former partners.
William Lerach, whose high-profile legal victories included a $7 billion judgment against now-defunct energy company Enron Corp., pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to obstruct justice and make false statements. He was sentenced to two years in federal prison.
Steven Schulman pleaded guilty to a racketeering conspiracy charge. He agreed to forfeit $1.85 million to the government and to pay a $250,000 fine. Former partner David Bershad pleaded guilty to conspiracy and agreed to cooperate with the government. Schulman and Bershad are scheduled to be sentenced later this year. With Weiss’ guilty plea, there are two defendants remaining in the case — the firm itself and attorney Paul T. Selzer. Trials for those defendants are scheduled in August.

In a statement, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner praised Rattner’s work on the auto industry overhaul. “We are extremely grateful to Steve for his efforts in helping strengthen GM and Chrysler, recapitalize GMAC and support the American auto industry,” Geithner said. “I hope that he takes another opportunity to bring his unique skills to government service in the future.”

Rattner will be replaced by Bloom. He assumes leadership of the task force’s activities as the government transitions from day-to-day restructuring to “protecting the substantial investment the American taxpayers have made in GM, Chrysler and GMAC,” Geithner said.

So Damn Much Money is the title of Bob Kaiser’s penetrating book on the explosion of lobbying and corruption in Washington over the past quarter century. Kaiser is right, and so is Barack Obama in his attempt to attenuate the corrosive links between lobbying and government–even with the hiccup created by Tom Daschle’s withdrawal.

In over 39 years in Washington, I have seen the city transformed from a sterile national capital akin to Canberra or Brasilia into a social, cultural, culinary, and economic metropolis that can (almost) compete with London and Paris. In 1969, when I arrived here, there was limited regional theater, the Smithsonian museums, and a literal handful of “exotic” restaurants (the most exotic of which was a Cuban dive called the Omega). Fancy clothing was the purview of Raleigh’s, where Hickey-Freeman was as hip as it got.

Today, the museums are world-class, as are the restaurants, the art scene, the fashion. But all this pales in comparison to the biggest change: the sheer amount of money sloshing around. In 1970, the federal budget was all of $195 billion. Today, the budget is over $3 trillion.

With so many federal dollars at stake, the capital injected into the system to influence government decisions has exploded. Law firms, lobbying firms, public relations firms–all have mushroomed over the past four decades, creating thousands of high-paying jobs, some going well into the seven figures.

In 1969, a member of Congress earned $42,500. Today, the pay is nearly four times that, $169,300. But in 1969, the salary of a first-year associate at prime Washington firms was around $10,000–while today, the starting pay for a first-year associate is $160,000, not including hefty bonuses for those who have clerked for a federal judge. Back then, a senior partner in a Washington law firm would earn a bit more than a member of Congress; today, that partner might make ten times a congressional salary.

The disparities have grown even sharper with lobbyists. In 1969, a newly minted lobbyist with solid Capitol Hill experience could count on making a touch more than the $10,000 they earned as congressional staff. Today, the congressional staffer making $50,000 can look at a peer making five or six times that much as a lobbyist. An assistant secretary in an executive department can make similar multiples upon leaving office and taking up lobbying. The explosion of public relations and lobbying firms has meant that huge conglomerates like Burson-Marsteller, Ogilvy, Hill & Knowlton, and WPP have bought up boutique firms created by former executive branch and congressional staffers, turning these staffers into instant multi-millionaires.

It is no wonder that the Washington area is now filled with neighborhoods of three-million-dollar houses; that the city now has its own version of Rodeo Drive, with a Jimmy Choo shoe store even.

Living in a prosperous, vibrant city is nice. But the corrupting influence of all that money is palpable. For senior members of Congress, it is not easy to see one’s peers–much less one’s former employees–leave the Hill and make so much more money. The seemingly inexplicable petty corruption of powerhouses like Dan Rostenkowski and Ted Stevens can be explained, I believe, by their belief that they were making such immense sacrifices to stay in public service that a few additional perks were well-deserved–and still left them far poorer than their lobbyist friends. And for the first time, we have young people who enter public service, not out of idealism or even a thirst for power, but out of a desire to make money.

Jack Abramoff and his colleagues showed that corruption can be painfully blatant. But often a more subtle dynamic is present: congressional staffers, members of Congress, and executive officials answer the phone calls and see the unsavory clients of lobbyists who enjoy prime tickets to Redskins games and golf at Burning Tree or might at some future point be their employers–who wants to alienate someone who might hold the key to a million-dollar job? Laws and regulations get more complicated when drafted by staffers and agency officials who know their market value is much higher when they are the ones who can interpret the nuances or find the loopholes when they leave government service.

Many of these lobbyists and consultants are my friends; most are very honorable people, but all–including Tom Daschle, a man of real integrity and strong basic values–are caught up in a system that is becoming more difficult to keep on the straight and narrow

That is why President Obama’s tough ethics and lobbying restrictions, the most far-reaching ever, are so welcome. Obama’s executive order has a blanket gift ban, will block lobbyists from taking jobs in his administration in any area where they have lobbied over the previous two years, and will bar administration officials from lobbying his administration at all after they leave office–for what could be a full eight years.

There is no doubt that some extremely talented people will be barred from taking jobs in the administration–and others will shrink from the prospect, given the hit on their future earning capability. But there are many talented people who will answer the call to public service without seeing it as an inevitable route to riches. In the rare case where a person is deemed indispensable, there is a waiver provision (first employed for Obama’s nominee for Deputy Secretary of Defense Bill Lynn) but the president has pledged to make it very rare. And, as the Lynn nomination shows, each waiver will get a lot of scrutiny.

Of course, there is another serious price, which has become more apparent over the past few days. Set tough standards, combine them with the kind of vetting process that is the equivalent of full body cavity searches, and you will inevitably have casualties, like Tom Daschle and Nancy Killefer.

None of this suggests that Obama should rethink or dilute either his ethics reform package or his willingness to recruit Washington insiders for key positions. And tough as the reform measures are, they are only the first step in breaking the corrupting influence of money in Washington. Ideally, these moves will encourage Congress to create its own sharper limitations on members and staff moving into lucrative lobbying posts. And it is now critical to pass campaign finance reform that tilts the system dramatically toward small donors and away from big shots, including Washington lobbyists. These steps will not end corruption or the impact of money; a huge federal government invites both. They will not keep some nominees from stepping into embarrassing situations; indeed, they may result in some very good people deciding it is not worth entering government. But at least, for the first time in a long time, public service is being framed as a calling, not as a springboard to get a larger piece of that huge pie.

WASHINGTON (CNN) — A source close to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi now confirms that Pelosi was told in February 2003 by her intelligence aide, Michael Sheehy, that waterboarding was actually used on CIA detainee Abu Zubaydah. Source says Nancy Pelosi didn’t object about waterboard usage because she wasn’t personally briefed about it. Source says Nancy Pelosi didn’t object about waterboard usage because she wasn’t personally briefed about it. This appears to contradict Pelosi’s account that she was never told waterboarding actually happened, only that the administration was considering using it. Sheehy attended a briefing in which waterboarding was discussed in February 2003, with Rep. Jane Harman, D-California, who took over Pelosi’s spot as the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. This source says Pelosi didn’t object when she learned that waterboarding was being used because she had not been personally briefed about it — only her aide had been told. The source said Pelosi supported a letter that Harman sent to the administration at the time raising concerns. The source asked not to be identified because of the sensitive nature of matters discussed in classified intelligence briefings.

Pelosi admits attending one briefing in September 2002, but at a news conference last month, she was adamant that she did not know waterboarding was used. “At that or any other briefing, and that was the only briefing that I was briefed on in that regard, we were not — I repeat, we were not — told that waterboarding or any of these other enhanced interrogation methods were used, ” Pelosi said on April 23. Some Republicans have called for Pelosi to testify at congressional hearings. The number two House Democrat — Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Maryland — said Tuesday, “I think the facts need to get out” regarding what members of Congress had been told about harsh interrogations. But when asked whether Pelosi testifying would be appropriate, Hoyer did not directly answer the question, saying, “The issue is what was done. If you don’t have the facts pounded on the table, they (Republicans) are pounding on the table, or they are pounding on Speaker Pelosi. Take your pick. But they are doing so as a distraction, as a distraction from what was done in this case.”