Supplementary » July 31, 2006
Jack Abramoff: Captain Jack?
Jack Abramoff was a central figure in the “K Street Project” - a barely legal collaboration between Republicans and lobbyists.
By Conor Kenny
More Players
Despite Bush’s claims that he didn’t know Jack, Abramoff recently claimed a close familiarity with the president, writing, “The guy saw me in almost a dozen settings, and joked with me about a bunch of things, including details of my kids.” In fact, Secret Service logs released in July show that in the months after Bush was elected, Abramoff came to the White House at least six times.
Abramoff started out as a conservative activist, but eventually left for the private sector because, he said, “I wanted to make money.” That he did, most of it ($66 million over three years) as a lobbyist for Indian tribes seeking casino permits whose leaders he privately called “troglodytes” and “the stupidest idiots in the land.”
His fortunes took off in 1994, when the Republicans took over Congress and Grover Norquist and Tom DeLay initiated the “K Street Project,” which skated right up to the edge of legality. Essentially, K Street lobbying firms would hire lobbyists hand-picked by the Republican leadership, who would then encourage their clients to contribute to Republican congressional campaigns and even lean on congressmen who were bucking the leadership’s wishes on a particular vote. In return, the firms were granted legislative favors sought by their clients and were able to increase their billing rates by demonstrating their enormous access. When a K Street firm hired Abramoff—less than a week after the 1994 election—DeLay’s chief of staff made a point of telling the National Journal, “He is someone on our side. … [H]e has access to DeLay.”
But making fundraising and lobbying an active part of your legislative strategy has its consequences. In a New York Times interview, Abramoff put it aptly: “I just don’t think members of Congress for the most part sell their votes … generally speaking, that is.” But the exceptions—when members of Congress can be leveraged due to their reliance on their surrogate fundraisers—make the difference between the “legal bribery” of campaign contributions and the straight-up bribery of a quid-pro-quo.
Abramoff crossed that line, pleading guilty in January to fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to channel gifts, trips and campaign contributions to members of Congress.
More information about Conor Kenny
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments
There are no comments on this article yet. Start the discussion below.
-
register a new account »Posting Security
Appeared in the August 2006 Issue
Also featured
Narcissists Rђ Us?
Students vs. Sweatshops, Round III
Rechecking the Balance of Powers
Full contents
Previous issues
Subscribe and save!
Also by Conor Kenny
- Jeremy Horton
"I was always politically interested and involved, but I'd never really done anything… morePosted on May 21, 2007 - Paula Villescaz
Villescaz's first serious foray into Democratic politics occurred last summer when she attended… morePosted on May 21, 2007 - Hello, I’m a Democrat
Meet the netroots activists who have moved online and into political officePosted on May 21, 2007 - Thomas Noe: The NumismatistӔ
Thomas Noe, Ohio regional fundraising chairman for Bush in 2004, is suspected of laundering $2 million of money from the Ohio Bureau of Worker's Compensation.Posted on July 31, 2006 - Brent Wilkes: The EarmarkerӔ
Brent Wilkes is accused of illegally setting up his own lobbying firm to convince members of Congress to earmark money via appropriations bills.Posted on July 31, 2006
IN THESE TIMES COMMUNITY MEMBERS
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
- 4.
- 5.
- 6.
- 7.
- 8.
Ignoring Outrage, Obama Set to Expand Pentagon Presence in Colombia
- 9.
- 10.
RSS Feed