Thursday, June 22, 2006

POLITICAL SYMBIOSIS -- The Abramoff affair has piqued the interest of reformists and journalists, in addition to prosecutors, looking for the next whale of a scandal. Consequently, the Congressional sacandals have continued to expand. It appears that a symbiotic relationship is developing between reformists, journalists, and prosecutors, with dirty politicians on the losing end. That new system seems to be taking primacy over the former system in which politicians, operators, and lobbyists maintained a symbiotic relationship, with the public on the losing end. Just consider:
House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) made a $2 million profit last year on the sale of land 5 1/2 miles from a highway project that he helped to finance with targeted federal funds.

A Republican House member from California, meanwhile, received nearly double what he paid for a four-acre parcel near an Air Force base after securing $8 million for a planned freeway interchange 16 miles away. And another California GOP congressman obtained funding in last year's highway bill for street improvements near a planned residential and commercial development that he co-owns.

In all three cases, Hastert and Reps. Ken Calvert and Gary Miller say that they were securing funds their home districts wanted badly, and that in no way did the earmarks have any impact on the land values of their investments. But for watchdog groups, the cases have opened a fresh avenue for investigation and a new wrinkle in the ongoing controversy over earmarks -- home-district projects funded through narrowly written legislative language.

For more than a year, the congressional corruption scandal triggered by former lobbyist Jack Abramoff has focused attention on earmarks secured by lawmakers on lobbyists' and government contractors' behalf. Now watchdog groups are combing through lawmakers' land holdings and legislative activities, searching for earmarks that may have boosted the value of those investments.