ProPublica

Journalism in the Public Interest

Cancel

Fried Chicken, Krispy Kreme and Lobbying

.

The Office of Congressional Ethics is scrutinizing events held for the following congressmen, clockwise, from top left: Mel Watt, D-N.C., Joseph Crowley, D-N.Y., Frank Lucas, R-Okla., Earl Pomeroy, D-N.C., John Campbell, R-Calif., and Tom Price, R-Ga.

Last December, a $500 donation could buy a ticket to a fundraiser that, the invitation said, would feature "Bojangles' Fried Chicken, Krispy Kreme Doughnuts, And Mel Watt, of course!" Two days later, Watt, a Democratic congressman from North Carolina, withdrew a provision from the House's financial reform bill that would have regulated loans from car dealers.

This event and several others have come under scrutiny by the Office of Congressional Ethics, The New York Times reported today. The ethics office sent donors and party hosts a formal request for documents relating to a number of fundraisers for members of Congress in the run-up to the House vote on financial reform last December.

The Times singled out certain events that raised red flags, and the Sunlight Foundation's Party Time site, which collects fundraising invites, has the details for Watt's event and several others in its database.

There's New York Democrat Joseph Crowley's "Holiday Cocktail Reception," which he ducked into while debates were continuing on the Hill. "After collecting thousands of dollars in checks, Mr. Crowley returned to the floor of the House just in time to vote against a series of amendments that would have imposed tougher restrictions on Wall Street," the Times reported.

Three days before the vote, Frank Lucas, R-Okla., held a "'Last Call' Breakfast," and John Campbell, R-Calif., hosted a "California Wine Tasting." Two days before the vote, there was a "Financial Services Luncheon" for Georgia Republican Tom Price. The same day, North Dakota Democrat Earl Pomeroy had a "Fundraising Breakfast" at the offices of Davis & Harman, which billed over $2 million in lobbying fees last year to companies and organizations that could be affected by financial reform, according to lobbyist disclosures.

Watt and other congressmen defended their fundraising, saying contributions did not sway their votes.

Jay Honeycutt

July 17, 2010, 5:31 a.m.

These are just the junior, less connected, less savvy members to stumble into the crosshairs of the Office of Congressional Ethics (must be a very small office, perhaps phone-booth size?).  The more savvy members have bagmen to collect the checks or to arrange for offshore deposits in a more discreet manner. 

You could vote them out, at which time they enjoy the FERS pension that Ron Paul terms “immoral”.

These meretricious hacks pollute congress and vitiate democracy and along with the rest of their ilk in politics have allowed big business to turn our country into a banana republic run by oligarchs.

except in the most obviously corrupt circumstances, when has the ethics committee done an even minimalist job effectively investigating itself? So, ho hum, same ole, same ole

Get Updates

Stay on top of what we’re working on by subscribing to our email digest.

optional