Quick Picks: Business-Boosting Lawmakers
Quick Picks focuses on a select few of the day’s stories from “Breaking on the Web.”
- Does “Congressman Fuji” ring a bell? That’s the moniker FDA scientists gave to ex-Rep. Christopher Shays (R-CT), who called the agency to express concern about the status of a breast-imaging device made by Connecticut-based Fujifilm Medical Systems, according to internal FDA documents provided to the New York Times. After that phone call, an FDA official ignored agency scientists and approved the device, the documents allege. FDA scientists wrote a letter to President-elect Obama last week alleging a pattern of “corruption” in the FDA division that reviews and approves medical devices. A spokeswoman for that division told ProPublica, “We’re working directly with the transition team and we’ll address their issues directly.”
- According to the AP, Hillary Clinton acted in the interest of her husband’s donors at least six times. In one instance, she wrote to the FCC about a rate change she feared would hurt telecoms, citing a New York-based company whose chief executive later donated to her husband’s foundation.
Check out more of our roundup of the best investigative stories around the Web.
Was there a story we missed? Please keep sending us stories from your local paper, favorite blog or magazine, etc. via e-mail or Delicious.
Get Updates
Our Hottest Stories
- Donations to Scott Walker Flagged as Potential Fraud
- In Race For Better Cell Service, Men Who Climb Towers Pay With Their Lives
- Billion Dollar Bait & Switch: States Divert Foreclosure Deal Funds
- Pardon Attorney Torpedoes Plea for Presidential Mercy
- Patient Died at New York VA Hospital After Alarm Was Ignored
- Introducing the ProPublica Patient Harm Community on Facebook
- Built for a Simpler Era, OSHA Struggles When Tower Climbers Die
- Finding Oscar: Massacre, Memory and Justice in Guatemala
- Got Student Loans? Share Your Documents With Us
- Remember Stuxnet? Why the U.S. is Still Vulnerable
- Donations to Scott Walker Flagged as Potential Fraud
- Pardon Attorney Torpedoes Plea for Presidential Mercy
- In Race For Better Cell Service, Men Who Climb Towers Pay With Their Lives
- Air Force Pilots Balk at Flying the World’s Most Expensive Fighter Jet
- Watchdog Group Calls for Probe of Lobbyists Behind Congressional Trip to Taiwan
- Patient Died at New York VA Hospital After Alarm Was Ignored
- Billion Dollar Bait & Switch: States Divert Foreclosure Deal Funds
- Broadcasters Sue to...Block Transparency
- Happy Graduation! Here's The Best, Most Depressing Journalism on Student Debt
- Remember Stuxnet? Why the U.S. is Still Vulnerable







1 comments
Philip Cardella
Jan. 13, 2009, 3:21 p.m.
I bought a house last summer. I wanted to thank the lending agent and the real estate agent. Is this improper? Would it be improper for me to give them something? Is it hard to imagine that my estimation of my lending credit union and the real estate company went up when things went smoothly despite the builder’s best efforts to screw things up? Don’t you think my desire to reward them would increase the more I personally felt cared for?
Reality is, if I write my law maker and ask for help and they give it to me I’m going to contribute. I’m going to give money, I’m going to donate time to their campaigns. This isn’t out of the ordinary. The question is, and only should be, was there an understanding of a tit for tat. If that can’t be shown, then, frankly, the fact that Clinton only helped six people out who said thank you through a tax deductible donation is more of a story than that any one greased her pockets. You get tape of her looking for favors, bury her and send her to jail. If she gets big donations THEN helps, or flip flops, authorize a wire tap, but until then, get a life.
Commenting on this story is closed.