Obama Rejects Peter Roskam’s Cynical Attempt to Deceive 6th District Voters

On 10.30.08, In Economic Justice, Ethics Reform, Friends of Peter Roskam, George Bush, SCHIP, Veterans, By RSR

Thanks to Kitty Kurth for this news:

Peter Roskam, who is diametrically opposed to almost everything that Barack Obama stands for and is a member of the McCain leadership team, has been trying to peel off Obama voters. But, Obama supports Jill Morgenthaler for Congress in Illinois 6th District.

“While we’re pleased that Barack Obama continues to attract support from across party lines because of his long record of working with Republicans and independents to bring change, he believes Congressman Roskam would continue President Bush’s failed policies and is supporting Jill Morgenthaler for Congress.”

Justin DeJong, Illinois Director of Communications for Obama for America

Jill Morgenthaler’s press release is here.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 
1 Comments
Leave A Response

Peter Roskam, “Hero of The Taxpayer” …Not so much

On 10.23.08, In Congressional Elections, Ethics Reform, Lobbyists, Peter Roskam, By RSR

Thanks to Progress Illinois for this.  It seems Congressman Peter Roskam has found himself the subject of an ethics complaint filed by Public Citizen, a national non-profit consumer advocacy group founded by Ralph Nader in the early 1970s. This is not a front group. Its a serious non-partisan organization working in the public interest. Here’s what Senator John McCain had to say about them:

Public Citizen has been a powerful and persistent voice for cleaning up our campaign finance system which has corrupted our legislative process and distorted government policies. The group continues to fight for average citizens whose voices are muted by the monied special interests.

And here’s what Public  Citizen has to say about Peter Roskam:

U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam (R-Ill.) appears to have abused his franking privileges and violated U.S. House of Representative rules against using taxpayer funds to pay for political mailers promoting himself within 90 days of the general election, Public Citizen charged today in a complaint filed with the House Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards.

Members of Congress are allowed to distribute mass mailings to their constituents at taxpayer expense touting their legislative records (“franked” mail), but not within 90 days of an election. A bipartisan Commission on Congressional Mailing Standards, known as the “Franking Commission,” is responsible for oversight and regulation of the franking privilege in the House of Representatives.

“Right up into October, just weeks before the election, voters have been receiving two-page color mailers paid for by taxpayers, with Peter Roskam’s name splashed all over them,” said Joan Claybrook, president of Public Citizen. “Taxpayers should not be footing the bill to advertise Roskam’s candidacy for Congress.”

“Using tax dollars to pay for campaign literature is a clear violation of the franking laws,” said David Arkush, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. “The mailers are campaign advertisements, plain and simple. They promote Roskam for things like ‘Protecting Children from Poison’ and ‘Securing Our Borders.’ ”

Roskam consistently has tapped taxpayers to pay for mass mailings to his congressional district, amounting to almost $200,000 in legitimate franked mail from January 2007 through June 2008. The franking rules bar sending mass mailings to constituents after Aug. 6.

If the commission finds a violation, it will refer the matter to the House ethics committee for enforcement. The ethics committee has wide latitude in all its enforcement actions, ranging from a private letter of reprimand, to civil penalty, to removal from office. This issue likely would result in a letter of reprimand and a requirement that the campaign reimburse taxpayers for the franked mail.

“We urge the ethics committee to severely reprimand Roskam and require him to pay a civil penalty and pay back the taxpayers for any franked mail sent out since early August,” said Craig Holman, campaign finance lobbyist for Public Citizen.

The  text of the complaint aginst Roskam can be found here.

The complaint against Roskam is, on one hand, hardly surprising because Roskam has not been a supporter of Congressional ethics reform and has shown himself, both in this election campaign and his last, to be willing to say or do just about anything to win.  And Roskam’s coziness with Washington lobbyists has provided further evidence of his lack of concern for occupying the ethical high ground. But one wonders why Roskam would need to use taxpayer money to promote his candidacy when he is so flush with cash from his corporate sponsors. I guess Peter just likes playing with a stacked deck.

Tagged with: • • • •
 
1 Comments
Leave A Response

Peter Roskam’s $163 million in Earmarks

On 08.01.08, In Earmarks, Ethics Reform, Peter Roskam, Reagan 21, By RSR

When it comes to earmarks, Peter Roskam’s message is “do as I say, not as I do”.

Last fall, Peter Roskam got together with a bunch of fellow Republican extremists who were feeling desperate about their party’s chances in the upcoming 2008 elections after 7 horrible years of mismanagement, malfeasance, and downright criminality by their President, George W. Bush. They decided the only answer was to bring back Ronald Reagan from the dead and so they founded a kind of Ronald Regan resurrection club.

They called their club “Reagan 21″ . This is what they had to say about their club:

Republicans have a proud tradition of upholding Ronald Reagan’s principles of liberty and a vision for the 21st Century. That vision is an America that espouses individual freedom, free enterprise, and common-sense values. Americans are crying out for leadership with courage, principle, and integrity. Reagan 21, a new conservative group uniting Republican leaders from both chambers of Congress, was formed to fill this leadership void. Reagan21 presents a positive alternative to the current majority in Congress.

Now I could fill a book about Reagan’s “common-sense values“ (remember Iran-Contra, Reagan’s brutal war in Central America, his opposition to gay rights, his indifference to the poor and to persons with AIDS?) but that is not the point here. The Reagan 21 club proclaimed its emphasis on Integrity and Ethics, presumably because the Jack Abramoff model of the previous few years wasn’t working for them anymore:

Americans deserve to have elected officials who represent them, including Members of Congress, abide by the highest possible standards of professional conduct and personal ethics. No Member of Congress should engage in any activity in which there is or could be a conflict of interest between his or her official duties or activities on behalf of his constituents and any personnel interest of that Member. This duty to avoid conflicts of interest is critical to public confidence in the integrity of our nation’s government. To effectuate this duty, Members must not only aggressively avoid any conflict of interest but also any activity in which there could be even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

One of the ways the Reagan 21 club proposed to promote ethics and integrity in Congress was to end the practice of earmarks. Earmarks are Congress’s way of bypassing the executive branch agencies and allocating funds directly to specific favored pet projects. Earmarks in an appropriation bill are often called “pork”. Citizen’s Against Government Waste, an advocacy group formed to “eliminate waste, mismanagement, and inefficiency in the federal government”, identified 7 criteria for identifying pork:

  • Requested by only one chamber of Congress;
  • Not specifically authorized;
  • Not competitively awarded;
  • Not requested by the President;
  • Greatly exceeds the President’s budget request or the previous year’s funding;
  • Not the subject of congressional hearings; or
  • Serves only a local or special interest.

Senators and Congressmen often rail against pork spending but tend to like it because it can be a way of making themselves popular in their home district, effectively buying votes with highly visible projects that would not other wise be funded.

Here’s what the Reagan 21 club has to say about earmarks:

Recognizing this critical duty, House Republicans in 1994 pledged to “re-establish the bonds of trust between the United States Congress and the American people.” Regrettably, we failed to achieve and maintain this goal. Now Congress must reinvigorate its efforts to reestablish those bonds of trust and hold every Member to a zero tolerance standard in which no self-dealing or appearance of impropriety whatsoever will be tolerated.

One of the main culprits of self-dealing is the practice of “earmarking.” The 1981 transportation bill contained only 10 earmarks. President Reagan vetoed a transportation bill in 1987 that contained 121 earmarks, saying, ‘I haven’t seen this much lard since I handed out blue ribbons at the Iowa State Fair.’ In 2005, Congress passed a transportation bill that included an astonishing 6,371 earmarks at a cost of $27.3 billion.

The year before Republicans took the majorities in the U.S. House and U.S. Senate, there were 1,400 earmarks. Last year, there were more than 14,000.

So we see that, while most Republican complain about pork and try to blame it on the Democrats, they have been, in actuality, big pork fans. But the Reagan 21 Republicans said that all was going to change. They were going to end earmarks. Yes that’s right, Roskam signed on to a group that declared its intent to pursue a full ban on earmarks, whose members subscribed to a set of core values that included ending all earmarks.

So. How’s Roskam doing in his quest to bring integrity back to Washington by ending the practice of earmarks. Sad to say, not so good. As of today, Roskam’s house website lists a whopping $163, 086, 569 in earmarks for FY ‘08 and FY ‘09. Mr. Roskam really does like his pork, all his pretensions about being a fiscal conservative to the contrary.

I can only speak for myself but this kind of pisses me off. I’m sure there are many worthwhile projects included in Roskam’s long list of earmarks but we have been listening to Roskam lecture the Democrats in Congress on wasteful spending every time they try to do something to help folks who are truly suffering and all the while Roskam is buying votes back home with these projects that bypass the normal appropriations process.

If it makes you mad too, I’d suggest you give Roskam a call and ask him “what’s with all the pork?” Roskam can be reached at his Washington office at (202) 225-4561 or in Bloomingdale at (630) 893-9670.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 
2 Comments
Leave A Response

Peter Roskam Gives Lobbyists Place of Honor in Washington Office

On 06.13.08, In Ethics Reform, Lobbyists, Peter Roskam, Peter Roskam's Corporate Agenda, By RSR

Many Congressmen are cozy with Washington lobbyists but I doubt many have gone as far as Roskam did in immortalizing a couple of revolving door lobbyists in a painting in his Washington office.

According to “The Hill”, last month Peter Roskam’s wife Elizabeth, an artist, presented her husband with a painting she did depicting a scene from Roskam’s 2006 congressional campaign. The painting features the Roskams and their children as well as number of current and former staff members:

Jason Roe, a lobbyist with the Federal Strategy Group who was Roskam’s campaign manager, is also in the painting. The artist put him in a Michigan State University hat to reflect his diehard Spartan tendencies — the school wouldn’t accept him — but “humbled him” by dressing him in blue and maize, the colors of rival University of Michigan.

Other campaign aides, including Dean Thompson, Roskam’s legislative correspondent, and Brigitta Johnson, Roskam’s scheduler, are also in the painting.

David Mork, Roskam’s senior legislative assistant, and Mork’s then-girlfriend and now-wife Kirsten Mork are entwined in the painting. After meeting on the campaign trail for Roskam, the two worked together in the congressman’s office until they decided to marry.

Kirsten then landed another job as an associate lobbyist for Roe’s Federal Strategy Group.

Elizabeth Roskam is pleased her husband has the painting front and center in his office. “It’s something Peter can look at when he’s at his desk, a reminder of the fun times of the campaign.”

Isn’t that special. Seriously, it sounds like a beautiful gift, but that, of course, is not the point of my posting it here.

The point is simply to alert Peter Roskam’s constituents that there is a rather close connection between his office and the Washington lobbying firm Federal Strategy Group. Jason Roe, Roskam’s former campaign manager and Kirsten Mork, Roskam’s former Deputy Campaign Finance Director and former legislative assistant are lobbyists there. Roe is also a donor to Roskam’s current congressional campaign. Roskam’s current legislative assistant, David Mork, is married to Kirsten.

Here’s what the Federal Strategy Group has to say about it’s product:

More than any other lobbying firm, Federal Strategy Group understands what you want and we have the experience and expertise to deliver it. You want results – not process. Our team provides the access, advocacy, and advice to help you achieve those results.

First, we offer unparalleled access to top decision-makers. The abundance and strength of these relationships makes our team uniquely able to reach key public officials. Our lobbyists were selected from the top ranks of government, in part, because they have excelled in that professional arena. They bring with them relationships cultivated over years of public service. As part of our team, they grow and strengthen these relationships within government. As a result, Federal Strategy Group can open doors to get your message heard by the right people.

Maybe I’m too jaded but it sounds to me like what they are marketing is access to Peter Roskam and to other elected officials that they may be friendly with. And, as a voter and a citizen, it strikes me as wrong.

According to Open Secrets, Federal Strategy Group’s current clients include Verizon and American Airlines. Voters should bear that in mind as they examine Roskam’s bill sponsorship and voting record going forward.

Interestingly, when I tried today to verify today that David Mork is still on Peter Roskam’s staff, I found that I was unable. Neither Roskam’s Congressional website nor the House website provide any means for citizens to view a list of their Congressman’s staff members. Roskam likes to talk about transparency. He could make that happen tomorrow: a list of current staff members with bios on his House website. What about it Peter? Do we as citizens have a right to know? Roskam should also consider publishing his schedule on a regular basis so that we know who is lobbying him on what issues.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • •
 
2 Comments
Leave A Response

Peter Roskam Votes No on Ethics Reform – What Does He Want to Hide?

On 03.12.08, In Ethics Reform, Peter Roskam, By RSR

Peter Roskam cast his vote today against the establishment of a new set of ethics rules for the House of Representatives. The measure, which was passed despite Roskam’s vote, establishes for the first time an independent means of policing a Congress which had grown to be spectacularly corrupt during the Bush-Abramoff-Rove era. A number of legislators of Roskam’s Republican party, including Roskam’s ex-boss Tom Delay, were indicted and/or convicted on charges of serious corruption. One Democrat, William Jefferson, has also been indicted. During this period, the House Ethics committee proved to be completely ineffectual, prompting Democrats to push for independent oversight once they became the majority party.

There will now be an independent Office of Congressional Ethics which can initiate and investigate complaints without prior approval of the Ethics committee. Its powers are somewhat limited in that it will not be able to issue subpoenas and determinations on the validity of its investigative findings will still be left to the Ethics committee.

Most Republicans, including Roskam, fiercely resisted this reform. The final vote fell strongly along party lines though a few members from either side crossed over. One wonders why Roskam and his party fear independent oversight. Do they have more skeletons in their cloakroom?

Interestingly, if Denny Hastert hadn’t abandoned his seat in the 14th abruptly and Bill Foster hadn’t been elected to replace him, independent oversight may not have come to pass. According to The Swamp, prior to the vote on passage, the measure hung on a procedural vote that passed by a single Ay. Foster was there and voted yes. Hastert most certainly would have voted no. So a BIG thank you to Bill Foster and here’s hoping voters take you to the woodshed this fall, Peter. Once again you have demonstrated your insistence that government and corporate elites should be above the law.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 
1 Comments
Leave A Response

Will Roskam Vote to Clean-up Congress?

On 03.03.08, In Ethics Reform, Peter Roskam, By RSR

During the Bush years, the House has been plagued by corruption, most spectacularly in Roskam’s party. Members of both parties have been indicted yet the House Ethics Committee has been largely silent and ineffective. Congress has not show the willingness to police itself. Under the current rules, only a current member of Congress can introduce an ethics complaint against another member. Members have shown a reluctance to do so, fearing politically-motivated retaliatory attacks. Something has to change.

Now, a resolution is pending in the House to change the way ethical issues are handled. The resolution, HR 895, would create an independent Office of Congressional Ethics within the House of Representatives. The office would be governed by a board consisting of six members, three appointed by the Speaker of the House and three by the minority leader. Current or recent lobbyists or members of Congress and current federal employees would be excluded from membership. The Office would have the power to initiate and investigate ethics complaints and would be required to report on its findings within set time-frames.

A vote was initially scheduled on the measure last week but was postponed while Republicans pushed for modifications to the measure. The resolution may now be brought up for a vote sometime this week.

Republicans in the House are unlikely to vote for a strong ethics measure such as this unless they know voters will hold them accountable. Residents of the 6th Congressional District should contact Peter Roskam and insist that he go on the record in favor of independent oversight and that he vote for HR 895 if it comes to the floor. Jill Morgenthaler and voters should both take Roskam to task this fall if he does not. Likewise, voters should thank and congratulate him if he does support this measure.

You may reach Peter Roskam’s office in Bloomingdale at (630) 893-9670 or in Washington at (202) 225-4561. Please tell him I said hello.

Tagged with: • • • • • • • • • • • • •
 
1 Comments
Leave A Response
Go To Top »

Meta

Installed by SimpleScripts