Illegal Aliens Nabbed In New Jersey Terrorist Plot
By Tom Fitton
May 15, 2007
Page 2 of 2
While the Pentagon ultimately awards military contracts, there is a reason for the review process. The Senate's subcommittee on Military Construction's approval carries weight. Senator Feinstein, therefore, likely had influence over the decision making process. How much influence? That's what Judicial Watch aims to find out. (Judicial Watch filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the Department of Defense.)
Now, Feinstein, who resigned from the subcommittee last year, claims she consulted the Senate Ethics committee on the matter. The "guidance" she received from the ethics committee is sealed, but it apparently permitted Feinstein to serve as both Chairwoman and ranking member of the subcommittee even as it considered bids that enriched Feinstein's family. Blum's business partner reportedly sent Feinstein's office regular updates about contracts that their Perini company was up for before the Pentagon, so Feinstein had specific information, which she seems to have ignored, on which projects she should have recused herself from voting.
Incredibly, the Senate Ethics Committee ruling which allowed Feinstein to serve on the committee is still secret, despite all the controversy. So much for changing the "culture of corruption"...
Pelosi in Trouble over Earmark
Feinstein isn't the only Democratic leader in hot water for using her influence in Congress to enrich her husband (and, potentially, herself.) House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who promised a new era of ethics enforcement in the House of Representatives, snuck a $25 million gift (web site) to her husband in a $15 billion Water Resources Development Act recently passed by Congress.
Members of Congress regularly abuse the appropriations process by earmarking public monies to fund pet projects of special interests and donors often in their own congressional districts or states. Earmarks are an area of the legislative process particularly susceptible to corruption. (There were literally hundreds of these types of projects inserted into the water bill.)
In this case, the special interest may have been Pelosi's wealthy husband, Paul Pelosi. And the pet project involved renovating ports in Speaker Pelosi's home base of San Francisco. Paul Pelosi just happens to own apartment buildings near the areas targeted for improvement, and will almost certainly experience a significant boost in property value as a result of Pelosi's earmark.
Pelosi, capitalizing on the public's distaste for the earmarking process, pledged reform during the elections last fall. The good news is that the House did reform the process a bit by requiring members to certify that they had no personal financial interests in earmarks they sponsor. Pelosi followed the new rules and reportedly signed a form certifying that neither she nor her husband would benefit financially from the earmark. That may not actually be the case and the Speaker's office will have some more explaining to do.
--------
Tom Fitton is president of Judicial Watch, Inc., a conservative, non-partisan educational foundation that promotes transparency, accountability and integrity in government, politics and the law.
--------------------
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA. >> Back -- Page 1 2
++ Discuss this topic in The Forum
Current rating:  5.0 out of 5.0 (5 total votes)
| 
