NYT article on the CBC

[HopeOverFear]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/14/us/politics/14cbc.html


In 2008, the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation spent more on the caterer for its signature legislative dinner and conference — nearly $700,000 for an event one organizer called “Hollywood on the Potomac” — than it gave out in scholarships, federal tax records show.

At the galas, lobbyists and executives who give to caucus charities get to mingle with lawmakers. They also get seats on committees the caucus has set up to help members of Congress decide what positions to take on the issues of the day. Indeed, the nonprofit groups and the political wing are so deeply connected it is sometimes hard to tell where one ends and the other begins.

Even as it has used its status as a civil rights organization to become a fund-raising power in Washington, the caucus has had to fend off criticism of ties to companies whose business is seen by some as detrimental to its black constituents.

These include cigarette companies, Internet poker operators, beer brewers and the rent-to-own industry, which has become a particular focus of consumer advocates for its practice of charging high monthly fees for appliances, televisions and computers.

Caucus leaders said the giving had not influenced them.

“We’re unbossed and unbought,” said Representative Barbara Lee, Democrat of California and chairwoman of the caucus. “Historically, we’ve been known as the conscience of the Congress, and we’re the ones bringing up issues that often go unnoticed or just aren’t on the table.”

[Fire1]

1. Sorry, Hope. Didn't see that you had already post this. n/t

[Number23]

2. Get the *BEEP* *BEEP* outta here!!

"But by taking advantage of political finance laws, the caucus has built a fund-raising juggernaut unlike anything else in town."

What the ****!??! So they can fundraise to pay off mortgages and pay salaries but not do scholarships and try to provide any significant support to the black people who put them in office??

"But the bulk of the money has been spent on elaborate conventions that have become a high point of the Washington social season, as well as the headquarters building, golf outings by members of Congress and an annual visit to a Mississippi casino resort."

Thia makes me want to scream. I've spent quite a bit of time on this board defending the CBC, particularly as there are a few posters here who literally salivate and can't run and post fast enough whenever a CBC member criticizes Obama. I've had some experience with the CBC in the past and thought they were great.

I take some comfort in knowing that they appear to have gone bad after my experiences with them, but this is so disgusting and disappointing nonetheless.

[Number23]

3. aw HELL no!

"...the caucus has had to fend off criticism of ties to companies whose business is seen by some as detrimental to its black constituents. These include cigarette companies, Internet poker operators, beer brewers and the rent-to-own industry, which has become a particular focus of consumer advocates for its practice of charging high monthly fees for appliances, televisions and computers."

"...Black people gamble. Black people smoke. Black people drink,” she said in an interview. “And so if these companies want to take some of the money they’ve earned off of our people and give it to us to support good causes, then we take it.”

Anyone else think it's time for some house-cleaning at the CBC??

[Fire1]

4. Naw. I made a similar post re: the CBC, in this forum. Read

down thread. I can't type all that over again. Thank you Number 23. It's kind of suspect to me.

[Number23]

5. You know what? The timing of all of this probably is a bit suspect

But in my mind, that still doesn't justify an organization with the grand and noble ideals that the CBC has spending more money on some damn catering than they do on scholarships and taking money from organizations that they KNOW are helping to kill our communities.

I saw that some have been openly questioning whether Obama okay'd this to get back at the CBC for not being as supportive as they could have been. I don't put anything past any politician but that would be seriously messed up if that were true. Luckily, I don't believe that it is.

[Fire1]

6. Yeah, I have a hard time believing that, too. I just can't

figure out WHY and WHO?? I have mixed feelings. On the one hand, who is to say theirs is the only caucus spending that kind of money or even getting those kinds of contributions. Some caucuses have had the privilege of having offices on the hill and didn't have to worry about a mortgage. I don't like the contributors, either, but I'm not going to speculate that the CBC members have financial ties to these industries, until I have proof.

Some said, they're not the powerhouse they are portrayed to be. That's debatable, imo. Look at the work Waters has been doing for poor and homeless people and not just in her state! Maxine Waters is the one who subpoenaed Oliver North to testify before committee in the Iran Contra affair. They ALL stood up to W over NOLA. Conyers has issued subpoenas to Rove over the illegal firing of eight U.S. attorneys, albeit, ignored but still! They may not be a significant force to be reckoned with, but they have made their mark.

The more I think about it the more suspect it becomes.

[bliss_eternal]

8. Regarding Maxine Waters and Iran Contra....

...I recently learned a bit more about that subpoena, while watching Ms. Waters discuss the work of northern Californian reporter Gary Webb.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Webb#Dark_Alliance

Journalist Gary Webb made the connection between Iran Contra, the CIA and crack cocaine in the socal black community with his piece, Dark Alliance. I believe this is why Maxine Waters was the one to subpoena Oliver North. Given he (and his agency) stood accused of having knowledge of funneling drugs into her community, thus destroying many of her constituents' families.....it seems appropriate that she would be the one to subpoena him.

Per the link above:

In August 1996 the San Jose Mercury News published Webb's "Dark Alliance", a 20,000 word, three-part investigative series which alleged that Nicaraguan drug traffickers had sold and distributed crack cocaine in Los Angeles during the 1980s, and that drug profits were used to fund the CIA-supported Nicaraguan Contras. Webb never asserted that the CIA directly aided drug dealers to raise money for the Contras, but he did document that the CIA was aware of the cocaine transactions and the large shipments of cocaine into the U.S. by the Contra personnel.<1> "Dark Alliance" received national attention. At the height of the interest, the web version of it on San Jose Mercury News website received 1.3 million hits a day. According to the Columbia Journalism Review, the series became "the most talked-about piece of journalism in 1996 and arguably the most famous—some would say infamous—set of articles of the decade."<2>


If you're interested in learning more, search "gary webb american gangster" or "gary webb" or "gary webb dark alliance" "gary webb murder"...any of those seem to bring up a great deal of information (related to iran contra). :hi:

Hope you had a great valentine's day.

[Number23]

9. Really great points.

And for all we know, ever single caucus can be doing some similar stuff, but you know that we are and always have been held to a different set of standards in this country.

I know that Maxine has been doing alot for the homeless but it barely seems to register doesn't it?? I can't even remember the last time I even heard her name. And you would think that with the amount of adoration that Kucinich gets on the 'net from "progressives" that Maxine would be a much talked about figure around here, right?? :eyes:

The info from you and bliss on what the CBC has been up to lately is great. But if they're not the powerhouse that they're portrayed to be, then why do you think that the timing on this is suspect? Who do you think would be behind the NYT piece??

[kwassa]

7. Some comments

1) My wife was very politically connected at one point, we attended a CBC gala in DC about 8 years ago, and it was all about people wearing their finest clothing and the political pecking order, and not much else. It was also one of the few times I got major stinkeye for being part of an interracial couple. The old school black politics in DC is screwed up, and Obama, and Mayor Fenty have made the smart end-run around the entire thing.

2) The current updates in ethics laws make it impossible for lobbyists to meet legislators except for a giant damn loophole; at fundraisers for public officials. Lobbyists can meet legislators only if they contribute to their political campaigns. If this is not a superhighway to corruption, I don't know what it. My wife was also a registered lobbyist, briefly.

3)On a slightly different subject, I saw the same thing happen at the late Ebony Fashion Fair. Big production, lots of show and flash, only one scholarship, given to the daughter of one of the Alpha Wives organizers.

[Number23]

10. Yeah, the article mentions that lobbyists with the highest contributions

were the first ones allowed to meet with members of the CBC. "Superhighway to corruption" indeed. Why do people think that stuff like this will never come to light??

The old school black politics in DC is screwed up, and Obama, and Mayor Fenty have made the smart end-run around the entire thing.

Yeah, but Obama seems to paying the price for that, isn't he?? CBC didn't even endorse him when he ran for President. And even though I still believe that by and large they have been staunch supporters of the Pres, some of them are all too quick to run to the press with even the most miniscule, almost petty complaints. They know damn well that the sight of a black person criticizing Obama is too good for the press to pass up and that it will get blown to massive proportions no matter how untrue or stupid.

And as for your first point, that sounds like every black affair I've ever been to. We can be FANTASTIC at putting on "a show" but scratch the surface even the slightest bit and the whole damn thing falls about.

[Fire1]

11. So true, #23! All flash and little substance. The Grand Gala

in Ky. that I've attended over the past several years is the same way. Funds supposed to be for scholarships of "deserving" urban youth and nobody ever knows how this money was distributed or to whom. But nobody questions it because it's a nice tax write off and people get to hob nob with celebrities and movers and shakers. Many deals are struck at these affairs, as Kwassa stated. This is the time to get the ear of bankers and the like. I have to admit, I've taken advantage of the occasion and struck a deal of my own. I'll never forget laughing at Michael Jordan when some man was chewing his ear off about some proposed deal and Jordan looked at me while I was laughing, just shaking his head, smiling and looking for some escape. When I got near his table, he got up, while the man was still talking, and hugged me! I was astounded but couldn't show it! Trying to be cool.:rofl:

I can't begrudge the CBC their social affairs because everybody does it! Blacks and whites. ALL of these affairs serve the same purpose no matter if there are lobbyists, bankers or businessmen and women in attendance. Just like there are a million and one deals made on golf courses at country clubs on any given day across this country, social affairs are the same way. Bill Clinton is at the Economic Summit in Vancouver! Why would he be there, other than being on a fundraising mission!

It's just the way of the world.

[kwassa]

12. Lobbying is lobbying

and what people outside of DC don't realize, as most of DU doesn't realize, is that you will never get rid of lobbyists, anyone advocating a cause is a lobbyist, but also, lobbyists also serve a practical function that actually makes the government work. They do lots of the legwork and research and background stuff that congresspeople and all their staffs don't have the time and manpower to do. Lobbyists also advocate good causes as well as bad. It is critical that congress view critically and skeptically these contributions, but they are real contributions.

Every new politician including Obama says they will get rid of "special interests" but everyone has their special interest, something readily apparent right here on DU where you see so many very personal and strong agendas.

and all politicians depend on them.

I would love to see big money out of politics, but it won't happen with the current supreme court and congress. What i want is a too radical to ever take place.

[Fire1]

13. Exactly. I think we're both on the same page. However, I'm

not naive enough to think congress is going to screen their donations, except to ensure there's no conflict of interest. Especially, in a career largely dependent upon funding, as you pointed out. Again, I can't begrudge the CBC members their social affairs/fundraising efforts because indeed it is not going away! It's the way of the world.