Legislator questions rejection of donation request

[Judi Lynn]

Aug. 3, 2005, 12:10AM

Legislator questions rejection of donation request
By R.G. RATCLIFFE
Copyright 2005 Houston Chronicle Austin Bureau

AUSTIN - State Rep. Corbin Van Arsdale questioned Tuesday whether an executive of Time Warner Cable had violated state bribery laws by rejecting the lawmaker's request for a campaign contribution because of a vote he made on a specific telecommunications bill.

Time Warner officials said Van Arsdale's donation was turned down because of his philosophical position on telecommunications issues, not because of a single vote.

Van Arsdale, R-Tomball, had requested a campaign contribution from TX Friends of Time Warner Cable PAC in a July 19 letter. That was three days after Van Arsdale had voted for Senate Bill 21, a telecommunications bill opposed by the cable television industry.

Time Warner Regional President Ron McMillen's hand-written reply said: "Because of your vote in support of SB21 during the special session, our PAC committee cannot support you at this time."

SB21 died in the last special session, but an identical bill is pending before the House in the current special session.
Van Arsdale said the phrase "at this time" in McMillen's note made it sound like he might receive a contribution if he voted against the second bill.
(snip/...)

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/metropolitan/3293676
(Free registration required)

[cornermouse]

1. Am I reading this correctly?

I thought donations were something that was given because the giver wanted to give; not given because it was requested by the recipient.

Okay, the early morning fog has cleared a little. But the whole thing is still strange.

[Jazzgirl]

2. I thought the same thing cornermouse.

I had to read it twice to make sure I understood it. So...the guy is accusing them of bribery because <drum roll> they wouldn't give him any money when he asked for it??? Regardless of whether they agree with his support of the bill its still their call who/when they want to donate to. Maybe I'm missing something! :wow:

[shraby]

12. The way I read it, he just crossed the line into

extortion.

[Judi Lynn]

3. More from the article:

"I don't want to attach incorrect intentions to this language, but the words struck me as Time Warner PAC hinging their campaign contributions to a particular official vote on a particular bill," Van Arsdale said in a letter to McMillan.

Van Arsdale sent copies of his letter to prosecutors in Travis and Harris counties, but he said he did not want to launch an official investigation. Officials in those two offices could not be reached for comment.

Time Warner spokesman Michael Bybee said Van Arsdale is inaccurately portraying how TX Friends of Time Warner Cable PAC makes donation decisions.

"Our belief is that public servants deserve support when their philosophies align with the objectives of our business to the benefit of our customers and employees," Bybee said.
(snip/...)

Glad Congress can be of service to them, bless their hearts.

[knitter4democracy]

8. Dude, isn't that what PACs are for?

To influence votes through campaign funds? Am I missing something?

[damntexdem]

14. That's not early-morning fog, that's good-old Texas smog.

Not too keen on clean air around these parts.

[Sgent]

4. It seems more to me

like this is intimidation by the legislator than bribary by Time-Warner.

I don't donate to candidates who support bibles in public schools, and I sure as hell wouldn't donate to one 3 days after they had voted to distrubute the KJV to all public school kids.

Say what you will about the corporate influence -- and I agree with most of it, but this looks like its illegal, but not by Time Warner.

[damntexdem]

15. You won't donate to candidates who support bibles in public schools?

Why you election-law felon, you! ;-)

[Mairead]

5. Van Arsdale is unclear on the concept

A problem can arise only when some company/wealthy person DOES give money, not when they DON'T!! Van Arsdale seems to believe that bribes campaign contributions are now mandatory.

I'm sure Molly Ivins will have something to say about this: she loves Texas politicritters.

[Solly Mack]

6. Sounds like extortion to me

he's gonna accuse them of bribery because they didn't give him money?



While donations from some big companies often amount to bribery and pay-offs....doesn't this carry the whiff of extortion?

[salin]

9. Note: sends the letter to prosecutors in TWO counties, but

claims he didn't want to start a "formal" investigation.

Intimatidation? Threat - give now or I push for investigation?

What else can we expect from members of the republican majority house that was initially won by DeLay's strong arm tactics (TRMPAC) ?

The funny thing is the new breed / definition of the "entitlement culture". Or as I see it - emboldened pols who think it is their right to demand extortive "campaign contributions"

[Solly Mack]

11. Yep...exactly

[salin]

7. There is such wide corruption just lurking beneath

the surface on the Hill (DC) and in state capitols across the country. The wild thing is how arrogant these pols have become in the sense of no longer recognizing that this crosses ethical lines and should at least be attempted to be hard to detect.

[leesa]

10. Well, you sleazebags set the rules...to get the dough, you gotta provide

favorable legislation. That's how our government works, ain't it? This is too funny....maximum government corruption.

[damntexdem]

13. Well, Texas pols are a little ethically challenged ...

and on top of that, he's a Republican, so has major ethics deficits. Put it all together, and one can understand why he thinks that refusing to donate to him may be a violation of election laws. ;-)