Catastrophe - Dick Morris [97]
Of course not.
And Rubin says they didn’t even know that Kennedy was involved in the deal.
Of course not.
Rubin even disputes the $200,000 fee Kennedy Jr. billed the State of Massachusetts, claiming that Kennedy had nothing to do with the deal.341
What’s going on there? It’s impossible to say.
Can’t Ted Kennedy, Jr., find something to do that doesn’t involve his father?
These days, Kennedy is still involved in private financing, including other health care ventures. And he’s a prominent speaker at business conferences predicting what will happen on specific health care issues before the federal government—including the business ramifications of health care reform.
Once again, he’s taking advantage of his closeness to the core of power on health care issues. And no doubt he’s figured out ways to turn his position to his financial advantage.
It’s a powerful position indeed. Information on the specifics of the health care plan in each sector of the industry can change markets, make or lose millions, and lead to big fees.
Ted Kennedy, Jr., has figured it all out.
It’s all in a name.
10
STEALTH LOBBYISTS
The Former Congressional Leaders Who Secretly Influence Federal Policies and Spending
Please don’t call them lobbyists. You might upset them.
They’re not lobbyists! Not at all.
They call themselves something entirely different: “strategic advisers,” for instance, or “policy advisers.” Sometimes they’re just “government relations consultants.” But they’re definitely not lobbyists.
Why would you even think such a thing? Simply because they work for lobbying firms to help get legislation passed in Congress?
Here’s a helpful translation of this novel insider Washingtonspeak:
Terms like “strategic advisers,” “policy advisers,” and “government relations consultants” refer to the well-heeled people—usually high-level former government officials or relatives of powerful lawmakers or former presidential campaign gurus—who charge exorbitant fees to corporations, foreign governments and other foreign interests, labor unions, trade associations—and anyone else who will secretly pay them—to try to pass (or kill) special-interest legislation or get money for favorite projects.
Think that sounds a lot like what a lobbyist does? You’re right. If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, and acts like a duck, it’s a duck. And if it acts like a lobbyist, is paid like a lobbyist, and works for a lobbying firm or to influence legislation, it’s a lobbyist.
Except, of course, in Washington.
The lobbyists who wrote the legislation to regulate lobbying actually managed to protect their little game by carving out several rather ridiculous exceptions to the definition of a lobbyist. For example, if you don’t actually call or write to a member of Congress or the Executive Branch or their staff to get legislation passed, you’re not a lobbyist—even if you push for that legislation in plenty of other ways. You can be paid to offer advice on whether specific legislation should be passed or killed; sit with your client and draft legislation; prepare a list of talking points; create a list of all of the people who should be contacted to further the legislation; organize other people and groups to contact legislators; make appointments with key staff and legislators; speak to reporters about the merits of your client’s position; track the progress of the bills; even draft revisions to bills and amendments.
None of that counts as lobbying. Not in Washington.
That’s what happens when the goats are put in charge of guarding the garbage.
The “advisers” who thrive under these rules righteously claim that they’re not lobbyists. In fact, they’re stealth lobbyists—working to get legislation passed while these regulations shield them from the reporting and disclosure requirements of all other lobbyists, subverting the entire purpose of lobbying disclosure requirements.
It’s time to out them.
They need to be treated like any other lobbyists—regardless of what professional name they give to their work.
They need to disclose