Winter Break WK #1: “Two Cheers for Rod Blagojevich”

December 14, 2008
Op-Ed Columnist

ROD BLAGOJEVICH is the perfect holiday treat for a country fighting off depression. He gift-wraps the ugliness of corruption in the mirthful garb of farce. From a safe distance outside Illinois, it’s hard not to laugh at the “culture of Chicago,” where even the president-elect’s Senate seat is just another commodity to be bought and sold.

But the entertainment is escapist only up to a point. What went down in the Land of Lincoln is just the reductio ad absurdum of an American era where both entitlement and corruption have been the calling cards of power. Blagojevich’s alleged crimes pale next to the larger scandals of Washington and Wall Street. Yet those who promoted and condoned the twin national catastrophes of reckless war in Iraq and reckless gambling in our markets have largely escaped the accountability that now seems to await the Chicago punk nabbed by the United States attorney, Patrick Fitzgerald.

The Republican partisans cheering Fitzgerald’s prosecution of a Democrat have forgotten his other red-letter case in this decade, his conviction of Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney’s chief of staff. Libby was far bigger prey. He was part of the White House Iraq Group, the task force of propagandists that sold an entire war to America on false pretenses. Because Libby was caught lying to a grand jury and federal prosecutors as well as to the public, he was sentenced to two and a half years in prison. But President Bush commuted the sentence before he served a day.

Fitzgerald was not pleased. “It is fundamental to the rule of law that all citizens stand before the bar of justice as equals,” he said at the time.

Not in the Bush era, man. Though the president had earlier vowed to fire anyone involved in leaking the classified identity of a C.I.A. officer, Valerie Plame Wilson — the act Libby tried to cover up by committing perjury — both Libby and his collaborator in leaking, Karl Rove, remained in place.

Accountability wasn’t remotely on Bush’s mind. If anything, he was more likely to reward malfeasance and incompetence, as exemplified by his gifting of the Presidential Medal of Freedom to George Tenet, L. Paul Bremer and Gen. Tommy Franks, three of the most culpable stooges of the Iraq fiasco.

Bush had arrived in Washington vowing to inaugurate a new, post-Clinton era of “personal responsibility” in which “people are accountable for their actions.” Eight years later he holds himself accountable for nothing. In his recent exit interview with Charles Gibson, he presented himself as a passive witness to disastrous events, the Forrest Gump of his own White House. He wishes “the intelligence had been different” about W.M.D. in Iraq — as if his administration hadn’t hyped and manipulated that intelligence. As for the economic meltdown, he had this to say: “I’m sorry it’s happening, of course.”

If you want to trace the bipartisan roots of the morally bankrupt culture that has now found its culmination in our financial apocalypse, a good place to start is late 2001 and 2002, just as the White House contemplated inflating Saddam’s W.M.D. That’s when we learned about another scandal with cooked books, Enron. This was a supreme embarrassment for Bush, whose political career had been bankrolled by the Enron titan Kenneth Lay, or, as Bush nicknamed him back in Texas, “Kenny Boy.”

The chagrined president eventually convened a one-day “economic summit” photo op in August 2002 (held in Waco, Tex., lest his vacation in Crawford be disrupted). But while some perpetrators of fraud at Enron would ultimately pay a price, any lessons from its demise, including a need for safeguards, were promptly forgotten by one and all in the power centers of both federal and corporate governance.

Enron was an energy company that had diversified to trade in derivatives — financial instruments that were bets on everything from exchange rates to the weather. It was also brilliant in devising shell companies that kept hundreds of millions of dollars of debt off the company’s bottom line and away from the prying eyes of shareholders.

Regulators had failed to see the iceberg in Enron’s path and so had Enron’s own accountants at Arthur Andersen, a corporate giant whose parallel implosion had its own casualty list of some 80,000 jobs. Despite Bush’s post-Enron call for “a new ethic of personal responsibility in the business community,” the exact opposite has happened in the six years since. Warren Buffett’s warning in 2003 that derivatives were “financial weapons of mass destruction” was politely ignored. Much larger companies than Enron figured out how to place even bigger and more impenetrable gambles on derivatives, all the while piling up unseen debt. They built castles of air on a far grander scale than Kenny Boy could have imagined, doing so with sheer stupidity and cavalier, greed-fueled carelessness rather than fraud.

The most stupendous example as measured in dollars is Citigroup, now the recipient of potentially the biggest taxpayer bailout to date. The price tag could be some $300 billion — 20 times the proposed first installment of the scuttled Detroit bailout. Citigroup’s toxic derivatives, often tied to subprime mortgages, metastasized without appearing on the balance sheet. Both the company’s former chief executive, Charles O. Prince III, and his senior adviser, Robert Rubin, the former Clinton Treasury secretary, have said they didn’t know the size of the worthless holdings until they’d spiraled into the tens of billions of dollars.

Once again, regulators slept. Once again, credit-rating agencies, typified this time by Moody’s, kept giving a thumbs-up to worthless paper until it was too late. There was just so much easy money to be made, and no one wanted to be left out. As Michael Lewis concludes in his brilliant account of “the end” of Wall Street in Portfolio magazine: “Something for nothing. It never loses its charm.”

But if all bubbles and panics are alike, this one, the worst since the Great Depression, also carried the DNA of our own time. Enron had been a Citigroup client. In a now-forgotten footnote to that scandal, Rubin was discovered to have made a phone call to a former colleague in the Treasury Department to float the idea of asking credit-rating agencies to delay downgrading Enron’s debt. This inappropriate lobbying never went anywhere, but Rubin neither apologized nor learned any lessons. “I can see why that call might be questioned,” he wrote in his 2003 memoir, “but I would make it again.” He would say the same this year about his performance at Citigroup during its collapse.

The Republican side of the same tarnished coin is Phil Gramm, the former senator from Texas. Like Rubin, he helped push through banking deregulation when in government in the 1990s, then cashed in on the relaxed rules by joining the banking industry once he left Washington. Gramm is at UBS, which also binged on credit-default swaps and is now receiving a $60 billion bailout from the Swiss government.

It’s a sad snapshot of our century’s establishment that Rubin has been an economic adviser to Barack Obama and Gramm to John McCain. And that both captains of finance remain unapologetic, unaccountable and still at their banks, which have each lost more than 70 percent of their shareholders’ value this year and have collectively announced more than 90,000 layoffs so far.

The Times calls its chilling investigative series on the financial failures “The Reckoning,” but the reckoning is largely for the rest of us — taxpayers, shareholders, the countless laid-off employees — not the corporate and political leaders who led us into the quagmire. It’s a replay of the Iraq equation: the troops, the Iraqi people and American taxpayers have borne the harshest costs while Bush and company retire to their McMansions.

As our outgoing president passes the buck for his failures — all that bad intelligence — so do leaders in the private and public sectors who enabled the economic debacle. Gramm has put the blame for the subprime fiasco on “predatory borrowers.” Rubin has blamed a “perfect storm” of economic factors, as has Sam Zell, the magnate who bought and maimed the Tribune newspapers in a highly leveraged financial stunt that led to a bankruptcy filing last week. Donald Trump has invoked a standard “act of God” clause to avoid paying a $40 million construction loan on his huge new project in Chicago.

After a while they all start to sound like O. J. Simpson, who when at last held accountable for some of his behavior told a Las Vegas judge this month, “In no way did I mean to hurt anybody.” Or perhaps they are channeling Donald Rumsfeld, whose famous excuse for his failure to secure post-invasion Iraq, “Stuff happens,” could be the epitaph of our age.

Our next president, like his predecessor, is promising “a new era of responsibility and accountability.” We must hope he means it. Meanwhile, we have the governor he leaves behind in Illinois to serve as our national whipping boy, the one betrayer of the public trust who could actually end up paying for his behavior. The surveillance tapes of Blagojevich are so fabulous it seems a tragedy we don’t have similar audio records of the bigger fish who have wrecked the country. But in these hard times we’ll take what we can get.

Published in: on December 14, 2008 at 8:29 am Comments (0)

Winter Break CE WK #1: ” Get away from pay to play: vote”

Special election only way to keep things honest

December 14, 2008

Political leaders in Illinois may still not get it. But we do.

Gov. Blagojevich’s downfall has given the rest of the country a jaw-dropping look at how the world works in the Land of Lincoln.

And you know what? After they got past the nasty language, I doubt that the majority of them were shocked that the fix was in when it came to who would fill President-elect Barack Obama’s Senate seat.

The most shocking aspect of this tawdry affair is that Blagojevich was free to do whatever the heck he wanted.

Far as I can tell, no one complained about the lack of a credible and transparent process.

No one complained that the governor was dragging his heels.

No one ran off screaming: shakedown, shakedown!!

Despite Blagojevich’s arrogant and bullying demeanor, no one dared rat out the governor.

In fact, I would argue that Blagojevich’s colleagues weren’t surprised that he was trying to barter the Senate seat for political favors and campaign donations.

But these same colleagues are likely absolutely shocked by Blagojevich’s tackiness.

But Blagojevich apparently didn’t have time to be subtle.

He has been in the cross hairs of federal prosecutors since he took office in 2003.

Before he’d even warmed the governor’s seat, his own father-in-law, Ald. Dick Mell, who viewed his son-in-law as cocky and ungrateful, said publicly that Blagojevich was trading board appointments for campaign donations. It was beginning to look like “The People” had fallen for a rogue in reformer’s clothing.

Now it seems clear from the complaint that Blagojevich was certain he was going to be impeached and desperately needed a place to land.

“I’ve got this thing and it’s f—— golden, and uh, uh, I’m just not giving it up for f——’ nothing. I’m not gonna do it,” Blagojevich allegedly said in a call that was intercepted by federal prosecutors.

Although the legislative body that was working with Blagojevich was a war zone, no one balked at him picking the next senator?

No one suspected the investigation that was swirling around Blagojevich was a problem?

No one had the courage to demand that the laws be changed so there could be a special election?

I suspect that Blagojevich’s biggest sin, and the thing that has members of the General Assembly gnashing their teeth, is that he was so inept at the sleazy gamesmanship that is an integral part of Illinois politics.

Blagojevich was caught on tape saying: “I want to make money,” words pols dare not speak … on a wiretap.

Because regardless of how we rail against Blagojevich, at the heart of all politics is pay to play.

Yes. There’s a thin line between expectations and shakedown. But do any of us really believe that the people who raise huge sums of money for a particular political candidate aren’t expecting something for their efforts?

Do we really believe that a person who is vested with the power to give away a Senate seat isn’t going to give it to the person who will somehow do him or her the most good?

That’s why the way out of the Senate seat scandal can’t be more of the same.

With all due respect to Lt. Gov. Pat Quinn, he shouldn’t be in a position to pick the next Illinois senator.

He has served six years with the governor and didn’t have a clue as to what was really going on with the Blagojevich administration.

Hopefully, Blagojevich will resign and spare the state further embarrassment.

If he doesn’t, the General Assembly appears to be moving toward impeachment.

And a lawsuit filed by Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan asking the Illinois Supreme Court to remove Blagojevich from office because he is unable to serve would also pave the way for a Quinn pick.

No thank you.

Once Blagojevich is drummed out of office, the race for the Senate seat would begin anew with a fresh round of lobbying and horse trading.

Illinois voters should demand that the state hold a special election.

We’ve heard enough promises of change from enough reformers that we finally get it.

We know how Illinois works.

Winter Break WK #1: ” Kennedy chatter is royally insulting”

Have New York Democrats lost all self-respect? Their excited talk of whether Caroline Kennedy is “interested” in Hillary Clinton’s Senate seat makes you wonder. The late John F. Kennedy’s daughter has made at least one feeler phone call to New York Gov. David Paterson. And Uncle Teddy, the Massachusetts senator, is busy pulling the levers to slip her in. The seat will be vacant upon Clinton’s confirmation as secretary of state.

This unsavory spectacle has been upstaged by the wild drama in Illinois, where Gov. Rod Blagojevich is being accused of trying to sell Barack Obama’s Senate seat. The doings in New York are not blatant corruption, but they are corrosive to our democratic ideals. Lest anyone forget the point of the American Revolution, our representatives are not chosen by hereditary succession, which, to quote Thomas Paine, “is an insult and imposition on posterity.”

Of course, Caroline can ask for whatever she wants. The astounding part is that the idea of such a request hasn’t been laughed out of the news pages.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, against all evidence, touts Caroline as “a very experienced woman.” Her government service starts and ends at raising private money for the New York City schools. While a worthy endeavor, it’s a socialite’s job.

For nearly four decades after her father’s assassination, Caroline commendably resisted the call to become a Democratic Party ornament. Then at the 2000 Democratic convention, she stepped on the stage to the tune of “Camelot” and, with no little presumption, thanked the American people for “sustaining us through the good times, and the difficult ones, and for helping us dream my father’s dream.” Then she introduced “Uncle Teddy.”

Women’s groups have been eager to see Clinton replaced by another female. The Feminist Majority and the National Organization for Women had already endorsed Carolyn Maloney, a congresswoman who has represented parts of Manhattan and Queens for 15 years.

But if Caroline Kennedy wants the job, all bets are off, according to Feminist Majority President Eleanor Smeal. “You’re talking to someone who thinks Ted Kennedy is the most effective senator there,” Smeal actually told the New York Times.

Here you have it. Without a second thought, feminists talk of throwing a seasoned, self-made professional overboard to make room for a Kennedy princess.

Uncle Ted has been reminding Democrats that Caroline would be backed by – as the Times straightforwardly put it – “the Kennedy family’s extensive fundraising network.” That’s nice, but this is New York state, where electing a Democrat requires no miracle.

Set aside whether any seat should be gender-specific. It certainly shouldn’t be genealogy-specific. But that’s one of Caroline’s selling points, at least from the Kennedy perspective. The seat was held for three years by her uncle Robert F. Kennedy, who was killed in 1968. For this reason, RFK’s son Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was also eying the seat for himself. (Perhaps he could be made ambassador to France, instead.)

Hey, what about the Moynihans? Democrat Daniel Patrick Moynihan occupied that Senate chair for more than 20 years. No Moynihan has yet come forward to claim it as a family possession to be handed down unto the generations.

Are we really having this conversation?

Paterson says he hasn’t decided whom he will choose, though he notes that Caroline is “thinking about” the Senate position. According to the Times, “Some influential Democrats have privately suggested that given the buzz set off by Ms. Kennedy’s emergence, the governor would have little choice but to appoint her if she decided she truly wanted the job.”

Actually, he does have a choice.

Can New York Democrats summon up some dignity? We shall see.

Winter Break CE WK #1: “New era, new kind of scandal”

It always seems like fun at the time. Then the photo surfaces.

Two guys, some beer and a cardboard cutout of Hillary Clinton have created fresh grief for the young and uninitiated to Washington Rules.

In the latest blog scandal-ette, Jon Favreau, a Holy Cross valedictorian and 27-year-old wunderkind speechwriter for Barack Obama, was captured clutching the prospective secretary of state’s, um, pectoral area, while a fellow reveler, wearing an “Obama Staff” T-shirt, nuzzles Clinton’s ear and holds a beer bottle to her smiling lips.

The photo popped up on Facebook for a couple of hours before being removed … too late. The moment was captured and the rest was instant and persistent history. On the Information Highway, alas, roadkill is never really dead.

One day, Favreau was the golden boy of silken tongue. The next, he was just another dimwitted dude acting dumb.

Feminists groups such as NOW and the New Agenda are outraged that Clinton – or at least her image – is being treated disrespectfully by the boys. Conservatives are outraged that there’s not enough outrage, as would be the case were the party boys Republicans.

An attorney wrote on the Feminist Law Professors blog that Favreau should not be excused for “youthful indiscretion” and questioned Obama’s judgment “in continuing to rely professionally on someone so young and irresponsible and offensively sexist.”

FitzWalter, quickly, my smelling salts! Oh, and dust off the guillotine while you’re at it.

Only Hillary Clinton has made light of the “incident,” hereinafter known as Night of BBB (Boys Being Boys). In an e-mail to the Washington Post’s Al Kamen, a Clinton adviser wrote: “Senator Clinton is pleased to learn of Jon’s obvious interest in the State Department, and is currently reviewing his application.”

Hear, hear. Nipping nonsense in the bud is an essential skill for a secretary of state, and Clinton used her shears deftly. If anyone recognizes a little harmless male sport, it would be the bride of President “Is.” One thing is harmful; another thing isn’t.

Nevertheless, Clinton’s response has fallen short of what some deem appropriate. CNN’s Campbell Brown charged Clinton with forfeiting her feminist cred, especially after issuing her own charges of sexism throughout the presidential campaign. Now that Clinton’s a member of the Obama team, she suddenly has a sense of humor?

All of the above would be nonsense except that almost nothing any longer is. Nonsense is the new standard for controversy; and even party shenanigans qualify.

Puritans and prohibitionists would adore our brave new world of shutterbug infamy. The fact is, no one’s having fun anymore, especially in the nation’s capital, where one can’t afford to let the tongue slip or risk being caught in the crosshairs of a cell camera.

Political veterans have learned, sometimes the hard way. This new generation – the Obama cohort – needs to review the Rules. Smart grown-ups in Washington don’t get drunk in public. A glass of wine is a prop that rarely gets drained.

At a small, private dinner recently, where wine flowed freely (and no one took pictures), conversation turned to the day when politicos and others routinely enjoyed three-martini lunches. How did they do that? Not just the drinking, but the escape from scrutiny?

It was all about time. In low-tech America, people had time to sober up. There was no e-mail light blinking to demand your immediate attention, no 24/7 news producers demanding instant responses to urgent claims and counterclaims. Several hours – or even a few days – could pass before anyone had to Do Something.

For all the gratification and convenience of real-time everything, downtime was underappreciated while it lasted. Even 10 years ago, BBB would have been vaguely recalled over Bloody Marys – and quickly forgotten. Now young men goofing around are immortalized as misogynist maulers, portentous reminders to the rest of us that the gender wars won’t end until irreverence and humor are dead.

In the meantime, feminists might channel their free-ranging anger toward, say, Iran, where yet another woman recently was sentenced to death by stoning for adultery.

And Facebookers might heed the saloon owner’s orders: Check your weapons at the door. Cameras are lethal.

Published in: on at 8:07 am Comments (6)