Two weeks after Mike Allen broke the story of The Washington Post’s planned “salons,” he’s back today with another tale of unseemly buck-raking behavior: the news that a conservative organization made a blatant “pay for play” proposal to FedEx.
Allen’s lede:
The American Conservative Union asked FedEx for a check for $2 million to $3 million in return for the group’s endorsement in a bitter legislative dispute, then flipped and sided with UPS after FedEx refused to pay.
In reply the ACU has sent out a press release, in which it claims the story carries a “false headline,” notes David Weigel at The Washington Independent. Readers can peruse the letters that form the core of Allen’s story, posted at Politico’s site, and judge for themselves.
The story has been picked up around the blogosphere but hasn’t really caused the firestorm Allen’s Post piece did. Which is good news for journalists: we may tend to fare poorly in those polls about “most respected professions,” but people still expect more from us than from lobbyists.
You missed one of the main points of the scoop related to journalism, which is that the ACU offered the writing of op-eds in The Hill for a price. The ACU aren't supposedly lobbyists, but a think-tank that does independent research. If they were honest about the fact that they were lobbyists, they would not have the respect they do and get regular newspaper columns.
#1 Posted by Reid S., CJR on Fri 17 Jul 2009 at 02:34 PM
Speaking of pay for play:
Three House Democratic leaders who were whipping members on the climate change bill gave tens of thousands in campaign cash to party moderates around the time of the 219-212 vote on June 26, according to Federal Election Commission records.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/glennthrush/0709/Big_Dem_cash_dump_on_eve_of_climate_vote.html?showall
But shhhh ..... we dont want to rain on "cap and trade's" parade, so move along folks, nothing to see here.
#2 Posted by Tim Horton, CJR on Fri 17 Jul 2009 at 03:19 PM
people still expect more from us than from lobbyists.
Well, yes, we do expect more, but we rarely actually get more. For example, what is The Hill going to do now that we find that one of their Republican contributors, ACU's David Keene, has been selling OpEds on their pages for the benefit of his organization? Is that just par for the insider's course? Is that kind of selling of opinion columns a common thing in the beltway? That news was greeted with a big yawn, even in this post it wasn't worthy of mention.
On the OT comment, the link provided refutes the commenters comment:
On the other hand, Clyburn also gave at least $14,000 to Democrats who voted no despite his pressure: Mike Arcuri, D-NY ($2,000); Marion Berry, D-Ark. ($2,000); Bobby Bright, D-Ala. ($2,000); Chris Carney, D-Penn. ($2,000); Chet Edwards (D-Tx.), Travis Childers , D-Miss. ($2,000); Parker Griffith, D-Ala. ($2,000) and Harry Mitchell, D-NM ($2,000).
The same pattern held true for House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who gave $4,000 to yes-voting Ohio Democrat Zack Space and the same amount to no-voting Chris Carney.
Which proves what?
#3 Posted by Tom, CJR on Sun 19 Jul 2009 at 02:27 AM