Tribes linked to Abramoff gave to Allard, Campbell

[Okwes]

Tribes linked to Abramoff gave to Allard, Campbell

Wednesday, January 04, 2006
By GARY HARMON
The Daily Sentinel
www.gjsentinel.com/news/content/news/stories/2006/01/04/1_4_6a_
Abramoff.html

Seven Indian tribes with gaming interests and ties to fallen
Washington lobbyist Jack Abramoff contributed to two Colorado
senators' political campaigns, records say.

Sen. Wayne Allard and former Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, both
Republicans, were listed among hundreds of officials on both sides of
the aisle and political parties that received contributions from
people or organizations with ties to Abramoff.

Allard and Campbell said they had no dealings with Abramoff, and
Campbell said he narrowly dodged a meeting with Abramoff during his
days as chairman of the Senate Indian Affairs Committee.

A spokesman for Sen. Wayne Allard said that to connect Allard with
Abramoff on the basis of the tribes' contributions would be
to "stretch the truth a bit."

Listing Allard among hundreds of other recipients of contributions by
Abramoff, his associates or tribal clients amounted to a "classic
case of guilt by association," said Allard's chief of staff, Sean
Conway.

Abramoff pleaded guilty to three federal felonies Tuesday.

Among his lobbying clients were several tribes with casinos on tribal
lands.

Two tribes gave $4,000 to Allard in the 2002 election cycle, and six
contributed to Campbell's campaign between 2000 and 2004.

During his years as chairman of the Indian Affairs Committee,
Campbell said Abramoff and some associates sought an appointment with
him.

One of his staffers warned him about Abramoff, Campbell said, calling
him "a fast-talker and pretty slippery. In retrospect, I'm glad I
never met with him."

Indian tribes likely will suffer from Abramoff's fall, Campbell said.

"It's weird and kind of tragic," he said, calling Abramoff
a "scoundrel" who fleeced tribes and "made elected officials gun-shy
about Indians now."

Federal records show Abramoff and an associate were paid more than
$80 million between 2001 and 2004 by American Indian tribes with
casinos.

Contributions to Campbell were:

$1,000 from the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians in California;

$2,000 from the Chitimacha Tribe of Louisiana;

$1,000 from the Coushatta Tribe of Louisiana.

$2,000 from the Pueblo of Sandia in New Mexico.

$4,000 in two separate $2,000 contributions from the Saginaw Chippewa
Indian Tribe of Michigan.

$2,000 from the Tigua Indian Reservation in Texas.

The contributions were no different than any other political
contributions, Campbell said.

"I got contributions from the tribes, but not from (Abramoff),"
Campbell said.

Allard received $2,000 from the Tigua Indian Reservation and $2,000
from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians.

He and Campbell were listed on the Center for Responsive Politics'
Opensecrets.org Web site as having received contributions from
organizations with ties to Abramoff.

Conway said he was unaware of any of Allard's campaign contributors
having ties to Abramoff and that a search of contributors failed to
reveal an immediate, obvious connection to Abramoff.

He did, however, confirm the tribes' contributions.

[blackcrowheart]

Carper to donate Abramoff money after all
Sen. Tom Carper maintains donations to his campaign were legal.


By JENNIFER BROOKS
News Journal Washington Bureau

01/06/2006
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Tom Carper, D-Del., announced Thursday that he would donate to charity all of the money in his campaign coffers that had even a remote link to scandal-plagued former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Carper's staff delivered a check for $7,077 to the Wilmington offices of the Boys & Girls Clubs of Delaware. The check reflected not only the $4,000 in contributions Carper received from Indian tribes once represented by Abramoff, but also contributions from two Democratic lobbyists from the Washington lobbying firm where Abramoff used to work -- lobbyists Carper said he had known and respected for 20 years.

In a statement, Carper said the donations were legal and had nothing to do with the former Washington power broker who pleaded guilty this week to fraud, tax evasion and conspiracy to bribe public officials.

"However, in order to dispel any perception that there has been any wrongdoing, I have directed my campaign committee and PAC to make a charitable donation today to the Boys & Girls Club of Delaware," Carper said. "I sincerely hope this will not reflect negatively on the integrity of the organizations or individuals who have made legal contributions to my campaign in good faith."
Carper told The News Journal that one of the tribes, the Agua Caliente tribe of Palm Springs, Calif., donated to his campaign after they broke their ties with Abramoff.

He said the other donation, from the Saginaw Chippewa of Michigan in 2004, came after he met with tribal leaders at the 2004 Democratic National Convention and, apparently, made a good impression.

Nevertheless, the guilt-by-association of the Abramoff name prompted Carper to distance himself from the donations.

"I just decided it's not worth it. Let's give it to someone. Find a good cause and give them the money," Carper said.

Carper joins a stampede of legislators rushing to rid themselves of any financial tie to Abramoff, who is cooperating with an investigation into his dealings with Congress.

The Center for Responsive Politics has tracked more than $4.4 million in contributions from Abramoff and his associates to some 240 members of Congress. The contributions range as high as six figures for some lawmakers and for both parties' congressional fundraising organizations.

'This money is hot'

Among the names on their list is the late Sen. Bill Roth, R-Del., who accepted $4,000 in contributions from three tribes during the 2000 election cycle.

"The vast majority of this money came to these members legally and was disclosed legally," said Massie Ritsch, the center's communication director. "Politically though, this money is hot. They don't want to have anything to do with it."

Carper's wife, Martha Ann, is a board member of the Boys & Girls Clubs of Delaware.

The money will be used for the annual RiverFest, which raises money for all of the state's clubs. At the Oak Orchard Boys & Girls Club in Sussex County, which serves children from the Nanticoke Indian tribe, organizers hope to raise enough money to fill the club's library and computer lab.

Carper's turnabout comes a day after the Delaware Republican Party said it would donate to charity $1,000 the party received in 2003 from former Abramoff partner Michael Scanlon, a Rehoboth Beach resident who served as former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's press secretary before becoming Abramoff's business partner. DeLay, R-Texas, said he would return $15,000 of the $30,500 he received from Abramoff and his associates.

In November, Scanlon pleaded guilty to conspiring to bribe public officials and is cooperating with the congressional corruption probe.

Contact Jennifer Brooks at [e-mail].

[blackcrowheart]

Defamation of Indians on trial

by William Reed
www.sfbayview.com/010406/defamation010406.shtml

A blockbuster Washington, D.C., scandal will produce racial epithets
aplenty. Jack Abramoff and an associate currently face charges of
conspiracy and fraud, allegedly having lied about assets to secure
financing to purchase a fleet of gambling boats. Evidence in
Abramoff's case illustrates the American establishment's continual
condolence of discrimination and will produce congressional
corruption and criminal cases against up to 20 lawmakers and staff
members.

Annals of Washington politicians contain many grubby chapters of
unscrupulous behavior toward Native Americans. But in terms of sheer
greed and exploitation, few can match the tale of Jack Abramoff's and
Michael Scanlon's milking of half a dozen Indian tribes newly
enriched by gambling revenues. Tribes were bilked of vast sums to
protect the casino gambling operations that are their financial
lifeline – in return they got called scandalous names and empty
promises of access to corridors of government power.

In late 2001, Abramoff and associates backed a grassroots lobbying
campaign that led to closure of the Tigua Casino in El Paso. Then
they contacted the tribe and offered to use their influence on
Capitol Hill to get the same casino reopened. All the while they were
in that business, they heaped scorn on the Indians, referring to
tribal officials as "morons," "troglodytes" and "idiots."

For months, prosecutors in the nation's capital focused on whether
Abramoff defrauded his Indian tribe clients of millions of dollars
and used improper influence on members of Congress. The lone Native
American in the Senate, Ben Nighthorse Campbell from Colorado, told
Scanlon, "For 400 years, people have been cheating Indians in this
country, so you're not the first. It's just a shame, in this
enlightened day, that you've added a new dimension to a shameful
legacy."

The American deception will be to call Abramoff a "jerk,"
contending "racist" doesn't accurately characterize his remark.
They'll just say there's no evidence that he actually believes Native
Americans are "troglodytes" or "monkeys" or that their race is
inferior or his race is superior.

Sadly, some Blacks will acquiesce and join into such deceptive
debates. The reality is that bigotry, racial discrimination and
economic exploitation still exist for Native Americans – big time.
Racism permeates the country for African Americans, but we're in the
back of the bus when in comes to Native Americans.

The reality is, the North American continent is comprised of ghetto
and reservation systems. Native Americans have been asking for
justice since initial contact with whites. Their population prior to
European contact was greater than 12 million. Four centuries later,
their numbers have dropped to 237,000.

The U.S. has broken every single treaty it made with its natives.
Discovery of gold in California in 1848 prompted American migration
and expansion into the West. The greed of Americans for money and
land was rejuvenated with the Homestead Act of 1862.

Recently a movement among Indians is helping them regain their
cultural identity and see things through the lens of their own
culture. Also, gaming has emerged as a major catalyst for Native
Americans' community development. After decades of poverty and high
unemployment, gaming provides sources of employment and governmental
revenues and a promising enterprise for tribes to achieve self-
sufficiency.

The Indians thought Congress was there to help. In a five-year span,
ending in early 2004, Indian tribes represented by Abramoff
contributed millions of dollars in casino income to congressional
campaigns, often routing the money through political action
committees for conservative members of Congress who opposed gambling.
If we allow it to degrade to just a debate over words, that will
allow too many Americans, Black and white, to pardon establishment
bilking of the Indians.

Economic power is a combination of wealth, income, status and
occupation, access to education and health care, connections and
geographic and social mobility. These in turn translate into
political power, organization and access to media, business and
government. A great deal of the damage done by racism is done through
the economic system. It's time for people of color to pay attention,
see how we're too often denied or relieved of economic power in
discriminatory ways.

William Reed is president of Black Press International
(www.BlackPressInternational.com). Email him at
[e-mail].

[Okwes]

Fwd: from Mike Graham of _www.UnitedNativeAmerica.com_
(http://www.unitednativeamerica.com/) :

Please read the report below to fully understand the Abramoff issue in
taking Indian tribes money. Republicans in office have been caught in their action
against Indians. The Abramoff scandal is about the republican party!!! Not
about Indians doing wrong!! American Indians have been "HAD" again!!!
WASHINGTON -- George W. Bush gave the nation's gambling industry plenty of
reason to fear his presidency.
He moved to shut down an Indian-run casino while governor of Texas. He
declared in a widely circulated state report that ''Casino gambling is not OK. It
has ruined the lives of too many adults, and it can do the same thing to our
children." He wooed religious conservatives by boasting in a presidential
debate about his ''strong antigambling record."
But as president, Bush has not spoken out against gambling. After promising
not to take money from gambling interests, Bush's campaign fund accepted large
contributions from gambling-related sources. His 2001 inaugural committee
raised at least $300,000 from gambling interests, including gifts from
MGM/Mirage, Sands, and a leading slot-machine maker. Bush later appeared at a Las
Vegas casino for a fund-raiser for his reelection campaign.
Bush's retreat from his antigambling rhetoric came as Republican lobbyists
and activist groups collected tens of millions of dollars from Indian tribes
seeking to preserve their casinos. Now those payments are the focus of Senate
and Justice Department investigations.
Bush is not the subject of the investigations and denied through a spokesman
having anything to do with aiding Indian casino interests. But Bush's aides
acknowledge that the president met with Indian gaming leaders at the White
House in annual sessions over a four-year period that were arranged by antitax
crusader Grover Norquist, in some cases after tribes contributed to Norquist's
organization. Norquist and the White House say casinos were not discussed.
As the investigations continue, the politics of gambling are crucial to
understanding how some Republican leaders and organizations have profited from
the industry. When Bush was a firm opponent of gambling, his position opened the
door for GOP lobbyists to court gaming tribes worried about a tough
administration policy. After Bush dropped his antigambling rhetoric, lobbyists
touted their access, and fund-raising from Indian tribes grew exponentially.
Among the prominent figures who have come under the scrutiny of Senate and
federal investigators are Norquist, whose organization received $1.5 million
from tribes and fought a tax on Indian casinos; lobbyist Jack Abramoff, a top
Bush fund-raiser who earned millions of dollars in fees as a consultant to
gaming tribes; and Ralph Reed, the former director of the Christian Coalition
who allegedly used some money from Indian gaming tribes to fund his efforts to
close down rival casinos and lotteries. House majority leader Tom DeLay, who
has said he is strongly antigambling, also has drawn media scrutiny because
of his ties to Abramoff and opposition to an Indian gaming tax.
''We had great hopes and expectations when Bush was elected," said Tom Grey,
a Methodist minister who heads the National Coalition Against Legalized
Gambling. But now ''gambling has become the feeding trough" for politicians, he
said.
Grey called on Bush to take the lead in returning gambling contributions and
to speak out against casinos.
''To have nothing come out of his mouth is tantamount to saying, 'It's OK,
you can operate business as usual vis-a-vis gambling,' " Grey said.
Dana Perino, a spokeswoman for the White House, said Bush has not spoken out
against gambling because it ''is primarily a state-level issue, and his
record as governor reflects that."
But many Indian tribes believed they had much to fear from Washington, and
much to gain from hiring lobbyists who boasted of their access to the
Republican leadership -- all the way up to the White House.
A candidate shows his hand to religious conservatives
As Bush prepared to run for president, he hoped to avoid a mistake that hurt
the reelection bid of his father. George H. W. Bush felt uncomfortable wooing
religious conservatives. The younger Bush worked closely with religious
conservatives, especially Reed, who had been quoted in Business Week in 1998 as
warning that ''any presidential candidate who receives casino support is going
to come under heavy fire."
Bush, in presenting his antigambling credentials during the 2000 presidential
campaign, cited his efforts to close the Speaking Rock Casino run by a tribe
called the Tigua in El Paso. The same casino would later become a focus of
the investigations into whether lobbyists defrauded Indian tribes. Though Bush
was consistent in his opposition to the casino, the Tiguas became an early
example of how GOP lobbyists played on tribes' desperate desire for influence
with Republicans to reap millions of dollars in fees and solicit
contributions to conservative groups.
The Tiguas were among the poorest Indians in the United States. After
Congress passed legislation in 1988 clearing the way for Indian gaming, the
1,300-member Tigua tribe opened the Speaking Rock Casino, which at one point made an
estimated $60 million in annual profits. Some of the money went for
healthcare, education, and jobs; the tribe's unemployment and dropout rates went from
more than 50 percent to nearly zero.
But Texas officials said the casino was illegal because the Tiguas were
recognized under a federal law that required state approval for gambling. The
Tiguas countered that Texas had forfeited its right to oppose Indian gaming
because the state already was in the gambling business. Texas was collecting
hundreds of millions of dollars annually from a state lottery, with the money
boosting education efforts that Bush would eventually highlight in his
presidential bid.
The Tiguas even ran an ad that said: ''Dear Governor: Get your own house in
order before you pick on Native Americans."
Fearing that Bush would try to shut the casino down, the Tiguas poured tens
of thousands of dollars into the campaign of the Democrat running against Bush
in 1998, Gary Mauro.
The move may have backfired. After being reelected, Bush redoubled his
earlier efforts to shut down the Tigua casino. He arranged for a special
appropriation to help cover the cost for the state's attorney general, John Cornyn,
now a US senator, to take legal action against the tribe.
Eventually, the effort to shut down the Tiguas would attract two figures who
loom large into the current investigation into lobbying for Indian gaming
tribes: Jack Abramoff and Ralph Reed.
Reed, the man who had earlier declared that no presidential contender should
take gambling money, now acknowledges that payments for some of his efforts
to stop the Tigua casino came from rival Indian gaming tribes.
Abramoff, who helped arrange for the rival tribes to give the money to Reed's
group, turned around and offered his services to the Tiguas -- for $4.2
million in fees split between himself and a partner, the Senate investigation
found.
''What sets this tale apart, what makes it truly extraordinary, is the extent
and degree of the apparent exploitation and deceit," Senator John McCain,
Republican of Arizona, said in opening the Senate investigation. ''Even in this
town, where huge sums are routinely paid as the price of political access,
the figures are astonishing."
Over the years, Abramoff and his partner in Indian gaming consulting would
receive more than $60 million in fees from six different tribes seeking to
advance their gambling interests, the Senate investigation found. Abramoff also
told the tribes to give money to political candidates and organizations.
Eventually, the tribes gave $3 million, two-thirds of it to Republicans. Now, the
Senate Indian Affairs Committee, the Interior Department, and the FBI are
looking into whether the tribes were defrauded and how all the money was spent.
Ties to Massachusetts for Abramoff, Norquist
Abramoff and Norquist met in Massachusetts in 1980, when Abramoff was at
Brandeis University and organizing college Republicans. Norquist, who grew up in
Weston, was attending Harvard Business School and also organizing Republicans
on campus.
The bond between Abramoff and Norquist grew deeper when the two worked in
Massachusetts for the 1980 Republican presidential candidate, Ronald Reagan, who
carried the Bay State by about 6,000 votes.
The following year, Abramoff and Norquist came to Washington together to lead
the Republican Party's national effort to recruit college students. Reed
soon joined what became a tight circle of friends; eventually, Reed would
introduce Abramoff to Abramoff's future wife.
By 2000, when they worked in various capacities on behalf of Bush's campaign
for the presidency, the trio were leading figures in the Republican Party.
Reed, who had built the Christian Coalition into a powerful grass-roots group,
helped recruit religious conservatives for Bush. Norquist, who headed the
leading antitax group in Washington, rallied economic conservatives behind Bush.
Abramoff, who was a GOP lobbyist, gave money to Bush's campaign.
Norquist and Abramoff had already advocated on behalf of Indian gaming. In
1997, when antigambling fever was high within the Republican Party, some GOP
leaders, including the former House Ways and Means chairman, Bill Archer of
Texas, had called for a tax on Indian casino profits. Abramoff, working as a
consultant to the tribes, and Norquist, who saw the tax on Indian casino profits
as another way for the government to raise taxes, helped persuade key
members of Congress to kill the idea, which died in Archer's committee.
Lottery sparks a call for referendum in Ala.
While Norquist and Abramoff were known in Republican circles as defenders of
Indian gaming, Reed was not. As one of the nation's best-known religious
conservatives, Reed took a staunchly antigambling position. But behind the
scenes, he worked through Norquist and Abramoff to finance his antigambling
campaigns with contributions from those who stood to benefit the most from seeing
casinos and lotteries closed -- Indian tribes running rival casinos.
In 1999, Don Siegelman, the Democratic governor of Alabama, proposed a
lottery that would have pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into public schools
and even provided free college education for most Alabama high school
graduates.
Reed, rallying religious conservatives, set out to try to defeat it, as well
as a separate proposal that could have expanded commercial gambling in
Alabama. Antigambling efforts are notoriously underfunded. But Reed, in a move that
solidified his star power among religious conservatives, quickly raised
$1.15 million for antigambling groups that was used for ads and telephone banks.
The money came from Norquist's group, Americans for Tax Reform. Norquist told
the Globe recently that he, in turn, got the funds from an Indian gaming
tribe in Mississippi that feared competition in neighboring Alabama. Norquist
said that his group sent $850,000 to the Alabama Christian Coalition and
$300,000 to Citizens Against Legalized Lottery. He said he did not tell the groups
where the money came from. Both groups have policies against accepting
gambling money.
Reed and Norquist stressed that the money could have come from the tribe's
nongaming funds.
At the time Reed raised the money, he was working for Abramoff's law firm,
doing political and public-relations work, and Abramoff represented the
Mississippi tribe.
When the lottery was defeated in a state referendum, it may have seemed like
a win-win situation: Reed won a fight against gambling, and Abramoff appeared
to have satisfied a tribal client worried about competition.
But Siegelman was devastated, and saw no distinction in whether or not the
money came from a tribe's gaming receipts.
''I don't know how they can sleep at night taking money from the Indian
casinos to deny Alabama schoolchildren an opportunity to reach their God-given
potential through education," Siegelman said.
Effort to close casino continues after inaugural
Just as Reed was winning the Alabama fight, Bush and Cornyn were pursuing
their effort to close the Speaking Rock Casino run by the Tigua tribe. On the
campaign trail for the White House, Bush emphasized his opposition to Speaking
Rock as an example of his moral qualms with gambling.
When Bush entered the White House in 2001, the legal effort to close the
Tigua casino was left to Cornyn. Abramoff and Reed played leading roles in
building political opposition to the tribe.
Abramoff had a client, the Coushatta tribe of Louisiana, that feared
competition from Indian gaming in next-door Texas. The Coushattas were Abramoff's
most lucrative money source; they paid $26 million in fees to Abramoff's
partner in Indian-gaming deals, some of which was then funneled back to Abramoff,
according to the Senate investigation.
Some of that money was sent by the Abramoff team to Reed, who was helping
lead the campaign to close the casino, according to Senate testimony. He
arranged for radio ads, mailings, and church-led protests. A spokesman said Reed
''was approached about assisting with a broad-based coalition opposed to casino
gambling . . . and we were happy to do so." On Feb. 11, 2002, Cornyn won his
case against the tribe, and the casino closed.
Abramoff then launched an effort to get hired by the Tiguas, vowing that he
could use his connections to top Republicans to get it reopened. He never
mentioned to tribal leaders that his firm was also paying Reed, who had just run
the campaign to get the casino closed.
Privately, Abramoff told Reed his view about the tribe in an e-mail obtained
as part of the Senate investigation.
''I wish those moronic Tiguas were smarter in their political contributions,"
Abramoff wrote to Reed, referring to the tribal support for Democrats. ''I'd
love us to get our mitts on that moolah!! Oh well, stupid folks get wiped
out."
The next day, Abramoff and his partner in the Indian gaming deals, Michael
Scanlon, who worked at a separate company, boarded a private jet to El Paso,
where they met with a tribal lawyer.
Abramoff laid out an elaborate plan. He offered to work for free, but he
wanted the Tiguas to pay Scanlon $4.2 million. That would allow Abramoff to
avoid registering as a lobbyist for the Tiguas, which might have upset competing
tribal clients. Scanlon eventually sent half of the $4.2 million to Abramoff,
Senate investigators found.
Abramoff's calling card was his tie to Republican Party leaders. He boasted
to the tribal leaders about his access to Bush, and noted that his law firm
based in Miami, Greenberg Traurig, worked on the Florida case that helped put
Bush in the White House.
Scanlon, who sat by Abramoff's side as they met with the Tiguas, had
previously boasted of Abramoff's ties to the president. ''Jack has a relationship
with the president," Scanlon told a Florida newspaper in 2001. ''He doesn't
have a bat phone or anything, but if he wanted an appointment, he would have
one."
Abramoff, in turn, boasted that Scanlon had access to his former boss, DeLay,
the House majority leader.
The Tigua tribe's lieutenant governor, Carlos Hisa, said that Abramoff told
him that he had special influence with the president. Abramoff said he was
''close" to Bush, and that the president asked him for recommendations to fill
key positions at the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Hisa told the Globe.
Perino, Bush's spokeswoman, said in response about Abramoff: ''While they may
have met on occasion, the president does not know him."
In a later letter to a Tigua official, Abramoff wrote: ''While we are
Republicans, and normally want all Republicans to prevail in electoral challenges,
this ill-advised decision on the part of the Republican leadership in Texas
must not stand, and we intend to right this using, in part, Republican leaders
from Washington."
The key to the deal, Abramoff told the Tiguas in e-mails, was that they had
to start supporting Republicans with significant contributions. He laid out a
plan for the Tiguas to make contributions to various Republican politicians
and committees. For example, the Tiguas gave $90,000 to three national
Republican committees in March 2002, just after the tribe met with Abramoff,
according to federal records.
Eventually, Abramoff sketched out an elaborate deal involving contributions
to key members of Congress, but though the tribe came through with some of the
contributions, the deal fell apart. The casino remained closed.
Bush rival portrayed as friend to casinos
The fight over the Tiguas may have helped Bush win over religious
conservatives during his 2000 campaign. In the Republican primaries, some of Bush's
allies portrayed McCain, his chief opponent, as too close to gambling interests,
and spokesman Scott McClellan was quoted as saying that Bush did not accept
contributions from ''gambling interests." But Bush accepted $125,000 from
gambling interests in 2000 and collected $345,000 in 2004, according to the
nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. (John F. Kerry, the 2004 Democratic
nominee, received $100,000.)
Perino, the White House spokeswoman, said McClellan had been referring to
Bush's refusal to take money from political action committees, known as PACs.
Bush ''does not accept contributions from gaming PACs. Individuals have the
right to express their own opinions and their own views," she said. The center
said that $11,000 of Bush's gambling-related contributions came from PACs.
Many of Bush's other gambling-related contributions came from top casino
executives, the center said.
As for the $300,000 raised by the 2001 Inaugural Committee, a Republican
National Committee spokesperson said the inaugural organizers did not have to
abide by the campaign's rules.
By the time Bush entered the White House, his antigambling rhetoric was gone.
Contributions from gambling interests to Republican committees and
candidates jumped from $4 million in 1998 to $7.5 million in 2002, bringing the GOP up
to parity with Democrats, who previously collected the bulk of such money,
according to the center.
The president even attended a 2003 Bush-Cheney fund-raiser at the Venetian
Resort Hotel and Casino in Las Vegas, telling the crowd: ''It's such an honor
to be here."
Sig Rogich, who represents casino interests and has long been close to the
Bush family, served as Bush's Nevada chairman in 2000 and co-hosted the 2003
fund-raiser. In a telephone interview, he said Bush ''told me personally
several times he didn't have any problem with gaming, per se. It was his opinion
that it belonged in Las Vegas; it should be a destination experience. It
shouldn't just be a bunch of slot machines on every corner in every city."
While Bush's spokeswoman said the president considers gambling a state issue,
some antigambling activists maintain that Bush has power to stop the
expansion of casinos. Representative Frank Wolf, Republican of Virginia, wrote Bush
last month, imploring him to impose a two-year moratorium on recognition of
Indian tribes so that Congress could review the impact of Indian casinos. Bush
has not responded, according to Wolf's spokesman.
At the same time, Bush maintained ties with some of those who are now key
figures in the investigation into lobbying for Indian tribes.
Reed played a key role in Bush's reelection campaign by serving as the
Southeast regional chairman. Reed, who is planning to run for lieutenant governor
of Georgia, has cooperated with Senate investigators and is providing records
of his transactions to the Indian Affairs Committee. His spokesman confirmed
that federal officials have subpoenaed Reed's records.
Norquist was an influential adviser to Bush campaign strategists in 2004 and
remains a key player on tax policy, holding weekly meetings with
conservatives that often include White House officials. Norquist acknowledged earlier thi
s month that he had arranged annual meetings with Bush over a four-year
period at which Indian tribal chiefs discussed tax policy. He said the tribal
leaders did not discuss casinos with the president. Norquist has spoken with
Senate investigators but said he has not turned over a list of donors to his
organizations, citing confidentiality.
Abramoff, meanwhile, appears to be the central focus of the probe. Federal
investigators are looking at whether he defrauded the tribes, and how Abramoff
collected a reported $6 million -- much of it from Indian tribes -- for a
group called the Capital Athletic Foundation. The foundation used most of the
money to fund a private school established by Abramoff, who invoked his right
against self-incrimination when grilled by members of the Senate Indian
Affairs Committee.
Bush has not spoken on the matter.
© Copyright 2005 Boston Globe
_http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0603-08.htm_
(http://www.commondreams.org/headlines05/0603-08.htm)

[Okwes]

Former BIA director Kevin Gover speaks on press coverage of Abramoff
and Native Issues

www.prometheus6.org/node/12099
professorkim.blogspot.com/2006/01/former-bia-director-kevin-
gover-speaks.html

Few people can speak about the issues affecting Native Americans with
more authority, and from more perspectives than Kevin Gover, a
professor of Law at the University of Arizona who is also the former
Assistant Secretary of the Interior, responsible for running the
Bureau of Indian Affairs during the Clinton administration. He has
also been ranked among the most prominent Indian lawyers and
lobbyists in the United States.

During his tenure as BIA Secretary, Gover apologized for the BIA's
history of abuses to Indian tribes. There were also major political
battles over subjects such as the process for granting federal
recognition to tribes.

We started our conversation with my asking Gover to identify the most
pressing issues facing Native peoples. Gover broke the issues into
two categories: negotiating with the federal government for the right
to self-determination -- and confronting "social pathologies" within
Indian country. Those pathologies include substance abuse, domestic
violence, and the sexual exploitation of children.

Gover said that these pathologies are rooted in the history of
brutality against Native Americans, but it was up to today's Indians
to find ways of overcoming that history. Shame is one factor that
keeps Indians from talking about the problems, he said. That's why he
shares his own experiences as a recovering alcoholic.

Media does a "miserable job" of covering Indian tribes' role in
Abramoff scandal

Gover cites the coverage of fallen super-lobbyist Jack Abramoff as an
example of the problem that journalists have in covering Native
American issues. He argues that the compexity of Indian issues leads
too many reporters to substitute agenda-driven reporting for fair,
comprehensive coverage. Early in the scandal, he said, the tribes
that Abramoff "ripped off" were presented as victims; more recently,
the tone has bas been more negative. What gets lost, Gover says, is
that that the Indian tribes involved in the Abramoff scandal
represent only a tiny fraction of Indian tribes.

Gover talked about the prospect of lobbying reform and ways in which
the right kind of lobbying can benefit Native Americans. The federal
government can "be more creative and more forthcoming" in helping
tribes address their internal social problems.

In the final segment, we talked about the invisble Native American
victime of Hurricane Katrina, the lack of independence of Native
media and how journalists can do a better job of covering Indian
issues.

[blackcrowheart]

Indian Group Snubs 'Tainted' Abramoff Cash

POSTED: 5:37 pm PST January 18, 2006
www.nbc4.tv/news/6225858/detail.html

WASHINGTON -- A Native American group is rejecting a six-figure
donation from a Republican lawmaker.

"To us it's tainted money," said a member of the Montana-Wyoming
Tribal Leaders Council.

The $111,000 was offered by Sen. Conrad Burns, R-Mont., who got it
from lobbyist Jack Abramoff, his associates and his tribal clients.

Abramoff pleaded guilty two weeks ago to federal corruption charges.

Burns is among a growing list of lawmakers, mostly Republicans, who
have been trying to get rid of donations associated with Abramoff.
Burns' spokesman said his boss will try to donate the money to
charitable organizations approved by the tribes.

One member of the tribal leaders' group said some tribes are "tired
of being used," and don't want to appear to be helping Burns with his
political troubles.

[blackcrowheart]

Letter exposes new ties between DeLay and Abramoff
Posted: January 17, 2006
by: The Associated Press

AP Photo/David J. Phillip -- Carlos Bullock and Herbert Johnson Sr., both members of the Alabama-Coushatta tribe of Texas tribal council, look around in the building where the tribe's casino was once located, Jan. 10, in Livingston, Texas. Former House majority leader Tom DeLay tried to pressure the Bush administration into shutting down the casino that lobbyist Jack Abramoff wanted closed shortly after Abramoff's client, the Mississippi Band of Choctaw, donated to a political action committee DeLay launched. DeLay, R-Texas, demanded closure of the casino in a Dec. 11, 2001 letter to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft.
By Suzanne Gamboa -- Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) - Former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay tried to pressure the Bush administration into shutting down an Indian-owned casino that lobbyist Jack Abramoff wanted closed - shortly after a tribal client of Abramoff's donated to a DeLay political action committee, The Associated Press has learned.

The Texas Republican demanded closure of the casino, owned by the Alabama-Coushatta tribe of Texas, in a Dec. 11, 2001 letter to then-Attorney General John Ashcroft. The Associated Press obtained the letter from a source who did not want to be identified because of an ongoing federal investigation of Abramoff and members of Congress.

''We feel that the Department of Justice needs to step in and investigate the inappropriate and illegal actions by the tribe, its financial backers, if any, and the casino equipment vendors,'' said the letter, which was also signed by Texas Republican Reps. Pete Sessions, John Culberson and Kevin Brady.

Sessions' political action committee received $6,500 from Abramoff's tribal clients within three months of signing the letter. A spokesman for Sessions said he considers gaming a state issue. She said the tribe was circumventing state law and Sessions signed the letter in defense of Texas laws.

Ashcroft never took action on the request. The Texas casino was closed the following year by a federal court ruling in a 1999 lawsuit filed by the state's attorney general, John Cornyn, now a U.S. senator.

Kevin Madden, DeLay's spokesman, said DeLay's actions ''were based on policy considerations and their effect on his constituents. Mr. DeLay always makes decisions with the best interests of his constituents in mind.''

The letter was sent at least two weeks after the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians, a tribal client of Abramoff's, contributed $1,000 to Texans for a Republican Majority, or TRMPAC. That political action committee is at the center of the campaign finance investigation that yielded money laundering charges against DeLay and forced him temporarily out of the majority leader's job.

The letter also was sent to Interior Secretary Gale Norton; the U.S. attorney for Texas' eastern district; the chairman of the National Indian Gaming Commission; and Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who took over when Bush was elected president.

Its author appears to have been unfamiliar with the Alabama-Coushatta. It said the tribe was based in ''Livingstone,'' and that the tribe had opened a casino ''against the wishes of the citizens of Alabama.'' The tribe's reservation is in Livingston, Texas.

At the time of the letter, Abramoff was working for the Louisiana Coushatta and had portrayed the Alabama-Coushatta's Houston-area casino as a threat to his client's casino.

The revelation comes as DeLay has said he has given up trying to regain the majority leader post. DeLay had insisted until Jan. 7 that he would reclaim the job after clearing his name in the campaign finance investigation.

DeLay is awaiting trial on charges he funneled corporate contributions - largely banned in Texas elections - through TRMPAC and the Republican National Committee to the campaigns of several GOP state legislative candidates. On Jan. 9, an appeals court denied his request that the charges be dismissed.

The Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians made the TRMPAC contribution on Nov. 28, 2001, according to court documents. An attorney for the Choctaw declined comment on how the tribe decided on contributing to TRMPAC.

Abramoff pleaded guilty to federal charges and is cooperating with investigators whose bribery probe is now focusing on several members of Congress and their aides, including a former DeLay aide. Abramoff's former business partner Michael Scanlon, DeLay's former press aide, also has pleaded guilty in the case.

The contributions are not necessarily illegal, but DeLay's association with Abramoff is under scrutiny. DeLay has taken overseas trips paid for in part by Abramoff, and his national political action committee used a skybox leased by Abramoff to treat donors to a concert.

The Alabama-Coushatta were never clients of Abramoff or Scanlon. But Abramoff targeted the tribe in his work for the Louisiana Coushatta, first trying to shut down their casino and then trying to become a lobbyist for the Alabama-Coushatta.

He and Scanlon were in a panic a month before the letter, when the Alabama-Coushatta's chief said the tribe was opening a casino.

In e-mail, they discussed getting an official to threaten to jail the tribal chairman.

According to court documents, Abramoff also used the Alabama-Coushatta to carry out one of his bribery schemes.

Federal investigators have alleged that Representative #1 - later identified as Rep. Bob Ney, R-Ohio - agreed in June 2002 to introduce and pass a legislative provision that would eliminate a federal ban against commercial gaming for the Alabama-Coushatta ''at Abramoff's request.''

Abramoff pleaded guilty to telling Ney in June 2002 that a client, the Tigua Tribe of Texas, was raising money for Ney's trip to Scotland. The Tigua had turned down Abramoff's request for the money.

Alabama-Coushatta Chairman Ronnie Thomas and McClamrach Battise, a tribal council member, said the tribe wrote a $50,000 check to Abramoff's Capital Athletic Foundation after the tribe was approached by the Tigua. But the tribe was not told the charity belonged to Abramoff. The foundation cashed the tribe's check on July 24, 2002, the same day the Alabama-Coushatta closed its casino.

''We never knew Abramoff was in the picture,'' Battise said.

Carlos Hisa, lieutenant governor of the Tiguas, said he did not tell the Alabama-Coushatta that Abramoff wanted the money.

''We told them it was for a golfing trip and certain individuals from Congress were going to go that were going to help us with our cause,'' Hisa said. ''Abramoff had told us even from the very beginning the entire thing was top secret. Only a few could know because the language was going to be sneaked in.''

Documents show Abramoff hoped to eventually be on the tribe's payroll, making millions for helping them reopen the casino DeLay wanted shut down. Abramoff was pressing a Tigua representative to get the Alabama-Coushatta to sign over 10 percent of the tribe's future gaming revenues to a ''foundation'' he would later designate.

[Okwes]

American Indian Movement activist on the Abramoff scandal

American Indian Movement activist on the Abramoff scandal:
"One of many racists out to defraud Native tribes"

January 27, 2006 | Page 4
margotbworldnews.com/archives/2006/January/Jan25/AmericanIndian
.html

GEORGE BUSH and his Republican buddies are scrambling to shift
attention away from a scandal that could send some of the most
powerful people in Washington packing--if not land them behind bars.

At the center of the scandal is Jack Abramoff, a longtime Republican
Party operative who became a high-powered lobbyist in the 1990s.
Abramoff goes way back with important Republican leaders (former
Christian Coalition leader Ralph Reed was a college buddy), and he
became increasingly powerful as the right-wingers like ex-Majority
Leader Tom DeLay took over in the House of Representatives.

Because of his connections to DeLay and other prominent Republicans--
such as Ohio Rep. Bob "Freedom Fries" Ney--Abramoff was able to offer
his lobbying clients inside access when their interests were
threatened by legislation pending in Congress. In return, Abramoff
got filthy rich.

But Abramoff isn't in hot water for selling political influence. He
got caught ripping off his clients--in particular, Native American
tribes who run casino and gambling operations.

The tribes would hire Abramoff to lobby for them over gaming issues,
and Abramoff would tell them which politicians to make political
donations to.

What he didn't say was that he and his business partner Michael
Scanlon were sometimes working for groups whose interests were
directly opposed to the tribes. For example, in 2002, Abramoff and
Scanlon worked for religious conservatives lobbying the state of
Texas to shut down a casino run by the Tigua of Ysleta del Sur Pueblo
in Texas--at the same time that Abramoff was charging the Tiguas
millions to lobby for the casino.

Abramoff had nothing but contempt for his Native American clients. In
e-mails exposed a few years ago, Abramoff called tribal
members "trogdolytes" and "morons." "I have to meet with the monkeys
from the Choctaw tribal counsel," he wrote to Scanlon.

Overall, the Abramoff scandal is offering a glimpse of how political
power is bought and sold in America, but this particular aspect is
shining a light on a small part of an injustice that dates back even
longer--the U.S. government's genocide against Native Americans, its
theft of their land and the crushing of anyone who stood in their way.

ROBERT ROBIDEAU is co-director of the Leonard Peltier Defense
Committee. Along with Leonard, his cousin, Robert was an activist in
the American Indian Movement, an organization formed in the 1970s to
demand civil rights and defend Native Americans from government
violence.

Robert was accused along with Leonard of killing two FBI agents on
the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota in 1975. Robert was
acquitted; in a separate trial, Leonard was convicted and sentenced
to prison, where he remains unjustly to this day.

Robert has continued the struggle for Leonard and for Native American
rights. He wrote this article for Socialist Worker in response to the
Abramoff scandal.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

HISTORICALLY, RACISM has characterized and justified unscrupulous
behavior toward Native Americans. This attitude has kept us in
poverty and ill health since the inception of the reservation system.
The long historical racist mentality, accentuated through the
doctrine of Manifest Destiny, has allowed countless political types
and racist individuals like Jack Abramoff to defraud Native tribes of
billions of dollars.

This theft is consistent with congressional double-dealings that
manipulate away profit, land, natural resources and enterprising
attempts by Native American tribes to make their nations economically
and socially independent.

When tribal people stand up in self defense, as they did in the
1970s, when thousands marched across North America on the Trail of
Broken Treaties to Washington, D.C., to protest tribal corruption
sanctioned by federal policies and congressional acts, we were met
with clubs and violence.

Before federal treaties removed tribes from their traditional lands,
they lived a rich and abundant life for thousands of years. Since
then, congressional acts have kept tribes locked in poverty and ill
health to the present day.

The federal government's programs enacted by Congress have whittled
away millions of areas of reservation land for profit, and continue
an ongoing policy that sanctions thefts of Indian land and natural
resources. The gaming industry represents a continuation of
congressional manipulations that erode tribal sovereignty and
continue to plague the quality of life for Native people.

We have fought the land rush, gold rush and oil rush. Now comes the
gaming rush, which has created more corruption in our tribal
governments and animosity among Native Americans. Congress passed the
Indian Gaming Regulatory Act in 1988, and it has only brought money-
mongering politicians scurrying in from Washington, D.C., sniffing
out casino profits.

Governmental reports alleging that gaming revenue has been used
to "reduce poverty and unemployment rates, build schools and
hospitals, paved road and construct sewer systems, preserve and
revitalize cultural traditions and build responsive and responsible
government institutions such as tribal courts" are a smokescreen for
the United States to escape its treaty obligations.

If these treaties had been honored decades ago, the Native American
communities would have enjoyed the same opportunities and the same
standard of living as mainstream America.

The United States is the wealthiest country in the world, with a
higher poverty rate than any other progressive nation. Native
Americans rank the poorest in health and economy due to
federal "Indian policies."

The government has attempted to mask these policies as good and
wholesome, but in reality, they are bent towards genocide, ethnocide
and land and resource theft in the name of divine "manifest destiny"
to spread civilization by territorial expansion and subjugation of
American Indians.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

THE AMERICAN Indian Movement fought against tribal corruption in the
1970s, which resulted in us being labeled "terrorist" and wholesale
federal attacks on us by their political police force, the FBI, which
used its counter-intelligence program (COINTELPRO) to destroy our
legitimate protest movement.
The Church Committee declared that these methods were in violation of
the constitutional protections. Despite the Church Committee's
findings, the federal government declared war on the American Indian
Movement, resulting in over 300 assaults and homicides by a corrupt
tribal government that was armed and protected by the FBI, an agency
of the Department of Justice.

The USA PATRIOT Act is today using similar methods against us. The
federal government justifies such acts through scare tactics that
label threats under the name "terrorist." Leonard Peltier, a victim
of the COINTELPRO program, has served 30 years in prison to date, and
there seems to be no end in sight to his continued incarceration.

Congressional acts are passed to regulate the lives of Indian people
into oblivion. One of the most outrageous congressional acts passed
was about freedom of religion. Why did we need a special act
protecting our religious rights when the U.S. Constitution alleges to
protect everyone's religious freedom and rights?

Just as the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) controls the lives of
tribal people through corruption, so too does the casino business
create and maintain corrupt tribal leadership. Tribal leadership is
now using what remains of our sovereignty as a weapon against their
own people.

Many American Indians now view the Gaming Act as just another
congressional act of genocide, similar to congressional acts like the
Relocation and Termination Act. These were attempts to remove Indians
from their remaining lands and make them disappear into the melting
pot of North America.

Many California tribes, in order to get a bigger share of the
profits, have been thinning out their population by arbitrarily
kicking hundreds of members from tribal roles and/or denying them
enrollment. The Enterprise Rancheria kicked out 75 members, while
still other tribes corrupted by the money are kicking out hundreds.

The real kicker is that when these tribal members attempt to appeal
these outrageous acts of genocide by their own Nations through the
U.S. Department of Justice, tribal sovereignty is recognized. It is
clear that institutions of the federal government continue to
manipulate tribal sovereignty to the disparagement of Indian people.

Tribes began as sovereign powers, which are recognized by treaties
between them and the United States of America. Congress has
historically limited tribal sovereignty by passage of such
congressional acts as the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act, which are
cloaked as progressive economic opportunities for tribal nations,
while they are, in fact, designed to take from the tribes' control of
their lives, by expressly limiting tribal sovereignty.

[Okwes]

Jeffords, Leahy received funds from donors linked to Abramoff
By Shay Totten | Vermont Guardian

posted January 25, 2006

EDITOR’S NOTE: The following article is an updated version of a story originally posted Jan. 24 on this website.

WASHINGTON — The names of Vermont Sens. Jim Jeffords and Patrick Leahy appear on two lists of politicians who received money from clients and associates of lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Top aides say these contributions were not illegal, nor do they signify any direct link to the scandal currently swirling in the nation’s capital.

One list was printed in the conservative Washington Times and the other on the website of the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics (CRP).

Independent research by the Vermont Guardian found that much of the donations included on these lists came from clients or associates who were not represented by Abramoff or working with him at the time of the donation.

However, a Guardian examination of Federal Elections Commission (FEC) records available online revealed that both senators did receive money from clients represented by Abramoff at the time he was listed as their lobbyist.

According to FEC records and the CRP website, Leahy received a $1,000 donation from the Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe. Jeffords received two $1,000 donations from Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway, in 1999 and 2000. In both cases, Abramoff is listed as a lobbyist for these companies.

Clients are often directed by their lobbyists to make contributions, according to one non-partisan observer.

“That’s not to say that [Abramoff] definitely had anything to do with those tribes’ contributions, but it has come out that he was directing the tribes to give some of that money to specific individuals — but that’s not illegal,” said Massie Ritch, a spokesman for the CRP. “It’s completely common for lobbyists to direct their clients’ campaign contributions; that’s often why companies retain lobbyists, so they can get some guidance on where they should be giving their money.”

Abramoff is cooperating with federal investigators who are probing the lobbyist’s Washington dealings. On Jan. 3, in a 29-page plea agreement, Abramoff confessed to conspiracy, mail fraud, and tax evasion. He admits that beginning in 1997, he and others conspired to trade campaign contributions and other favors, such as trips overseas and golf outings, for favorable legislation that would benefit their clients.

Ritch said it’s impossible to tell the story behind each contribution, as federal records don’t present much background information. Abramoff has pleaded guilty to charges that are unrelated to directing campaign contributions, he notes, but more charges may emerge, possibly including other influence peddling that is illegal, as a result of the Justice Department’s probe.

A report on the contributions posted Jan. 24 on the Vermont Guardian website was disputed by top aides of both senators. The aides say the efforts to taint non-Republicans in the Abramoff scandal are part of a “smear campaign” and chastised the Guardian for printing a story that included some of the disputed donations.

“Jack Abramoff has been a top Republican operative, a favored Republican lobbyist, and a Bush campaign ‘Pioneer’ who plied his trade deep in the heart of the Republican inner circle,” said Ed Pagano, Leahy’s chief of staff. “He and Sen. Leahy are poles apart in their politics and in every other way, and it shouldn’t surprise anyone that, despite Mr. Abramoff’s prodigious campaign contributions, he did not cross paths with Sen. Leahy. It’s preposterous to even think that Jack Abramoff would do anything to support a progressive Democratic leader like Patrick Leahy.”

Abramoff is often described as a top GOP fundraiser, and was a “Pioneer” for Pres. George Bush’s reelection campaign, which means he personally raised more than $100,000. Abramoff’s clients gave liberally to candidates and committees of both parties, though most of the money has gone to Republicans.

The Saginaw Chippewa Indian Tribe was one of Abramoff’s more lucrative clients. In contrast to the $1,000 contribution to Leahy, top Democrats and Republicans in the Senate received campaign contributions of $10,000 or more from the tribe in the same year.

However, the Guardian has found that Leahy and Jeffords also received thousands of dollars in contributions from attorneys at Preston, Gates, Ellis, Meeds and Rouvelas, and from Greenberg Traurig, the two high-powered law firms where Abramoff worked, before, during, and after the his tenure.

The two firms employ hundreds of lawyers, and often develop close ties with senators from both political parties. Abramoff worked at the Seattle-based Preston Gates Ellis from 1993 to 2000. In 2001, he joined Greenberg Traurig, headquartered in Miami, where he remained until his resignation in 2005.

Top aides to Leahy and Jeffords said that attorneys who work at the same firm or with Abramoff should not be lumped into the category of having their campaign contributions being directed by Abramoff.

“We are not sure where those numbers come from. We assume from individual contributions from Democratic lawyers who may have worked in the same law firms before and after Abramoff worked there,” said Pagano. “Abramoff worked for two national law firms that have several hundred lawyers combined. Sen. Leahy did not receive any personal contributions from Abramoff.”

Neither Jeffords nor Leahy received any direct contributions from Abramoff, according to FEC records reviewed by the Guardian.

The two most distinguished donors that appear on the contribution lists are those of Edward “Eddie” Ayoob, a former top aide to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, a Nevada Democrat, and Michael D. Smith, a high-powered lobbyist. Both Ayoob and Smith have been connected to Abramoff’s wide-ranging scheme to buy influence for select tribes. Smith, a Democratic fundraiser like Ayoob, along with former Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-ND, have been linked to Abramoff for their work on behalf of the Mashpee Wampanoag tribe of Massachusetts, which was seeking federal recognition.

Ayoob donated $250 to Leahy’s campaign in October 2003, and Smith donated $250 to a joint fundraiser hosted by Leahy and Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-WA, in December 2003.

Pagano said the Saginaw Chippewa Tribe’s contribution “signifies political support for someone who has been a champion for social justice — including on Indian reservations — for his entire career.

“Native American tribes have been politically active for years before some of them were victimized by Jack Abramoff. The tribes are not the culprits in the Abramoff scandal, but have been among his biggest victims,” Pagano added.

One Republican observer scoffed at that defense.

“Saying that Indian gaming is a Republican issue is a weak defense … Everyone knows that this is a process called bundling, and that Abramoff would walk into the firm and ask attorneys to donate $1,000, $500, or $250 to a campaign,” said Jim Barnett, executive director of the Vermont Republican Party. “This is Abramoff money and this is just an example of the utter hypocrisy that this issue only affects Republicans; Pat Leahy is an Abramoff Democrat.”

Barnett said Leahy and Abramoff may “personally have different political philosophies, but when it comes to the clients he’s paid to work for, the influence peddling has no partisan divide.”

Pagano called Barnett’s charges “outrageous” and baseless.

“There is no evidence whatsoever that Mr. Abramoff directed or ‘bundled’ contributions to Sen. Leahy’s campaign. In fact, this charge is patently false,” Pagano said.

That’s in line with how former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean, now the chairman of the Democratic National Committee, sees the situation. Dean told CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Jan. 8 that no Democrat took money from Abramoff or his clients.

“There are no Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff, not one, not one single Democrat. Every person named in this scandal is a Republican. Every person under investigation is a Republican. Every person indicted is a Republican. This is a Republican finance scandal. There is no evidence that Jack Abramoff ever gave any Democrat any money. And we’ve looked through all of those FEC reports to make sure that’s true,” said Dean, according to a transcript of program.

“But through various Abramoff-related organizations and outfits, a bunch of Democrats did take money that presumably originated with Jack Abramoff,” said Blitzer.

“That’s not true either,” Dean responded. “There’s no evidence for that either. There is no evidence.”

The links between Jeffords and Abramoff, as cited on these lists, are also tenuous, at best, say top aides.

Jeffords received $1,000 from Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway in 1999 and 2000 at a time when Preston Gates & Ellis listed Abramoff as one of the lobbyists working on behalf of the rail operator.

Jeffords’ Press Secretary Diane Derby said this fact does not link Abramoff to Jeffords.

Derby already has tried to clear the air on one Republican-devised list that showed Jeffords accepting $4,000 from Abramoff-connected clients. Of that amount, $3,000 came from employees at Mallinkrodt and Tyco International as part of a joint employee-run PAC, the Guardian found. Mallinkrodt was bought out by Tyco several years after the money hit Jeffords’ campaign account in 1999 and 2000. Abramoff worked for Tyco as a lobbyist in 2003.

“The [RNC list showed] 39 Democrats and one independent as having received money from Abramoff clients, and then that was reported in The Washington Times,” said Derby. “We had his campaign staff look into it, and found it wasn’t true. But for some reason The Washington Times wouldn’t return my phone calls.”

Rep. Bernie Sanders, I-VT, does not appear on any list showing which members of Congress took Abramoff-tainted campaign donations. As a rule, Sanders does not accept money from corporate political action committees (PACs) or businesses. He does, however, accept money from labor unions and other special interest PACs.

[Okwes]

Interior secretary posed for photo with lobbyist Abramoff

www.klfy.com/Global/story.asp?S=4422817

WASHINGTON The Interior Department has released a photo of Secretary Gale Norton taken with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff. The photo shows Norton, Abramoff, an unnamed man, and two representatives of a Native American tribe.

In e-mails, Abramoff claimed to have an inside track in Norton's Interior Department, which oversees Indian Affairs. Abramoff's clients, some of which were Indian tribes with casinos, donated heavily to an environmental group Norton founded, and Abramoff tried to get congressional help to lobby Norton for tribes.

A department spokeswoman says Norton didn't speak with Abramoff when they met for the photo, which was taken in her second encounter with the lobbyist. The photo was made public in response to media requests.

The White House has declined to release photos President Bush taken with Abramoff.

[blackcrowheart]

American Indians and the Abramoff Scandal by Tex G. Hall

OPEN FORUM
American Indians and the Abramoff Scandal
You don't know Jack
Tex G. Hall

Friday, January 27, 2006

I decided to write this column because, before this whole Abramoff
affair goes any further, America needs to hear from American Indians
themselves.

There are three points that I want to the country to hear: First, we
condemn the corruption associated with Abramoff; second, we support
wholeheartedly the need for lobbying reform; and third, and most
important, America needs to understand that this scandal is
deflecting attention from an even more important scandal -- the
poverty on Indian reservations.

If the American people could get Congress to focus on the third-
world health care, crumbling schools, washed-out roads, diabetes,
suicide and domestic violence rates that plague Indian reservations -
- with the same intensity that they are bringing to lobbying reform -
- then maybe millions of American Indians who live far away from
Washington, D.C., could go to bed thinking that the federal
government actually works.

Now that I think about it, as long as the Justice Department is
investigating what happened to all of Abramoff's money, maybe they
could investigate what happened to all the treaty promises that have
been broken. Why is it, for instance, that despite the promise of
doctors and hospitals in exchange for our land, the government,
according to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, spends more than
twice as much on average for prisoner health care than for Indian
health care?

Let me get back to my first point. Everyone knows that bribing
public officials is wrong. Unfortunately, it seems to be ingrained
in political culture that, to gain access to elected officials, you
have to agree to play by Washington's rules. Maybe Ralph Reed said
it best: "In public policy," he wrote, "it matters less who has the
best arguments and more who gets heard -- and by whom."

Enter Jack Abramoff. Along with his friends and associates, he
targeted a handful -- six, to be exact -- of Indian tribes to
finance his empire on the Potomac. What, exactly, happened? As far
as I can tell, the Abramoff crew took advantage of the Indian
tribes' goodwill and bankrolls to the tune of $82 million in order
to pay for their own mansions, exotic trips and think tanks -- you
get the picture. Which is: A few Indian tribes get scammed, a bunch
of lobbyists and congressmen and staff get greedy (and later
nailed), some promises get made and a casino gets shut down, and
then Congress starts falling over itself to enact lobbying reform.
Meanwhile, nearly all federal Indian health care, education,
housing, water, energy, heating and roads programs are getting cut.

Let me be the first to say: We were cheated. Maybe if Indian tribes
were remotely benefiting from Abramoff's schemes, then those beating
their chests about the taint of tribal casino money might have a leg
to stand on. The fundamental mistake they are making, however, is
that Indian tribes are somehow running around waving fistfuls of
cash in the air. Sure, there are some wealthy tribes out there. But
only 20 percent of Indian casinos are doing really well, according
to Indian Country Today; the rest are only marginally profitable.
The reality, as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau, is that Native
Americans still live in poverty at a rate more than twice the
national average. We have the same economic disparity problems that
we had before Abramoff, and I bet we are going to have the same
problems after Abramoff.

Meanwhile, what exactly is happening to the message of tribal
leaders and advocates fighting day-to-day to improve our living
conditions on the reservations? That message is getting lost. Which
brings me to my second point -- Congress really does need to reform.
Indian Country supports lobbying reform as much as anyone. Think
about it -- Indians are the ones who were cheated in this deal and
are now being blamed. It doesn't take a degree in rocket science (or
anthropology) to see that the system is not working in our favor.

Fortunately, this can change. I am glad that such public officials
as Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., believe
that government can do better and are willing to fight the system to
make it so. Let's end lavish junkets, football skybox seats and five-
star dinners. Most important, let's make this a fair game. Why
shouldn't Ryan Wilson -- who, as president of the National Indian
Education Association, is fighting for decent Indian school meals
and the same basic textbooks that other American children get --
have the same access to congressional leadership as the head of a
Fortune 500 corporation?

But let's also be clear on one thing: Neither Indian tribes nor
casinos are the problem. If you listened to our critics, you'd think
that corruption in Washington was a phenomenon that began in 1988,
after Congress passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. Indian
tribes are governments, just like states, counties and cities.
Therefore, any lobbying reform must deal with tribes in the same
manner as it treats other governments.

Remember, we didn't make up these rules. Of course, we are more than
happy to join in and help improve the system. In return, all we ask
is that we be treated fairly, and that the United States live up to
the promises it made to us.

At the end of the day, reform to us really means safe schools,
access to doctors, living to age 80, roads, heating and electricity,
as well as opportunity for our children. If by now you don't know
that, then you don't know Jack.

Tex G. Hall, a.k.a. Red Tipped Arrow, is chairman of the Mandan,
Hidatsa Arikara Nation in North Dakota and past president of the
National Congress of American Indians, which he led from 2001-2005.



www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?
file=/chronicle/archive/2006/01/27/EDGT0GTK471.DTL

[blackcrowheart]

Native American Media: Tribes' greed led them into Abramoff scandal
By Pete Micek
Updated Feb 1, 2006, 06:35 pm Refer this article
Print page




Graphic: Harold Muhammad/MGN Online
American Indian media give little sympathy to tribes involved with Washington, D.C., lobbyists Michael Scanlon and Jack Abramoff, currently under investigation for buying influence in Congress on behalf of clients, including Indian gaming interests.
—News Analysis—

"There is some suggestion Jack Abramoff victimized unwary tribes and politicians," says former Native American Times editor Louis Gray in a guest editorial in the Oklahoma-based newspaper, "but this is more a case of unbridled greed than people taking advantage of powerless tribes and corrupting innocent politicians."

"It would be easy to play the victim card," Mr. Gray writes, "but that would be avoiding the responsibility many tribes had in their unrelenting drive to protect and obtain more gaming opportunities."

The weekly newspaper, distributed in Oklahoma and New Mexico, updates its website several times per day. Mr. Gray’s editorial, headlined, "Abramoff Scandal Is About Players, Not Victims," says gaming created heretofore unknown wealth and jobs among poor Native Americans. "But at what price and when is it enough?" he asks. Mr. Gray says that Mr. Abramoff and his tribal clients share blame for mismanagement of funds.

Mr. Abramoff pled guilty Jan. 3 to charges of tax evasion, mail fraud and conspiracy. He will cooperate with authorities in an ongoing investigation and therefore receive a lighter prison sentence. More than a month earlier, his former partner Michael Scanlon admitted conspiring to defraud Indian tribes and corrupt public officials.

The two lobbyists stand accused of bilking six tribes out of more than $82 million between 2001 and 2004, reports Indian Country Today (ICT), an upstate New York-based newspaper owned by the Oneida Nation. The Washington, D.C., lobbyists kept two-thirds of the money, said Gale Courey Toensing, a reporter for the 25-year-old newspaper, in an article entitled "Abramoff pleads guilty to federal charges."

One tribe, the Coushatta of Louisiana, gave Mr. Scanlon "and related entities" more than $30 million, according to the article. Mr. Scanlon redirected nearly half, $11.5 million, to Mr. Abramoff, ICT reports.

Coushatta attorney Jimmy Faircloth claims the tribe is "outraged" at Mr. Abramoff and "very satisfied" with his legal situation, according to ICT. "The tribe believed Abramoff had the secret handshake to Washington," Mr. Faircloth told ICT, "and they followed him down that path."

Politicians bought into the lavish gifts and arrangements the lobbyists prepared for them. Representative Robert Ney, a Republican from Ohio, took a golf trip to Scotland with Mr. Abramoff and others, according to ICT. He placed two speeches into the Congressional Record on behalf of Mr. Abramoff's efforts to take over the Sun Cruz Casino Lines.

Mr. Abramoff and another former partner, Adam Kidan, bought the casino fleet from a Miami businessman, who later turned up dead in a "gangland-type" slaying, ICT reports. They were indicted in Florida on conspiracy and wire fraud charges in connection with that purchase, according to the newspaper.

The golf trip also connects House Majority Leader Tom DeLay to Mr. Abramoff, according to emails released during a Senate Indian Affairs Committee investigation.

Politicians responded to the "Mother's Milk," or money and publicity, offered by Mr. Abramoff, Louis Gray says in the Native American Times editorial. Are they working for the public, Mr. Gray wonders, or for their own interests?

"Their actions say they worked for men like Abramoff, who in turn worked for the highest bidder of his services," Mr. Gray continues, "Tribes are not the innocent lambs in the forest they once were. Many of those in gaming have powerful people working for them and dispensing advice in important deliberations."

From the tribes to the lobbyists to politicians, Mr. Gray says, no one said "no" to the powerful influence of money.

At least one tribe watches the scandal with a wary eye. The Navajo Nation, says Duane Beyal, editor of Navajo Times newspaper in Arizona, looks to build casinos. The tribe’s Washington, D.C., office does its own lobbying, he said, and rarely relies on outside consultants. Though untouched by the scandal, he says, "We’re watching it from a distance."

"The part that is hard to believe," says Victor Rocha of the gaming news website Pechanga.Net, "is the amount of money the tribes gave [the lobbyists]." They took advantage of and belittled the tribes, he said, while also defending some tribes and their "ancestral" territory from development. His website’s "Quote of the Day" on Jan. 6 delivered support from the National Indian Gaming Association for the prosecution of Mr. Abramoff and "other offenders like Mr. Scanlon, who knowingly conspired with him, to the full extent of the law."

The Abramoff case worries editors of Indian Country Today, who write, "Just with that particular media-frenzied case, the image of Indians can transform from that of longstanding tribes progressively seeking justice in America, to one of A) newly-rich victim of Washington corruption, or B) greedy manipulators attempting to buy favors from political power." Though the labels might apply to the tribes caught in the scandal, they do not fit the rest of Indian country, editors said.

To avoid such characterizations, Native Americans must take control of their image presented to Americans.

"The magic wand," says editor Jose Barreiro, "is not in millions of dollars for one guy to buy off people, but for supporting the culture from inside."

(Pete Micek works for New America Media, a collaboration of ethnic media in the United States. He may be reached via email at [e-mail].)



© Copyright 2006 FCN Publishing, FinalCall.com

[Okwes]

Duped by Abramoff, tribe still smiling

By Michael Riley
Denver Post Staff Writer <mailto:[e-mail]>

www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_3477358

<http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_3477358#>
Former Sandia Pueblo Gov. Stuwart Paisano shepherded the Sandia Resort
& Casino project near Albuquerque. (Special / Jeff Geissler)

*Sandia Pueblo, N.M. - *The towering resort casino rises out of the
empty edges of northern Albuquerque like a mirage in the desert - a
symbol of the vast prosperity of a small band of American Indian farmers
that has emerged as one of New Mexico's richest tribes.

But as a symbol, Sandia Pueblo's glimmering resort - completed in
December - betrays more than is usually grasped by the thousands of
gamblers who daily plunk coins into flashing slot machines or toss chips
across the casino's green velvet tables.

Among the projects funded by the resort's profits: a private buffalo
herd whose animals are used in ancient religious ceremonies, a 15-person
environmental-quality department to manage land around sacred sites, and
vast property acquisitions to protect the pueblo's tiny village from
encroaching growth.

They are examples of the fine line the Sandia are attempting to walk.

"The tables have turned, and it's because of money. Our biggest
challenge right now is make sure we don't lose our identity - our
culture, our language and our traditions," said Stuwart Paisano, who led
the pueblo for six years as governor until he was replaced in January.

That line also led the Sandia into the arms of indicted Washington
lobbyist Jack Abramoff, Paisano and other pueblo leaders concede. Last
month, Abramoff admitted cheating his tribal clients out of millions of
dollars.

*$2.75 million to Abramoff*

Court documents show that the Sandia - with just 481 members - paid
Abramoff and his partner Michael Scanlon $2.75 million beginning in
February 2002. The money was part of a lobbying campaign to reclaim
control over land on nearby Sandia Mountain, threatened by development
and which the pueblo considers sacred.

They won their
<http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_3477358#>



20-year battle a year later, when U.S. Sen. Pete Domenici, R-N.M.,
helped pushed legislation through Congress putting about 10,000 acres of
the mountain into a trust over which the tribe will have significant
control.

"There was a decision taken early on to do whatever it took to get back
the mountain. People might say it could have been done cheaper, but we
don't know that," said Sam Montoya, 60, who directs a program to
preserve the pueblo's language.

Of the several tribes Abramoff is accused to have cheated, the Sandia
have perhaps received the least attention. And Sandia's association with
one of the most vilified men in Washington raises few eyebrows here -
perhaps because they won. They now control the craggy peaks that play a
central role in the pueblo's spiritual life, and are the location of
sacred sites that are important to the tribe's religious ceremonies.

For 20 years, the tribe sued the Interior Department and sent attorneys
into courtrooms without a clear victory. Within a year of hiring
Abramoff, they had their mountain.

"Lobbying is a new game for Indian tribes," said Lawrence Gutierrez, the
Sandia's new governor. "We didn't create it. We are using the system as
someone else developed it."

But it is also clear that Abramoff cheated the Sandia in much the way he
did his other tribal clients.

A large part of the tribe's multimillion-dollar fee went to Scanlon and
his firm, Capital Campaign Strategies, for public relations and
grassroots organizing, court documents show. Scanlon heavily inflated
his prices and then returned 50 percent of what he earned to Abramoff in
under-the-table kickbacks.

And there is the question of whether the money bought the tribe anything
at all. A spokesman for Domenici said the senator never talked to
Abramoff about Sandia Mountain or its fate.

"Late in the game, the pueblo chose to hire Abramoff's firm. At that
point, we made it very clear that they didn't need a lobbyist to
continue their contacts with Sen. Domenici," said Chris Gallegos, the
senator's spokesman.

Pueblo leaders wouldn't comment on Abramoff's effectiveness or his role
in getting the legislation passed.

*"You have to pay to play"*

Across Indian country, experts say the Abramoff scandal has raised a
number of questions apart from its meaning for the corrupting influence
of cash on Washington politics: Was the lack of checks and balances that
allowed Abramoff to steal millions from tribes a failure of tribal
leadership?

Would corporate America, with its broader experience in the ways of
lobbyists, have continued to pay so much for so long?

"Is there any other industry where you see such a huge gap between the
experience level of the people with the money hiring the lawyers and the
lawyers themselves?" asked Robert Odawi Porter, a law professor and
member of the Seneca tribe.

"At IBM and Ford, the CEOs have trained at the best business schools and
been involved in their companies for decades. In this dynamic, we're
much newer to the money and we don't have the same experience," he said.

At 34, Paisano is the embodiment of the often contradictory tensions
facing Sandia's leadership.

The youngest pueblo leader in New Mexico history, Paisano sports
tailored suits and media savvy. He was a member of Gov. Bill
Richardson's transition team four years ago and is a heavy Democratic
fundraiser.

During his governorship, Paisano shepherded the resort project.

He also pushed the pueblo to engage all the tools of modern

politics and often shuttled between the state capital of Santa Fe and
Washington.

"A lot of decisions were being made on our behalf without our knowledge.
I made it a priority that if decisions were going to made, they were
going to be made by us," Paisano said.

"I was at political events. I did a lot of political fundraising. We
contributed quite heavily to a variety of campaigns. You have to pay to
play," he said.

But leaders here emphasize that unlike other tribes involved with
Abramoff, Sandia wasn't looking to open up a new casino or shut someone
else's down. The tribe's wealth is being used to protect tradition and
secure the community's future.

Dominick Montoya, a computer technician, said that his parents wanted to
send him to private school when he was young but couldn't afford it.
Now, 70 percent of the pueblo's children attend private academies paid
for by the tribe, and tribal officials have already presented Montoya
and his wife with a range of private kindergartens where they can send
their 3-year-old when she's old enough.

Montoya said the current generation of schoolchildren will probably grow
up to be the most affluent and well-educated in Sandia history.

He didn't know about Abramoff's lobbying fees but didn't question the
decision when he learned of it.

"I think most people trust the councilmen to make the right decisions,
and they have been for a long time," said Montoya, 30. "I'm proud we
still have our traditions."

And those traditions run deep.

Most of the pueblo's members live in a modest village with dirt roads,
tucked out of sight of the massive casino.

Houses are small, and in front of many are traditional adobe ovens, used
to bake bread for feast days.

Religion plays a dominant role in public life. The tribe's governors and
lieutenant governors - always men - are picked by religious leaders
after a period of seclusion.

Paisano was replaced two days before Abramoff's plea agreement made many
of the tribe's dealings with the lobbyist public.

But the former governor said he has no idea why he was replaced or if it
has anything to do with the scandal.

"Out of respect ... for my culture, I didn't ask," he said.

*Raking in millions*

But that age-old form of government is also being buffeted by powerful
forces of change.

Tribal members get free education through graduate school. There are
interest-free mortgages and free home computers. A personal trainer
cajoles pueblo members during spinning classes in a state-of- the-art gym.

According to William Eadington, a gambling expert at the University of
Nevada, if you take the pueblo's publicly reported revenues from slot
machines, add estimates for poker and other games, and consider the 40
percent profits typical in Indian gaming, Sandia probably clears between
$50 million and $60 million a year from gaming.

The annual city budget of Greeley, with 77,000 people, is $60.7 million.

"We are a government here, but what's happened is we are also running
these money- making businesses. We're having this corporate culture come
into the governing aspect," said Lynn Trujillo, who grew up in the
pueblo, went to college at Dartmouth and returned home to become the
tribe's attorney.

Trujillo, 33, said that when she was younger, she used to fight with her
father over the restrictions of life in the pueblo. She wanted more
democracy and the right of women to participate in governance.

But she also believes that the pueblo's survival is intrinsically linked
to the survival of its traditions.

"What I hope for the future of the pueblo is that we are able to be
self-sustaining, that we have a healthy community. That probably means
finding a balance between communal rights and individual rights, between
traditional ways of life and the development that's going on," Trujillo
said.

"You are really talking about a community, this place, that walks a fine
line every single day in what we do."

/Staff writer Michael Riley can be reached at [e-mail]
<mailto:[e-mail]> or 303-820-1614./

The material in this post is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest
in receiving the included information for research
and educational purposes. For more information go to:
www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
oregon.uoregon.edu/~csundt/documents.htm
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this email
for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain
permission from the copyright owner.

[blackcrowheart]

Abramoff, RFK and Chief Joseph (Oh My)



Native Times
www.nativetimes.com/
Guest commentary
Helen O'Donnell 2/9/2006

Recently, I sat through some of the Congressional hearings into the
scandal involving Jack Abramoff and his arrogant misuse of his powerful
position. At one point, then retiring Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell
scolded Michael Scanlon, a colleague of Abramoff’s, who had come to the
hearings at the physical insistence of the United States Marshals.
Scanlon responded to being taken to task by Senator Nighthorse Campbell
by sitting in silence, taking the Fifth to all questions posed.

This situation reminds me of the hauntingly appropriate words of Chief
Joseph of the Nez Perce, who certainly could have been talking about
Jack Abramoff, Michael Scanlon and the culture of corporate greed and
arrogance that has swept like a dark wind over Washington: “Good words
do not last long unless they amount to something. Words do not pay for
my dead people. They do not pay for my country, now overrun by white
men. They do not protect my father’s grave. They do not pay for all my
horses and cattle. Good words cannot give me back my children. Good
words will not give my people good health and stop them from dying. Good
words will not get my people a home where they can live in peace and
take care of themselves. I am tired of talk that comes to nothing. It
makes my heart sick when I remember all the good words and all the
broken promises. There has been too much talking by men who had no right
to talk.”

In light of Chief Joseph’s words, the heart of this matter is about a
legacy of broken promises by the US Government and my fear is that what
is going on now in Washington is only another chapter in that American
legacy of mistreatment of the American Indian. To be sure, both
political parties are now touting reforms, both parties are making lots
of promises to the American people and to Native Americans and both
parties are doing a lot of what they do best, talking and making
promises.

The media is doing its usual job of hyping the story. Any potential
scandal that hits Republicans or Democrats and pumps up ratings keeps a
good story on the front page. However, has the media done any exposure
about the plight of the average American Indian today? Has there been
any real context to the story that up until now has allowed Abramoff et
al the arrogant assurance that American Indians are there for the
fleecing? I’ve searched through the media reports and have come to the
sad conclusion that the media, driven as it seems to be these days, by
the Marketing and Sales departments that the answer to these questions
about fair and balanced reporting is a cold and clarion “No.” Senator
Robert Kennedy would not have hesitated to call the media to task for
its failure to expose what is really at the core of the Abramoff
scandal: our collective failure to keep our promises to American
Indians.

Some reforms will almost certainly be enacted after much squabbling and
playing to the cameras. Those reforms will be aimed at making the US
government “better,” but they will just as certainly not better the
basic living situation for the American Indians. And the long-playing
Washington media game of “building them up so we can then enjoy taking
them down” will continue on its way.

No one seems to be asking the kind of questions Bobby Kennedy would be
asking. No one. It seems to me having grown up around men like my father
Kenneth O’Donnell, JFK’s Political Chief of Staff, and long time close
friend and essential aide to Bobby and Jack Kennedy, that politics meant
more than just empty rhetoric. For these men, politics was a unique and
noble way through which we could help those most in need. By the way
they practiced the art of politics, they taught us that we have an
obligation to be more, be better and to make a positive contribution to
the life of this country and world wherever and whenever we found the
need to do so, especially if that need was caused by our own
indifference or inaction.

As a student of politics and of Bobby Kennedy, it seems to me that we
ought to be angrier and more outraged about what really lies behind the
Abramoff affair. It ought to bother us a lot more than it seems to.
Years after taking this country away from Native Americans and herding
them onto reservations to live mostly in poverty and despair, it ought
to bother us that we still think so little of them as human beings that
further exploitation of American Indians is somehow “business as usual”
in Washington without rising to meet the real challenges that still face
our American Indian sisters and brothers.

The truth of the matter is most American Indian Tribes are not rich, are
not well off and day to day existence is a struggle. Most Indian tribes
still battle poverty, lack of education, lack of job opportunities and
the deadly scourge of alcoholism and drugs that destroy their youth in
record numbers. A few tribes have found some wealth in the Casinos and
that somehow sweeps aside our real obligation to keep in this day the
promises broken in days gone by.

These tribes don’t want a hand out from Washington or handouts from
other wealthy tribes either. What they want, as my father would say, is
“a hand up.” They want the same opportunities for their children that we
have for our own children. They want to live in harmony, peace and have
opportunities to build their own unique future as they see it. We have
promised that they are entitled to build a future true to their heritage
and their ancestry whatever that might be for any particular tribe. Most
importantly, as I discovered in a recent conversation with a member of
the Lakota Tribe of the Sioux Nation, I was invited to come to the
reservation to “listen and learn, because nobody listens and so they
don’t learn. We are not asking for anything more than asking you to just
listen.” Any help we provide must first begin in their being heard and
understood as they really are and for whom they really are.

Were he here today, Robert Kennedy would have listened, would have
learned and then he would have acted. He would have restrained himself
from wanting to hang Jack Abramoff and his kind from the rafters of the
vaulted ceiling in the Rotunda for using their political position and
power to exploit the least among us. Then, he would have taken up the
moral cause that more be done now, not later, at a time more convenient
to those responsible for the continuing plight of the American Indians.
He would have insisted that we begin in truly listening in order to
really help resolve the broken promises between our government and the
American Indian. He would have personally visited that Lakota Tribe and
every other Native American community who needed him and would have him.
Then he would have demanded more from us as citizens, from the American
Indians themselves but most of all from the center of our government in
Washington. Then he would have thrown himself into the battle until he
achieved the best he could have achieved in healing the divisions and
mending the promises that have been broken for generations. As the late
Jack Newfield once wrote, “part of Kennedy’s strength was that he
combined thought and action in a way rare for an American political
figure . . . He understood power and he used it for good.”

The Jack Abramoff scandal is Washington power at its lowest and there is
nothing good about it. Bobby would have made us uncomfortable with this
scandal and uncomfortable with our lack of moral outrage. His sense of
injustice and outrage would have made the corridors of power in
Washington shake and those in power wince and hope he was not talking
about them. Like school children in a classroom, they would have hoped
he would not notice them far in the back. Then he would have made us all
as Americans, Democrat, Republican or Independent uncomfortable. He
would have called upon us to demand more from ourselves, from our
elected officials and he would have inspired us to change the status
quo.

We live in a time with a political system so polarized between right and
left that most of us in the middle feel left behind or left out. We have
a Democratic party - a party my father loved but would not recognize
today. Today’s Democrats are more concerned with being liberal and
grabbing the headlines, than being right or righteous in their causes.
It is a Democratic party where being opposed to anything that comes from
the administration is more important than being for anything that would
really make a positive difference. The Abramoff case is a perfect
example of Democrats crying foul but not stepping up to make right the
string of broken promises to the American Indians.

On the other side of the aisle, we have a Republican party in Washington
led by a President with high moral values, high ideals and at critical
times, indecisive about just when to apply those values.

Lastly, I was struck recently by a poll that noted that most Americans
don’t pay attention to the Abramoff scandal or, if they do, see it as a
Republican vs. Democrat scandal because most Americans assume everyone
in Congress is up to their neck in this kind of corruption. Most
Americans do not see anything particularly new or unique in the Abramoff
scandal. Another poll showed that Americans were saddened by the
resulting despair and continued slow progress and disarray in the Gulf
Coast, yet they also feel the Government is helpless to change things,
to move faster, or to really change the status quo. Bobby would have
showed them differently.

Like many Americans, as a political Independent, I find myself watching
all this from the sidelines. I feel part of neither party nor happy with
anything much being said politically. Like Chief Joseph of the Nez
Perce, “I am tired of talk that amounts to nothing.” In the wake of the
Abramoff affair, there most likely will not be any change, any
improvement, just more talk that means little in the day-to-day life of
everyday Americans, especially American Indians. This excess of the
Abramoff scandal and the fact that it was Native Americans that were
ripped off again, brought home to me how far we have strayed from our
moral center and our sense of truly humanizing values.

As Bobby used to say, “don’t talk about, do it.” So this American has
decided to take Bobby’s advice and to find a way to channel the outrage,
the anger and the dissatisfaction by establishing Citizens Restoration
Corporation (CRC). The company set up in memory of the late Robert
Kennedy, my dad and Michael Kennedy will work to help those who need a
“hand up, not a hand out.” We will try to be a voice for the voiceless
and we will try to raise the issues that matter when Washington elites
try to drown them out in favor of the status quo.

While the challenges we face are great, the injustices and difficulties
get no easier, this lifelong Democrat, turned Independent, and daughter
of Ken O’Donnell, who devoted his life to the Democratic political party
and to this nation, has had enough.

I, like Chief Joseph, am tired of talk that means nothing. I have
decided to get off the bench and take action. This nation and the
political legacy which my father helped to build and that I too have
inherited is too valuable to be left to the likes of the Jack Abramoffs
and their kind or left to be reduced to empty promises and political
rhetoric. That is not Bobby Kennedy’s America or mine; and, in the final
analysis, it is not what being an American is really all about. My
deepest hope is that others will find and tap into the well of moral
goodness within each and every one of us, stand up and take our rights
and responsibilities as Americans into our own hands and make a positive
difference toward developing together a truly new frontier that embraces
and lifts up all who dwell within our lands. Join us by reaching out to
us at www.citizensrestoration.org.

[Okwes]

McSloy: Theodore Custer Abramoff - the worst since Little Big Horn
Posted: February 24, 2006

by: Steven Paul McSloy / Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP


How the Jack Abramoff scandal has done more damage to Indian sovereignty than anything since manifest destiny and the Little Big Horn

Jack Abramoff, more than anyone in recent history, lived out the life of the title character of Warren Zevon's song, ''Mr. Bad Example,'' who ''liked to have a good time and didn't care who got hurt.'' One would have to reach back further, though, to Pres. Theodore Roosevelt or even Gen. George Armstrong Custer to find someone who did as much damage to American Indian sovereignty.

Each of these three - Abramoff, Roosevelt and Custer - did the same thing to Indians: they saw Indians had wealth and they set out by any means to get it. For Custer, it was gold in the Black Hills, most recently the subject of HBO's ''Deadwood.'' For Roosevelt, the greatest proponent of ''manifest destiny,'' it was tribal land; and he made and enforced laws which, in his immortal phrase, were ''a mighty pulverizing engine to break up the tribal mass.'' For Abramoff, it was casino money, the first non-federally handed out dollars most Indian tribes had seen since the days of Custer.

Lately The Wall Street Journal, taking ''Mr. Bad Example'' as its point of departure, has in recent editorials been hammering away at what it calls the ''enduring nonsense of Indian 'sovereignty.''' Confusing the ends with the lack of means, it has taken Indian tribes to task for being poor, yet it has at the same time excoriated them for being wealthy.

One would think, however, that conservatives and libertarians would be the staunchest defenders of tribal sovereignty, as it embodies in reality what they can only dream of on a larger scale: local government, no taxes and no bureaucracy, all based on original intent and the plain text of the Constitution.

What libertarian would not want what George Washington wrote in the 1794 Treaty of Canandaigua with the Iroquois: the ''free use and enjoyment'' of their lands? What conservative would not say the original intent of that phrase was no taxes, no burdensome laws and no big government control? Instead of championing tribal ''governments which govern least,'' The Wall Street Journal disparages them as ''collectivist enclaves within a capitalist society.''

Greed always gets in the way of principle. Rather than holding up Indian reservations as examples of conservative philosophy in action, Abramoff and his cronies looked at reservations the same way famed bank robber Willie Sutton looked at banks.

The Indians who fought Custer were lied to in the peace treaty - so badly so, in fact, that the Supreme Court awarded them hundreds of millions of dollars for the taking of the Black Hills. Most have refused the money, saying the land can't be bought, then or now, even though they realize it is unlikely the court will actually order Roosevelt's face be chiseled off Mount Rushmore.

The Indians victim of Roosevelt's vigorous enforcement of the ''allotment policy'' were also lied to, as the government never followed through with promises to bring Indian people into the mainstream economy once the land grab was over, leaving them not only poor but now also land-poor.

And Abramoff lied, too. Nobody argues that the Indians were forced to sign the checks, though Abramoff's work in rigging tribal elections certainly make it that much more corrupt. But Abramoff's lie was more insidious, and more d**ning of our larger society. What he told the Indian people, who after long centuries finally had two nickels to rub together, was that if they really wanted to be players, really wanted to once again be power brokers on this continent as they were in the days of the wars and the treaties, that they had to pony up, as dick Cheney would say, ''big time.''

It is not the Indians who should be blamed for their cupidity; it is we who should be shamed that anyone could believe our society was so corrupt that you could throw $40 million at Congress and still not get a bill passed. Whether it was Wisconsin tribes paying $100,000 for a ''Clinton coffee'' or Abramoff's clients shoveling cash to the soon-to-be indicted, it all sends up a terrible stink: a smoke signal that says ''government for sale.'' Perhaps the reason the Indian tribes were so willing to believe we are so corrupt is because they have known us and dealt with D.C. for so long.

The Wall Street Journal has written that ''the time has come to abolish reservations for the good of the people who live on them.'' Custer and Roosevelt would agree. The Indian people, of course, would not; but such an expression of popular will ought not be allowed to stand in the way of the ''mighty pulverizing engine'' of the ''daily diary of the American dream.'' It is, however, passing strange to see The Wall Street Journal do what it always decries about liberals: tell people what they ought to do ''for their own good.'' In this regard, Abramoff might come off the Indians' champion, as he would disagree - but only because if reservations were abolished, his clients would go back to being poor and unable to afford him.

So for Indians, nothing ever changes but the date; and Jack Custer Roosevelt will keep reincarnating with every new form of wealth Indian people hold or devise. It is no coincidence that Zevon's ''Mr. Bad Example,'' after careers as a carpet salesman, lawyer and hair replacement scam artist, flew to Australia to pauperize aboriginals working the opal mines. Maybe the competition in D.C. was just too tough.

Steven Paul McSloy is co-chairman of the Native American Practice Group at Hughes, Hubbard & Reed LLP, an international law firm based in New York.

www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096412535