Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Seat in Congress Helps Mr. Taylor Help His Business

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
question everything Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:53 PM
Original message
Seat in Congress Helps Mr. Taylor Help His Business
The Wall Street Journal

Seat in Congress Helps Mr. Taylor Help His Business

Lawmaker Pushes Earmarks For Projects Near His Land; He Says District Benefits
'Grist for the Attack Mill'
By JOHN R. WILKE
October 11, 2006; Page A1

ASHEVILLE, N.C. -- Charles Taylor, wealthy businessman and banker, owns at least 14,000 acres of prime land in western North Carolina. He's also the local (Republican) congressman. So when he steers federal dollars to his district, sometimes he helps himself, too. Last year, Mr. Taylor added $11.4 million to a big federal transportation bill to widen U.S. Highway 19, the main road through Maggie Valley, a rural resort town in the Great Smoky Mountains. His companies own thousands of acres near the highway there and had already developed a subdivision called Maggie Valley Leisure Estates.

(snip)

The growth of earmarking points to a shift in the way Congress works. Most federal spending originates in requests by departments and agencies. The Transportation Department might seek funds to build a highway interchange, for example, or the Pentagon might ask for new tanks. The spending proposals are then put into legislation which must win approval by Congress. Earmarks are different because lawmakers can directly insert them into spending bills, often without public scrutiny. Many lobbyists and corporations have discovered in recent years that one of the fastest ways to get the spending they desire is to approach an individual lawmaker of either party on the House or Senate appropriation panel about an earmark. That has fed the growth in earmarks to an estimated $47.4 billion last year from $19.5 billion a decade earlier, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Earmarks range from pet projects -- such as Mr. Taylor's $500,000 earmark to help build a Teapot Museum in Sparta, N.C. -- to billion-dollar cargo-aircraft contracts that weren't sought by the Pentagon but are funded to keep jobs in a lawmaker's district. In California, Rep. Gary Miller steered $1.28 million to widen a road near an upscale shopping center he helped develop. The center is expected to include a Target store and 120 residential units. His business partner was Lewis Group, one of the nation's largest builders and a big contributor to his political campaign.

Federal prosecutors in Washington, Los Angeles and San Diego are looking closely at earmarking in the wake of the Cunningham case. At least four congressmen, including Rep. Jerry Lewis, a Republican from California who is chairman of the House Appropriations Committee, are being investigated for their role in earmarking or ties to lobbyists specializing in earmarks, people close to the inquiries say. Each lawmaker has denied impropriety. Mr. Taylor isn't known to be a target of any investigation. Prosecuting these cases will be difficult because an earmark only becomes illegal if the legislator is clearly acting in exchange for money or to promote his private business interests. Under the prevailing interpretation of the constitutional separation of powers, most congressional correspondence and deliberations are out of reach of prosecutors.

(snip)

Congress has done little to police itself, although lawmakers enacted an internal rule last month requiring members to sign their names to some earmarks. Mr. Taylor voted in favor of the measure, saying members should be willing to stand up for earmarks. He called such spending "absolutely essential" to rural areas of the country. Mr. Taylor also said that eliminating earmarks entirely wouldn't save money. "The same tax dollars would be spent," he said through a spokesman. "The decisions about where and how much would just be left to unelected bureaucrats." The measure has big loopholes and exempts appropriations bills the House already has passed this year. Because it is an internal House rule, not a law, it will expire when the current congressional session ends in a few weeks.

URL for this article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116053185551188928.html (subscription)


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
WCGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-12-06 11:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. Well, I guesshe just want's to serve himself while he serves...
a few other wealthy land owners...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eugene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-13-06 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
2. Taylor demands retraction and threatens to sue WSJ.
Congressman Demands Retraction From WSJ

By TIM WHITMIRE
The Associated Press
Friday, October 13, 2006; 7:02 PM

CHARLOTTE, N.C. -- A congressman in the thick of a tough re-election battle
demanded Friday that The Wall Street Journal correct and retract statements
in an article that said he slipped projects benefiting his own business
interests into the federal budget, a claim he called libelous.

Rep. Charles Taylor said he would sue the newspaper if it does not meet his
demands, made in a letter written by Asheville lawyer Robert B. Long Jr. and
released by Taylor's office.

-snip-

Full article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101301346.html

His protests just gave the story more visibility.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Mon May 06th 2024, 01:39 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC