U.S. Sen. David Vitter may not show up for debates and he may not submit to unscripted press conferences, but that doesn’t mean he won’t seek out the opportunity to rub shoulders with well-heeled lobbyists representing more than 1,000 businesses, organizations and other vested interests in Louisiana.
In what political historian Robert Mann calls “the most blatant, breathtaking pay-to-play message I have ever seen in politics,” Vitter, through a front man, unabashedly puts the muscle on lobbyists for the maximum $5,000 each in campaign contributions. http://bobmannblog.com/2015/10/21/sen-david-vitters-blatant-pay-to-play-scheme/
And Mann has worked for three U.S. senators and a Louisiana governor, so he knows political coercion when he sees it.
It’s understandable that Vitter doesn’t want to address uncomfortable questions, i.e. did he ever solicit prostitution for pay? It turns out the family values candidate, who was highly critical of President Bill Clinton’s tryst with Monica Lewinski (and we by no means defend that behavior) in a 1998 New Orleans Times-Picayune op-ed piece, had his own fling with a couple of hookers while serving in the U.S. Senate.
It’s understandable but not acceptable. Senator, you answer for your actions, good, bad or indifferent. You can run but you can’t hide. If you are elected, you will be under this shadow and it will haunt you throughout your entire term of office, be it four or eight years. You said Clinton could not govern effectively after what he did. How can you?
But, as is our wont, I digress.
There are no fewer than 800 registered lobbyists that prowl the halls of the Louisiana Capitol, buttonholing senator, representatives, and governors.
They represent about 1,100 clients, including payday loan companies, utility companies, oil companies, insurance companies, the National Football League, the New Orleans Saints, the New Orleans Pelicans, professional firefighters, sheriffs, municipalities, and the Association of Louisiana Bail Underwriters and countless associations, organizations, and services.
A partial list:
- AT&T, AT&T Louisiana, AT&T Louisiana and its Subsidiaries, AT&T Telecommunications, AT&T, Inc. and its Affiliates;
- CLECO Corp., CLECO Power, CLECO Power, LLC;
- Entergy, Entergy Corp., Entergy Louisiana, Entergy Services, Inc.;
- Louisiana Energy and Power Authority, Louisiana Energy Users Group;
- Louisiana Family Forum, Louisiana Family Forum Action;
- Louisiana Farm Bureau, Louisiana Farm Bureau Insurance Group;
- Louisiana Federal of Teachers, Louisiana Federation of Teachers and School Employees;
- Louisiana Housing Alliance, Louisiana Housing Council;
- Louisiana Oil & Gas, Louisiana Oil Marketers and Convenience Store Association, Louisiana Oilfield Contractors Association;
- Ochsner Clinic Foundation, Ochsner Health System;
- Pelican Bingo, Pelican Gaming;
- State Farm Insurance Co., State Farm Insurance Companies, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company;
You get the picture.
So, what does all this have to do with David Vitter?
Simply this: Vitter spokesman Jimmy Burland, a Baton Rouge attorney and lobbyist, sent out an email blast to “the Louisiana Lobbyist Community” in which he announced that Vitter and wife Windy would be hosting receptions across Louisiana immediately after Saturday’s primary “and we hope you can attend and bring a check.” (Emphasis ours).
Mann was right. That’s pretty blatant and more than a little heavy-handed and it sends a clear message to lobbyists to be ready to play ball if they want special favors from a Vitter administration.
Okay, we know this kind of thing goes on all the time but at least most politicians have the good sense to be a little more subtle about blackmailing potential contributors.
The schedule for the receptions:
- Sunday, Oct. 25: brunch at Andrea’s Restaurant in Metairie;
- Monday, Oct. 26: luncheon at Juban’s Restaurant in Baton Rouge, followed by a reception at a Lake Charles site to be announced at 3 p.m. and a 6 p.m. reception at Café Vermilionville in Lafayette;
- Tuesday, Oct. 27: breakfast at Brocato’s in Alexandria at 8 a.m., followed by an 11:30 a.m. luncheon at Ristorante Giuseppe in Shreveport and a 5 p.m. reception in Monroe.
And, as if that is not enough: “Additionally, we have set a lobbyist fund-raising meeting for Friday, Oct. 29 in Baton Rouge (time and place to be announced) and urge you to attend,” Burland wrote.
That must be to catch all the strays and stragglers.
Perhaps the most irony-filled statement in the entire email was when Burland wrote, “…David has spent much of his money fighting eight SuperPACs (sic) and opponents, and he has asked his most ardent donors to re-up for the runoff campaign immediately at the maximum contribution amount.” (Emphasis ours.)
Spent much of his money fighting eight Super PACs? Wow, what unmitigated hypocrisy. The Fund for Louisiana’s Future, a Super PAC set up by a Vitter colleague and into which Vitter poured in a quarter-million dollars of his own money, has launched an unmerciful distortion and lies-filled attack against his two Republican opponents. (Presumably, he will do the same against Democrat John Bel Edwards, expected by most experts to face Vitter in the November general election.)
The biggest lies are that Lt. Gov. Jay Dardenne had a “European birthday bash” at the expense of Louisiana taxpayers and that Dardenne voted himself lifetime health benefits. The trips were to boost tourism in Louisiana and he was not even a member of the health benefits system when the vote was taken. Moreover, Dardenne led a delegation that convinced then-Gov. Kathleen Blanco to veto a bill that would have given legislators the benefits.
To be perfectly candid, there is no excuse for this kind of character assassination in any political campaign. Unfortunately, there always have been and will always be candidates like Vitter who know no boundaries of decency.
Florida Sen. George Smathers was said to have accused opponent Congressman Claude Pepper of “matriculating” in college, having a brother who was a “known homo sapien,” his sister “a practicing thespian,” and that he and his wife practiced “celibacy before marriage.” Earl Long once called an opponent “catfish mouth” and said another opponent once fell into a hog pen and when passersby commented that one could be judged by the company he kept, the hogs left.
Those kinds of comments are funny and in the long run, harmless.
But Vitter’s attacks are way over the top. He even propped his wife up in front of the TV cameras to tell us her husband has given his pension back to Congress. Interesting, since he hasn’t even qualified for a pension. He’s 54 and he would not qualify for his $74,000 per year pension until he reaches age 62.
We can barely wait to see what kind of sordid, tasteless, lies and distortions he will unleash should he and Edwards face one another in the runoff election.
LouisianaVoice attempted to contact Burland by telephone and email but we never heard back from him. Here is our email:
Sent: Wednesday, October 21, 2015 5:35 PM
To: ‘jimmy@burland.org’ <jimmy@burland.org>
Subject: LOBBYIST SOLICITATION
Mr. Burland: Below is a copy of an email to “the Louisiana Lobbyist Community” dated yesterday, Oct. 20.
My question is this: Do you consider this a proper solicitation of contributions when the implication is clear that the lobbyists better play ball or not expect any help from “Gov. Vitter”?
This has the appearance of extortion at worst or coercion at best. I would be interested in your explanation and will publish your response in full.
Tom Aswell
LouisianaVoice
There was the usual disclaimer at the end of Burland’s email:
“This email is intended to reach certain state registered Louisiana lobbyists only. If this email has been sent to you in error, either as a prohibited recipient, public servant or foreign national, please disregard this message and delete it from your mailbox immediately as it was not intended for your viewing or use.”
I’ll bet.
Well, LouisianaVoice received the email and intended or not, here is the complete text:
Lord help us. He’s more vicious and vile than Jindal!
To say this is blatant is an understatement. Where are our “main stream” media on this? We know the Times-Pic-nola.com probably won’t cover it (will it Julia?) since they endorsed this sleazeball, but what about the rest? Where are the tv station, The Advocate and other print media?
I do not support pay to play. Unfortunately it exists, despite my dismay. These types of solicitations go out daily. Democrats and republicans, good guys and bad guys, winners and losers – they all have a finance team.
I plan on voting anyway. I did not give a single dollar to a single candidate, yet my vote still counts as much as a high dollar lobbyist. Go vote and tell them to go to hell.
Respectfully Lindsey, I would disagree.
I too have gotten emails from candidates or their organizations asking to “help out” or to help “put them over the top” in an election. However, this was to a specific audience (lobbyists) and was pretty specific about bringing that check and for what amount (the legal maximum). No…this one is pretty brazen.
I sent Bob’s piece on this to a friend in Ky who was involved in politics there at one time. He wrote back and asked “Does La. have an ethics commission or something similar?”. I had to reply “Well yes, but…” which is really embarrassing to have to say.
I guess the local mainstream media want to make sure Vitter makes the runoff so he can spend the rest of his PAC money. Maybe the treatment of these stories will change after Saturday. Hoping!
As an update I saw that WAFB reported the Vitter strong arm tactic (my words; not theirs) on the 6:00 pm broadcast this evening. They are affiliated with channels in New Orleans and Shreveport so hopefully it’s airing there as well. BTW, their latest poll showed the 3 republican candidates in a dead heat with Edwards enjoying a comfortable lead for whatever a poll is worth.
I should have said Tom’s words not mine 😊.
I am so discouraged that the Republican voters in Louisiana will choose Vitter over the two other choices. Both other Republican candidates have run fairly factual campaigns while under attack from the Vitter ugly machine. I think it is time that we connect vile attack ads to the candidate who benefits from them and refuse to give that candidate our votes. Wishful thinking – but, we should consider some rebuttal to this destructive way of electing our public servants. This time Republican voters have two much better choices than Vitter.
It is sad that many of us can see the train wreck about to happen, but there is just not enough power (voters to show up and vote) to stop it. Or, more precisely, there IS power to stop it, it just will not be exercised.
Tom, where are your ethics, my good man? You were obviously “a prohibited recipient” of this email since you are neither a “public servant or foreign national.” As such it was your moral obligation to “disregard this message and delete it from your mailbox immediately as it was not intended for your viewing or use.” Have you no shame? Isn’t this just like eavesdropping on a party line? Wait, are we that old?
Seriously, it would be a wonderful surprise to the political pundits if Vitter got squeezed out Saturday. I was sadly surprised when Roemer got squeezed out years ago as were many other observers. I want to be happily surprised this time.
Senator Vitter has proven himself the least informed of the candidates in the few debates he attended – he doesn’t even seem to know what is in the Vitter Plan he so often refers us to when put in a corner. He makes no overt attempt to court the religious right, but, as Jim Engster said in a speech I attended yesterday, they love stories of redemption and apparently some people believe Vitter’s is such a story. Except for that difference, everybody must consider the many similarities between Vitter and Jindal – I guess one of the reasons they seem to despise one another is that, when you scratch the surface, they are so much alike.
I have talked to NOBODY who supports Vitter – quite the contrary. Maybe it’s the company I keep – or maybe, just maybe, we can get a pleasant surprise Saturday.
As Jindal is fond of saying, two things:
First, I have no control over what pops up in my in box. I received it, but refuse to delete it.
Second, immediately after my discharge from the Air Force, I began work as a telephone installer-repairman in Union Parish and 8-party lines were quite the norm back then. When we upgraded services to private lines, we traded out the older phones for new ones and at one residence the lady had a phone which had a feature I’d never seen before. The user could lift the receiver to learn if another on the party line was using the phone but no one could hear her pick up. She had to pull the button up to engage dial tone. She did not understand that there would be no more party lines and she fought like a wildcat to keep that phone! Turns out, she had made a career of listening in on others on her party line who could not hear her pick up so long as she didn’t pull that button up – and she didn’t want to lose that feature.
“…blackmailing potential contributors.”
It’s not blackmail. Extortion? Not exactly, although there are undertones and there is a history of elected officials engaging in it.
Pay to play is a euphemism for bribery. So, it could most accurately be described as a solicitation of bribery.
You are correct but no matter what term is used, it carries ominous overtones and bad connotations.