You are here
Accepting Campaign Contributions from Those Seeking Benefits
Wednesday, February 19th, 2014
Robert Wechsler
One Indian tribe wants to build a casino, another tribe already has
one in the area and doesn't want competition. You're a council
member in the city that can effectively block the casino from being built. Both tribes want your support, and are willing to back up
that support with campaign contributions. What do you do?
According to an article in yesterday's Spokesman-Review, this is a question that Spokane's council members have faced. "About two years ago, the council voted 4-3 to oppose the tribe’s proposed casino resort. The council now has a new make-up," and the new council president wants to reconsider the proposal.
While running for his position, the council president accepted $1,600 in contributions from the tribe that wants to build a casino. When accused of supporting the proposal due to the contributions, the council president said that, in 2011, a lobbyist from the tribe that already has a casino told him that he had found four or five people willing to give him maximum campaign contributions (this is an offer to "bundle" contributions, a common thing that lobbyists do, so that their client can take credit not only for contributions, but also for fundraising). When the council president told the lobbyist he would continue to support the new casino, the lobbyist told him, “You probably won’t hear from us.”
The council president now says, “If campaign contributions were how I made decisions, then I definitely would have taken the $8,000 and I would have been on a different side of the issue.”
The tribe with the casino responded by calling the council president's allegation "offensive and simply not true.”
The council president stands by his story, but, says the article, "prefers not to name the lobbyist because he doesn’t want to make the issue a 'personal fight.'"
But the fact is that it has become a personal fight. And the reason is that the council president took contributions from one side of the dispute, and then defended himself by telling a story that would make it appear that he could not be bought, that is, that he is an ethical person.
Whether or not the story is true, it is beside the point. No one will ever know whether or not he can be bought, any more than they can know who is telling the truth. All that matters is the appearance. If an official doesn't want to appear to be taking money in return for support, if he does not want to appear conflicted, all he has to do is say that he will not take money from anyone seeking benefits from the government, including lobbyists who, by definition, are seeking benefits for their client or employer. All he had to say to the lobbyist was, I don't take contributions from lobbyists, and I don't accept bundling by lobbyists, either. Then, there would be no personal fight, no accusations, no questions about his ethics.
This is not just about the council president. Other council candidates accepted contributions from the tribes. Anyone who takes money from an interested party has to accept the fact that he will be seen, at least by some, as supporting that party at least partially due to the money given.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
According to an article in yesterday's Spokesman-Review, this is a question that Spokane's council members have faced. "About two years ago, the council voted 4-3 to oppose the tribe’s proposed casino resort. The council now has a new make-up," and the new council president wants to reconsider the proposal.
While running for his position, the council president accepted $1,600 in contributions from the tribe that wants to build a casino. When accused of supporting the proposal due to the contributions, the council president said that, in 2011, a lobbyist from the tribe that already has a casino told him that he had found four or five people willing to give him maximum campaign contributions (this is an offer to "bundle" contributions, a common thing that lobbyists do, so that their client can take credit not only for contributions, but also for fundraising). When the council president told the lobbyist he would continue to support the new casino, the lobbyist told him, “You probably won’t hear from us.”
The council president now says, “If campaign contributions were how I made decisions, then I definitely would have taken the $8,000 and I would have been on a different side of the issue.”
The tribe with the casino responded by calling the council president's allegation "offensive and simply not true.”
The council president stands by his story, but, says the article, "prefers not to name the lobbyist because he doesn’t want to make the issue a 'personal fight.'"
But the fact is that it has become a personal fight. And the reason is that the council president took contributions from one side of the dispute, and then defended himself by telling a story that would make it appear that he could not be bought, that is, that he is an ethical person.
Whether or not the story is true, it is beside the point. No one will ever know whether or not he can be bought, any more than they can know who is telling the truth. All that matters is the appearance. If an official doesn't want to appear to be taking money in return for support, if he does not want to appear conflicted, all he has to do is say that he will not take money from anyone seeking benefits from the government, including lobbyists who, by definition, are seeking benefits for their client or employer. All he had to say to the lobbyist was, I don't take contributions from lobbyists, and I don't accept bundling by lobbyists, either. Then, there would be no personal fight, no accusations, no questions about his ethics.
This is not just about the council president. Other council candidates accepted contributions from the tribes. Anyone who takes money from an interested party has to accept the fact that he will be seen, at least by some, as supporting that party at least partially due to the money given.
Robert Wechsler
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics
---
Story Topics:
- Robert Wechsler's blog
- Log in or register to post comments