BY DAN
KENNEDY
Notes and observations on
the press, politics, culture, technology, and more. To sign up for
e-mail delivery, click
here. To send
an e-mail to Dan Kennedy, click
here.
For bio, published work, and links to other blogs, visit
www.dankennedy.net.
For information on Dan Kennedy's book, Little People: Learning to
See the World Through My Daughter's Eyes (Rodale, October 2003),
click
here.
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
Loyalty oafs. It hasn't
gotten much attention -- the Boston Globe, the New York
Times, and Long Island's Newsday all ran this
AP story inside -- but
Common Cause has issued a devastating report on influence-peddling
within the Bush White House.
Titled "Prospecting for Access: How
the Bush Pioneers Shaped Public Policy," the report meticulously
documents favors granted to the so-called Pioneers -- Bush
contributors who gave $100,000 or more in his 2000
campaign.
The press release is
here
(ignore the typo that says "2002"); the full report, in PDF format,
is here.
The report takes the form of a
Pioneer-by-Pioneer look at contributions made and goodies
received.
To take a random example, consider
James H. "Buck" Harless, the founder and chairman of International
Industries, in Gilbert, West Virginia. Harless raised and contributed
at least $355,000 for Bush's campaign, for the Florida-recount
effort, and for the Bush-Cheney inauguration.
So what did old Buck get for his
generosity? Here's what the report says:
The Bush administration
retracted a campaign pledge to require power plants that use coal
to sharply cut carbon dioxide emissions, rejected U.S. endorsement
of an international agreement to curb global warming, weakened
federal clean water regulations related to coal mining and
proposed investing substantial federal dollars in "clean coal"
technology.
The cost: "$2 billion over ten
years in federal subsidies to encourage clean coal technology;
degradation of air and water quality."
Of course, the White House might
have been inclined to do these things anyway. But that makes Common
Cause's findings no less repulsive.
Overall, the report is a litany of
regulations loosened or abolished, Colombian pipelines protected at
taxpayer expense, and secret meetings with Vice-President Dick Cheney
held.
It should have gotten a lot more
attention. Perhaps it will in the days ahead.
So, David, why do you think
Zimmer apologized? No, Pedro Martinez certainly doesn't deserve a
good-conduct medal for his disgraceful antics in Saturday's playoff
game.
But he did not "grab a
72-year-old man by the head and toss him to the ground," which is
New York Times columnist David Brooks's alternate-universe
description of the
Martinez-Don Zimmer confrontation.
Besides, doesn't Brooks realize
that the New York Times Company is a part-owner of the Red Sox, and
that its editorial
page last week actually
called for a Sox victory over the Yankees?
Brooks needs to get with the
program.
posted at 9:09 AM |
comment or permalink
MEDIA LOG ARCHIVES
Dan Kennedy is senior writer and media critic for the Boston Phoenix.
