Congressman Charles Rangel is once again on the hot seat related to his post as a senior tax-writer (chair since 2007 of the important Ways & Means Committee) and his conduct of personal and campaign activities. Recently, questions emerged about his fundraising for a City College of New york school to be named in his honor--he helped the school raise $11 million, in a step that some saw as at least giving the appearance of impropriety. Now, further investigation into his activities has questioned his "instrumental" role in preserving a tax loophole that benefited an oil-drilling company, at the same time that the CEO of the company pledge $1 million to the City College school. See Kocieniewski, The Congressman, the Donor and the Tax Break, New York Times, Nov. 25, 2008.
Clearly, politicians have to raise money to campaign for office, and just as clearly, any large donation to a congressman raises concern about capture by special interests. The same concerns are raised when a person who has matters before that congressman (especially a powerful one such as Rangel) makes a substantial contribution ($1 million is clearly substantial) to a third party, when that contribution can be expected in the normal course of human affairs to engender some degree of appreciation, if not downright eagerness to respond in kind. Where there is some time linkage between actions taken by the politician and the contribution, strong concerns are raised.
Why was Rangel eager to protect the right of companies to set up mailbox offices in the Caribbean in order to claim offshore status that reduced their federal tax liabilities, after he had originally "bitterly opposed those offshore moves"? Id. He says it was an opposition to retroactive tax increases. I don't think that cuts the mustard.....
Recent Comments