Tom Davis Scandal?

I'm not sure if this a scandal or not.  What do you think?  It is front page in the Washington Post this morning.

Comments

[Not Harry F. Byrd, Sr.]

Let's see:

1 - Tom Davis gives access to a government procurement "consulting" (lobbying) group owned by his old buddy.

2 - Old buddy gives Tom's wife a job pulling $80K/yr. to make phone calls from she and the Congressman's basement "consulting" for government contractors and attending events with her Congressman-procurement-overseeing husband and his staff.

3 - The government contracting community gives Tom and his State Senator Wife $1.1M in campaign donations.

4 - His Committee's (which is responsible for procurement oversight) Chief Investigative Counsel is married to the former head of the Bush Administration's former Chief Procurement Officer who was just convicted of obstructing a government investigation into influence peddling regarding government procurement, BUT she's got the same recusal deal that Tom's wife has (they don't discuss da procurement bidness).

5 - The House Ethics Committee says that it's all kosher so long as Senator Devolites-DAVIS doesn't "discuss her relationship with the Congressman" with anyone. Here's the letter.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/EthicsLetter_001.pdf

I'm sure she doesn't do that.

Besides, nobody knows who she's married to, right? Especially, government contractors who donate hundreds of thousands to both of them who are looking to get government business at conferences Cong. Davis attends that are organized by Sen. Devolites-DAVIS employer. No rules broken so long as she doesn't mention her.... uh, I mean, HIS name.

Nope. No scandal here. Nothing to see here. Just business as usual in Tom Delay's Congress.

Yes, I'd say a scandal. The thing that could limit its impact is the complexity. There is nothing as clearcut as taking bribes (a la Jefferson) here. But it certainly doesn't smell kosher.

[Bwana]

I think as it stands now it is less than a scandal, and not enough in itself to stop his reelection in 2006. However, given time to absorb its complexity, it has the potential to put the kibosh to any Davis hopes for the Senate in 2008.

[Tom Davis is Corrupt]

If this isn't corruption, what is?

No scandal here. I mean, it's not like he got his hair cut at Bubbles, right Ben?

This is a bunch of hogwash. I can't even understand what these writers are trying to say - what's the whole point of the article? This stuff happens all the time, and there's absolutely nothing wrong with it.

So 3 of the events that Davis spoke at out of 71 (71!) were sponsored by this guy's company - big deal! And the company's revenues last year - split 7 ways - was $800k. That's nothing at all.

Nothing wrong has occurred as evidenced by the Ethics committee's letter. And Tom takes money from the contractor community? Well...those are his constituents. Contractors! No crap.

What a waste of space.

"But the congressman said that Upson did not have "unique access" to his office and that his wife has no business on Capitol Hill."

Still some trust issues in this marriage???

[Tom Davis is Corrupt]

Smoke, more smoke, smoke pouring out the top of the capitol dome, smoke everywhere. But no fire, according to anon 08:09 AM.

Feathered birds waddling like ducks. Feathered birds quacking like ducks. But no ducks, according to anon 08:09 AM.

Smoked Davis-Devolites duck, anyone?

[Not Jack Herrity]

Interesting article. The Post apparently didn't have any relevant facts to report so they merely connected dots between Davis, his wife, and Don Upson. Very effective to the average reader because it creates an appearance of impropriety, regardless of what the actual facts are.

NJH

NJH - excellent comment

[James Young]

Another fine example of Pravda-on-the-Potomac's desire to smear anyone with the temerity to have an "R" next to his name. I would wonder if this fine journal ever devoted as much space to the relationship between Puff Daschle's status a Senate Majority Leader and his wife's work as an airline lobbyist, but I know the answer to that question is "No."

[Not Harry F. Byrd, Sr.]

Yeah, that's what I say every time they go after Jim Moran. . . er... uh. wait, um, I mean like the time they broke the Monica Lewinsky story. . . um...

I mean, like that time the Washington Post endorsed Tom Davis in every race he's run for congress since 1994. Yeah, those biased bastards at the Post....

[Bwana]

"Yeah, those biased bastards at the Post...."

At last you have seen the light! ;-)

In reality, it's not a big deal, but they way the article is written, it doesn't look very good either.

It is very difficult to even see what the point of the story is. There is no evidence of anything improper. The story says that Devolites was hired by the firm prior to her marriage to the Congressman. Imagine a Congressman from Northern Virginia raising campaign funds from (gasp!!)employees of companies in Northern Virginia. Residents of Fairfax have donated to their congressman? The fact is that the IT sector is a huge engine in driving our local economy. The story is a little over the top.

anon 11 am-

So she was hired before they were married. It's not like anyone had any idea they had a relationship. No one would have ever thought that. I mean, he was a married man.

"Another fine example of Pravda-on-the-Potomac's desire to smear anyone with the temerity to have an "R" next to his name."

Riiiiight. They just HATE Tom Davis over there at the post. In fact, they have such a vendetta against him that they endorse him every time he runs.

C'mon, how was Upson to know they'd get married?

Deolites couldn't possibly marry everyone she slept with. Beside being illegal there simply aren't that many tuxedos for rent....

The fact is that the story lacks any real substance, and it tries to weave together the appearance that something was improper. So no spouse of an elected official should work?

Anon 11:09 - is it that easy to cast the first stone? Your implication seems to cross the line.

[Anonymous Is A Woman]

The issue is that elected officials and those who work for government at the federal, state and local level have to go beyond merely not breaking the law.

Most government ethics manuals will spell out clearly a standard for government ethics that says a phrase such as the following:

"...that no reasonable person can conclude that a conflict of interest exists."

There may be no criminal activity - probably isn't. And Davis and Devolitis-Davis may truly keep a wall separating these activities from their personal life. But would a reasonable person never be able to conclude that there was no conflict of interest here?

On many levels, I don't think so. And even Davis' Services Acquisition Reform Act is so problematic (see the sidebar to that article in the WaPo print version) that Republican Administration officials had trouble with it including Angela Styles, former Chief of the Office of Federal Procurement Policy at OMB, and her previous boss, Mitch Daniels, former Chief of OMB and now Republican governor of Indiana.

These are not biased Democrats but pro-business, conservative Republicans.

And saying everybody does it and pointing fingers at Democrats who are no longer even in Congress is not an excuse for exoneration. Indeed, Daschle's wife's professional activities was an issue and it was one of the things his opponent used to defeat him.

Most people acknowledge that the culture of corruption on the Hill has gotten out of hand regardless of the politcial party. Unfortunately, with Republicans in charge, they were the ones most likely to have the access and power that lobbyists and contractors needed. So if it seems that Republicans are taking most of the heat for corruption scandals there is a reason. It comes with being the ones with the most power. Nobody needs to bribe somebody who is on the outside looking in, which is where the Democrats have been.

Anon is a Woman - so you're saying Davis and the Administration disagreed on something? Wow, certainly sounds like he's a rubber stamp for them...

And for the record, Angela Styles is not very highly thought of in industry. There's a reason she "resigned" under suspicious circumstances. And the Post did not interview Clinton's OFPP head, who agrees with Davis on the SARA issue and realizes Styles was way off the mark.

You also write "Most people acknowledge that the culture of corruption on the Hill has gotten out of hand regardless of the politcial party. Unfortunately, with Republicans in charge, they were the ones most likely to have the access and power that lobbyists and contractors needed. So if it seems that Republicans are taking most of the heat for corruption scandals there is a reason. It comes with being the ones with the most power." I am a Republican, and I think that's an accurate and well thought out comment.

[Bruce]

NJH is on target.

Here's the deal: the Davis committee does not award contracts!

This firm advises companies how to apply for contracts. This is a process that can not be lobbyied. It is a process where Congress has no say.

Yes, Davis has oversight if a contract goes bad. How does this help a firm that advises people how not to have their contract go bad?

For those who feel the reporter can not be biased when the Post endorses Davis - remember the oft repeated press mantra that editorial and news are seperate. Thus, seperate biases.

This story has no facts except:
1 - An experienced government contractor decided to set up a legal business advising other government contractors.
2 - This man hired an experienced government contractor for his firm.
3 - Both of these contractors have relationships (though in a different meaning of the word) with a Congressman who represents them in Congress.
4 - A dog once bit a man. More at 10.

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

This may not be illegal, but it certainly is yet ANOTHER profoundly clear example of how this Congress full of GOP fatcats butters up their friends in high places, and makes sure that their fellow Republican friends get the big contracts, hire their friends and family whether they can really work and perform or not, all on the backs of the American taxpayer.

Is this a scandal? Not really in this age of Republican management of government resources, as NHFB points out, it's just business as usual.

Is it CORRUPTION!? Hells yes.

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

Oh yeah, and I forgot to add the most important factor:

All those expenditures directed at their cronies don't deliver a dime of taxpayer value-added to our nation's interest, for the most part.

Look at Craney Island. The Alaskan Road to Nowhere. On and on and on.

Yet, our ports are unsecured, Iraq and the effort to rid the planet of terrorism are botched and bungled at every mentally incompetent turn, we're mortgaging our future to children who won't be out of debt until they reach the age of 53, and to top it all off, most meaningful government programs and expenditures remain the provence of Democratic initiatives.

Why the entire country doesn't march on Washington and cry out and demand competent, somewhat intelligent people to run their government is beyond me.

Clearly, the Davis Dynasty is nearing its glorious end.

[Doug in Mount Vernon]

Bring the POWER back to the PEOPLE!