Friday, July 11th, 1997 -- Republican members of the Senate committee investigating campaign finance abuses seemed desperate yesterday as public interest in what seems to have become an Inquisition waned. Former DNC finance director Richard Sullivan held his ground despite Chairman Thompson and others expressing exasperation with what they felt was stonewalling.
But the amusing stories yesterday came from Senators Arlen Specter (R-PA) and Susan Collins (R-ME).
Specter, seeking the spotlight, disclosed documents that purportedly show that Johnny Chung, who invited six Chinese national businessmen to the White House taping of a presidential radio address, gave $50,000 to Mrs. Clinton's chief of staff only days after receiving a $150,000 wire transfer from the Bank of China.
Specter, who failed to quote the source of the funds, wants you to believe that the Bank of China only wires funds for the purpose of corrupting the American political system, but of course this is not true. The Bank of China, one of the largest financial institutions in the world, wires billions of dollars each day for all sorts of reasons -- from transferring money to support aging parents to fulfilling letters of credit for large multinational corporations. If Specter wants us to take him seriously, he must trace the source and the motive as well as explain why the check to the DNC was $100,000 short. Was that Chung's commission?
Here's what China had to say: "Some people in the United States, out of domestic political needs, are out of thin air once again slandering China with accusation that it is involved in the so-called political donations. This is completely groundless," as related by Foreign Ministry spokesman Tan Guoqiang.
Senator Specter was followed by Senator Collins, who brought up a similar "coincidence" -- this time involving DNC donor Yogesh Gandhi.
Gandhi, a seeming bankrupt, gave the DNC a whopping $325,000 and Collins says the funds came from a $500,000 wire transfer from a Japanese bank to Gandhi earlier. Gandhi has invoked the fifth amendment and will not talk to the Committee. Again, Collins ought to prove the source of the funds rather than their country of origin. If Collins is right, then Gandhi pocketed a whopping $175,000 for his services to someone in Japan. Hard to believe it was the government.
Could it be that both Chung and Gandhi were being paid as lobbyists? One need only comb FEC reports to find that most all lobbying firms make extensive contributions from their own bank accounts to both sides of the aisle. They use funds they receive in fees from their clients -- foreign or domestic. For example, the FEC reports that Hill & Knowlton, the venerable foreign-owned lobbying firm in DC contributed -- through its PAC -- more than $21,000 in the last election cycle, and the hugely powerful legal-lobbying firm of Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld used its Civic Action Committee PAC to
contribute more than $460,000 -- mostly to incumbents on both sides of the aisle. Both these firms have foreign clients, and the partners and employees who contribute to their PACs enjoy the riches derived therefrom. Does this mean that the two respected firms are possibly buying influence for their foreign-based clients? Who knows?
But as they say, "Money talks."
In all cases, the system looks a bit smelly, but the fact is that any of you can contribute any amount you wish from money you earn -- no matter what the source. If you are an American citizen or hold a Green Card, and you work for the Communist Party and make a million dollars a year, there is nothing stopping you from spreading $750,000 or the whole million around Congress in legally limited hard money or unlimited soft-money contributions -- nothing! So, despite what Collins and Specter want you to believe, Gandhi, Chung, Huang and the rest are off scot-free unless someone produces a film showing them taking money from foreign nationals for the specific purpose of undermining the United States
government.
It may stink, but keep in mind that that's the way the law was designed -- on purpose -- by the Congress and the Federal Election Commission.
The "why" is what you need to answer for yourself.
© 1998, 1997, American Politics Journal Publications Inc.