Tuesday, May 2. 2006
Jon Delano, from KDKA-TV in Pittsburgh, asked Rick Santorum whether he's on the side of oil companies who are reaping huge profits, or the consumers who are now paying $3 a gallon for gas. Delano's question was based on the fact that oil companies have been very generous to Rick, giving him more than $400,000 over his Congressional career. Delano didn't bring up the fact that Rick voted to give more than $2 billion in tax breaks to oil and gas companies in last summer's energy bill. Watch the Delano video here. Here's Rick's answer:
“I don't think I'm on the side of the oil companies,” replied Santorum. “I'm on the side of trying to create energy independence for America.I'm on the side of trying to produce more energy in this country, to create the jobs here instead of in Venezuela or Iraq or Iran. We have the ability in this country to produce more energy.”
And he says it's no surprise that 80 percent of big oil's political contributions go to Republicans.
“It's only logical that they're going to support people who support the agenda of energy independence for America,” said Santorum.
It's also only logical that oil and gas companies would support people who vote to give them giant tax breaks while they're making record profits, right Rick? Whose side do you think Rick's on?
Tuesday, April 25. 2006
Rick Santorum recently addressed students at North Catholic High School in Pittsburgh and said something that we found very interesting. Rick was telling the students that when he was growing up he didn't live close enough to a Catholic high school to attend one. But that's not what we found interesting, what was interesting was when Rick said this, "So, I didn't go to a Catholic high school when I was living in Pennsylvania." (emphasis ours) We find it refreshing that Rick has decided to drop all pretense and acknowledge that he doesn't live in the state he represents. Here's the video:  Click image to play video
Monday, April 24. 2006
The Beaver County Times tells us about Lloyd "Skip" Haswell, a Marine Corps veteran who was recently listed as a member of a group of "Veterans for Santorum." It seems that Rick's recent vote against an amendment to provide "an assured stream of funding for veterans health care," and his failure to respond to Mr. Haswell's inquiries about that vote, have caused Mr. Haswell to reconsider his support for Rick:
Haswell is also president of Beaver County's Vietnam Veterans of America Chapter 862 and a district director for the Vietnam Veterans of America.
However, on March 16, Santorum voted against an amendment to a budget bill that would have provided steady funding for veterans health care, a move that did not sit well with Haswell.
According to a description on the U.S. Senate's Web site, the amendment - introduced by U.S. Sen. Barbara Mikulski, D-Md., and U.S. Sen. Tim Johnson, D-S.D. - would have provided "an assured stream of funding for veterans health care that will take into account the annual changes in the veterans population and inflation to be paid for by restoring the pre-2001 top rate for income over $1 million, closing corporate tax loopholes and delaying tax cuts for the wealthy."
U.S. Sen. Arlen Specter, R-Philadelphia, voted yes, but the amendment was defeated 54 to 46. It's probably a good guess that Santorum, a President Bush loyalist, had some issues with closing "tax loopholes" and "delaying tax cuts for the wealthy."
Haswell said he's been trying to get an answer from Santorum's people on why the senator rejected the amendment, but his calls have been ignored. Consequently, he pulled out of the Veterans for Santorum, saying he can't campaign for someone who "votes against veterans" then can't take the time to explain himself.
"The veterans deserve answers," Haswell said," and that's all I'm asking for."
Here's Rick's number: 202-224-6324
Click here to email Rick.
Let us know in the comments if you get any answers.
Wednesday, March 22. 2006
In an editorial titled " Lobbyist Reform as a Shell Game," the New York Times skewers Rick Santorum and his role in the current effort to reform Congressional ethics rules. Here's an excerpt:
Enter Capitol reality: As Congress drifts through a lobbying debate that leans toward cosmetic evasions, Mr. Santorum has been as avid as ever in wooing power lobbyists. The Washington Post reported that the senator had maintained his elite meetings with special-interest brokers.
The senator exemplifies the ultimate scandal in the reform debate: that the subversive money nexus between lawmakers' campaigns and opportunistic lobbyists is not even on the agenda. An honest run at the problem would stop lobbyists from bundling together maximum campaign donations from their clients. Many lawmakers have dropped any arm's length pretense and enlisted big-time lobbyists as formal treasurers for their political kitties.
Wednesday, March 15. 2006
Rick Santorum was on CN8's Larry Kane:Voice of Reason this week and Larry asked Rick about the $500,000 mortgage he received in 2002 from the Philadelphia Trust Company. Rick's answer shows that he completely misses the point about the mortgage controversy and what constitutes preferential treatment. The video, transcript and our analysis are below: Transcript:
Santorum: "Look, everyone who's looked at that mortgage will recognize that's a, that's very much a mortgage that's available on the market. I got no preferential treatment. In fact, one of the things I do, whether I'm buying, you know, a car or whether I'm buying a tube of toothpaste. I make it very, very clear -- I don't want my name in the newspaper as a result of this transaction and you don't want your name in the newspaper -- treat me just like any other consumer. And that's the way you got to live in this business.
Obviously, it's important to have that public trust. And I hold that as the most important thing that I have in this job is I've been given a trust and I want to make sure that I earn that trust everyday. So, no I got no preferential treatment. This mortgage is a mortgage that is typical of any of the mortgages that were being offered at that time. And I think that everyone who's commented on it has pretty much said the same." (emphasis ours)
Rick seems to think that, because his mortgage was at an interest rate similar to other rates being offered at the time, he didn't receive preferential treatment. However, that has nothing to do with the real issue. Rick received a mortgage from the Philadelphia Trust Co. whose web site says that its banking services "are available only to investment advisory clients whose portfolios we manage, oversee or administer." When Rick received his mortgage he was not an "investment advisory client" of Philadelphia Trust. As Will Bunch originally reported, "[a] call to the bank confirmed that mortgages are only for investors and not the general public." So Rick got a mortgage from a company that only lends to its own investors even though he was not an investor. He didn't meet their most basic lending criteria, yet he still was given a $500,000 mortgage. Here's an experiment for you. Call Philadelphia Trust and ask them to give you a mortgage even though you're not one of their investors. What do you think they'll tell you?
If Rick received something that you and I can't get, even though he wasn't any more qualified to get it, THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF PREFERENTIAL TREAMENT. The mortgage may have been typical of mortgages that were being offered at the time. The problem is, Rick's mortgage wasn't being offered on the open market by Philadelphia Trust. Speaking of trust, Rick says he works hard to earn yours everyday. Do you trust him when he says he got no preferential treatment?
Tuesday, March 14. 2006
Rick Santorum has written a letter to the Philadelphia Daily News claiming that their reporter, Will Bunch, has attacked him for founding a charity. As Bunch points out in response to Rick's letter, more than a few other news organizations have found problems related to Operation Good Neighbor. From Rick's letter:
THE FACT that Will Bunch, who seems to have embraced the use of disingenuous innuendo and half-truths in his "news" stories, is intent on attacking me for founding a charity is more than a little bemusing
This is an organization whose sole purpose is helping our neighbors in greatest need. I don't have anything to do with its day-to-day operations, but I'm proud to have my name affiliated with Operation Good Neighbor.
 Rick's contention that he has nothing to do with the charity's day-to-day operations is completely disingenous considering that he shows up to hand out giant novelty checks and the charity puts the pictures up on its web site. If you're going to take the credit for the charity handing out cash to worthy causes, then you need to take responsibility for the problems as well. You can't have it both ways, Rick. Whatever happened to Rick's strong belief in personal responsibility? Does that only apply to others? Anybody else smell that hypocrisy?
Thursday, March 9. 2006
This is just incredible. From the Washington Post:
After saying in January that he would end his regular meetings with lobbyists, Sen. Rick Santorum (Pa.), the third-ranking GOP leader in the Senate, has continued to meet with many of the same lobbyists at the same time and on the same day of the week.
Santorum, whose ties to Washington lobbyists have been criticized by his Democratic challenger, suspended his biweekly encounters on Jan. 30. His decision came as Democrats named him as their top target in November's Senate races, and after the guilty plea of former lobbyist Jack Abramoff to charges of conspiring to corrupt public officials.
But in the month since his announcement, Santorum has held two meetings attended by the same core group of lobbyists, and has used the sessions to appeal for campaign aid, according to participants. Both of those meetings were convened at the same time as the previous meetings -- 8:30 a.m. -- on the same day of the week -- Tuesday -- and they lasted for about as long as the earlier meetings -- one hour.
Wednesday, March 8. 2006
WTAE-TV in Pittsburgh recently confronted Rick Santorum about his charity and the fact that lobbyists play prominent roles in it. During the interview Rick tells us that there is a difference between being a "principal in a lobbying firm" and being a "principal in a public affairs firm, a government relations firm", which also happens to list lobbying as one of its services. It's reassuring to know that the self-proclaimed Republican point man on ethics reform doesn't know what a lobbyist is:
But Santorum's charity has also put money -- $216,000 -- into unexplained travel and meetings through 2004.
That's almost half of the $501,000 donated to community organizations, mostly in Philadelphia.
Who's doing all that traveling and where are they going? Team 4 asked the charity and the Senator, but they've refused to release the records.
"One thing I'm very clear about is to try to keep a separation between anything I do officially and the charity. I don't want the charity involved in politics," Santorum said.
But politics is involved in the charity. Santorum put political lobbyists and campaign staffers in charge of Operation Good Neighbor.
Charles Black is a member of the board of advisers for Operation Good Neighbor, and a federally registered lobbyist with the Washington firm BKSH.
One of his clients is ALCOA, a company that last year received a $1.9 million federal defense contract that Santorum and fellow Sen. Arlen Specter (news, bio, voting record) trumpeted in a news release.
Barbara Bonfiglio is treasurer of Operation Good Neighbor. She's also treasurer of Santorum's re-election campaign and his political action committee, America's Foundation. Bonfiglio is a principal in Williams and Jensen, a top Washington lobbying firm.
And Operation Good Neighbor's executive director is Rob Bickhart, who gets paid a salary by the charity and rent because Operation Good Neighbor is located in the suburban Phialdephia offices of Bickhart's company, Capitol Resource Group.
Santorum's re-election campaign and his PAC are also located there and they pay rent, too. And they pay management fees to Capitol resource.
Parsons: "Why are you paying a lobbyist, Rob Bickhart, to run that charity of yours?"
Santorum: "Well, first of all, he's not a lobbyist, No. one."
Parsons: "Well, he's a principal in a lobbying firm."
Santorum: "No, he's a principal in a public affairs firm, a government relations firm. And he does a whole bunch of other things."
But Capitol Resource Group's Web site clearly lists lobbying as a service it provides to clients.
And just last month, when Sen. Arlen Specter was facing questions about his ties to lobbyists, published reports in the Post-Gazette and New York Times said Bickhart and his Capitol Resources Group lobbied Specter.
Monday, March 6. 2006
Rick Santorum has penned a letter to the editor of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette taking issue with a few things they recently reported about him. Rick informs the Post-Gazette that, contrary to their report last week, he is still the Republican point man on ethics reform even though he apparently won't be attaching his name to the legislation. He also takes issue with the Post-Gazette characterizing the charity that Rick founded, Operation Good Neighbor, as his personal charity. He claims that he merely founded the charity, serves as the honorary chairman of its board and helps to raise money for it. But, he says, he has no control over it's direction. However, Rick neglects to mention in his letter that he likes to hand out big novelty checks to recipients and have his picture plastered all over the Operation Good Neighbor Web site.
Thursday, March 2. 2006
 Rick Santorum has written the foreword for the upcoming book, "Darwin's Nemesis: Phillip Johnson And the Intelligent Design Movement." For those of you who aren't familiar with Johnson, Wikipedia describes him as "the father of the intelligent design movement." Here's how Publishers Weekly describes the book:
This Festschrift from friends—and a couple of friendly critics—honors Phillip Johnson, the Berkeley law professor whose 1991 publication Darwin on Trial and later books helped intelligent design emerge as a highly visible, and highly controversial, alternative to Darwinism. While it may be premature to hail Johnson as "Darwin's Nemesis," these essays reveal him as an influential strategist and mentor within the ID movement.
Do you think Rick's foreword will mention his recent opposition to teaching intelligent design in classrooms?
Thursday, February 23. 2006
Here's yesterday's cartoon from Signe Wilkinson of the Philadelphia Daily News.  Click here to visit Signe's cartoon archive.
Tuesday, February 21. 2006
Will Bunch's sidebar to his American Prospect article that we told you about yesterday has now been posted. It concerns Rick Santorum's charity organization that seems to have some serious problems, including not being properly registered with the State of Pennsylvania. Here's an excerpt: In 2001, he launched the Operation Good Neighbor Foundation. The charity, which seeks to award money to faith-based groups and other organizations that combat poverty and social ills like teen pregnancy, has a Web page loaded with photos of a smiling Santorum, posing with oversized checks and leaders of community groups. So far, according to the site, the Senator’s charity has doled out $474,000.
But public records show that the group has raised considerably more than that since its inception in 2001.
A review of federal tax returns filed by the foundation for 2001, 2002, and 2003 shows that the charity spent just 35.9 percent of the nearly $1 million raised on its charitable grants, while spending 56.5 percent on expenses like salaries, fund-raising commissions, travel, conference costs, and rent. Charity experts say that charitable groups should spend at least 75 percent of their money on program grants, and that donors should beware of organizations that spend as little as Santorum’s has.
...
Gary Ruskin of the Congressional Accountability Project, a good-government group, questioned why Operation Good Neighbor would hire lobbyists and political operatives instead of charity professionals. “It looks like another pocket to fill,” Ruskin said, adding: “Senator Santorum is obviously a man with many pockets.”
Many pockets indeed, pockets which seem to be large and full.
Monday, February 20. 2006
Will Bunch, the intrepid Philadelphia Daily News reporter, has penned an extensively researched new piece for the American Prospect about Rick Santorum's personal finances, which, as its lede says, "suggests that the Senate GOP might want to reconsider making him its ethics czar." Bunch has put a summary of his investigation up on his Daily News blog, Attytood. Here are two highlights:
1. Santorum and his wife received a $500,000, five-year mortgage for their Leesburg, Va., home (pictured at top) from a small Philadelphia private bank run by a major campaign donor — even though its stated policy is to make loans only to its “affluent” investors, which the senator is not.
Good-government experts said the mortgage from Philadelphia Trust Co. raises serious questions about Santorum’s conduct at a time when he is the Senate GOP’s point man on ethics reform. They explained it would be a violation of the Senate’s current ethics rules if Santorum received something a regular citizen could not get.
2. A political action committee chaired by Santorum, America’s Foundation, spends less money on direct aid to GOP candidates — its stated purpose — and more on expenditures than similar PACs. And its expenditure reports are littered with scores of unorthodox expenses for a political committee, with charges at coffee and ice cream shops and fast-food joints as well as supermarkets and a home-hardware store.
Monday, February 13. 2006
Friday night Rick Santorum spoke to the Pennsylvania Republican State Committee. Rick thanked them for sticking by him even though he sometimes makes their work difficult with things that he says and does, which led to an unwanted round of applause. He told his audience that he'll probably continue to do and say controversial and unpopular things, which caused at least one attendee to audibly shout, "NO". However, he said that he'll always tell them the truth. Judging from his recent statements about travel, the K Street Project, and Grover Norquist, we assume that Rick must have had his fingers crossed when he said that he'll always tell the truth. Here's the video:
Sunday, February 12. 2006
On Thursday we told you about a Senate committee hearing in which Rick Santorum said, "The only traveling I do is to and from my state and driving my kids all over the place." We explained that Rick had clearly forgotten a number of trips he went on over the last few years. But we didn't realize just how bad Rick's memory problems are.
The Philadelphia Inquirer has found 9 more trips that Rick has taken in the last two years, all of them on corporate jets that he only had to reimburse at the rate of first-class airline tickets. Here's how the Inquirer puts it:
It's a tempting offer for the time-strapped elected official: fly by private jet, courtesy of a corporation, without the hassle of long lines and lost luggage.
Sen. Rick Santorum (R., Pa.) took advantage of the perk 10 times in the last two years, paying more than $18,000 - a fraction of the true cost of the flights - to six companies with legislative interests before Congress, according to campaign-finance documents.
At least six of those flights came at a time when he advocated positions favorable to two of the companies: BellSouth Corp. and UST Public Affairs Inc., a Connecticut smokeless-tobacco company.
How is it that Rick could possibly have forgotten about all of those trips on private jets? Do you think he forgot about them when he voted on legislation that was important to the companies the jets belong to?
|
