Sunday, November 05, 2006


Who's the real hypocrite, Sue Kelly?

If you only listened to Sue Kelly's laughable radio ad or received one of her flyers, you'd think that John Hall was the one in bed with big business. And while it's true that Sue has told numerous lies, particularly over the past few weeks as the race has grown tighter, this one is a real whopper.

That's because nearly 60% of the $1.94 million that Sue has raised during this campaign cycle comes from big businesses based outside the district. Now why would companies like Bank of America, Pfizer, and United Parcel Service pony up $10,000 (and more in the case of Bank of America) just to get Sue re-elected? We're not sure, but we're pretty confident they expect something in return. Or perhaps it's a reward for Sue's vote on the bankruptcy legislation. And Medicaid Part D(isaster).

Indeed, this morning's NY Times had this article which started like this, "For big drug companies, the new Medicare prescription benefit is proving to be a financial windfall larger than even the most optimistic Wall Street analysts had predicted." Remember: this is the legislation that Sue voted for back in 2003 -- legislation that passed by only 1 vote -- Sue's vote for Pfizer and other big drug companies and against seniors who live here in NY-19.

Come to think of it, where have we seen this kind of quid pro quo from Sue before? That's right -- none other than Donald Trump, which according to this group, gave Sue a hefty campaign contribution and got a $2 million gift from Kelly in return in the form of a highway subsidy to lower the Westside Highway. So who's the real hypocrite, Sue Kelly?

I had lunch with a Pfizer lobbyist once who openly boasted that Pfizer wrote the Medicare Part D legislation. Is this what we want from our elected officials in Washington? This culture of corruption is only made more evident by these despicable campaign tactics. Sue Kelly, you have no shame! The voters of NY-19 are smarter than this...
Here's another example of a Sue Kelly quid pro quo deal, see my latest blog entry here...
The reason Sue Kelly receives so much money from the financial services and insurance sectors is because she's is THE person who chairs the House Financial Services Committee's Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation.

A variety of sectors benefit from Sue's (pathetic lack of) "oversight," including drug manufacturers, who receive the lion's share of their compensation from the insurance firms. Even at face value, this is exceptionally questionable from an ethics standpoint.

Denny Hastert did everything but make the House Ethics Committee powerless when he appointed Hastings to run it in 2004. Hence the overall lack of ANY ethical underpinnings on anything that goes on in the House these days, never mind about Sue's lack of oversight on the Financial Services Committee(s).

One need look no further than the past month to see that the House Ethics Committee has now turned into nothing but a bunch of shills, since even the meat of the Foley investigation--including damning testimony from the past few weeks--will not even see the light of day until after the Election.

As CNN all but said in its fascinating "Broken Government" series that's aired over the past few days: "Absolutely power corrupts absolutely." And, that's what we have in D.C. right now: a complete breakdown of the system of checks and balances.

There are none. (And, as a result, this is what you get.)
Post a Comment

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?