Tuesday, October 19, 2010

Driehaus' Pay to Play

 No more unanswered questions.  Just follow the money trail.
cash
You may remember COAST's reporting of the closed door fundraiser with Congressman James Oberstar and Nancy Pelosi waterboy Steve Driehaus.  In August, Steve Driehaus met with Congressman James Oberstar, Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in a closed door meeting at the local offices of Parsons Brinkerhoff.  Liberal apologists defended the secret meeting, ensuring all that there was no quid pro quo.

As you may know, Parsons Brinkerhoff is a planning, engineering and construction management firm connected to many local boondoggles that either already have received government funding, or are poised to do so.  They are a member of the Cincinnati Streetcar Development Team, Project Manager for Governor Strickland's pet 3-C Rail project, as well as the Project Manager for the failed Riverfront Transit Center. 
It appears that COAST's reporting of top secret fundraiser for the Driehaus campaign following the closed meeting appears to be correct.  Was this meeting used as leverage by Driehaus to raise money from a contractor that stands to benefit from federal funding for local transportation projects?  You be the judge.  The Parsons Brinkerhoff PAC and Parsons Brinkerhoff President Fred Craig each contributed $500 to the Driehaus campaign.  Those contributions were deposited the very next day after the meeting.  Smell Fishy? 
Not coincidentally, Parsons Brinkerhoff's PAC also contributed $1000 to the campaign of Congressman Oberstar. 
"Steve Driehaus reminds us once again why we strongly oppose returning him to Congress," said COAST Chairman Jason Gloyd.  "Driehaus is clearly a willing participant in the big-money culture of corruption in politics."  Gloyd continued, "The shameful pay to play atmosphere that Driehaus has gladly wallowed in is exactly what's wrong with our representatives in Washington."

8 comments:

  1. How can a fundraiser be secret when it's reported in the paper prior to it happening?

    And you neglected to mention Mr. Craig's earlier donations to the senate campaign of Mike DeWine. For that matter, a simple search on OpenSecrets.org shows employees of Parsons Brinkerhoff making donations to various committees and candidates on both sides of the aisle.

    If you don't like to work for public financing of campaigns. Until we have that, we'll have this broken system working for both sides. While you're at it, why don't you ask your favorite candidates to support laws that override the horrible Citizens United decision that has millions of dollars pouring into campaigns, the lion's share going to your beloved Republican party.

    But to suggest that PB did anything out of the ordinary is to ignore the plain facts. They're an equal opportunity donor company.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Gloyd, do you ever read the comments on your website? I know a lot of them are just people making fun of how you can't pay your mortgage, but it was pointed out in the last post you did about this that the meeting wasn't secret, a newspaper figured out what was discussed:

    http://cincinnati.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/stories/2010/08/02/daily10.html?jst=pn_pn_lk

    Why does COAST continue to manipulate and lie?

    Also, yet AGAIN, you failed to mention another PB boondoggle, the Brent Spence Bridge replacement.

    I wonder if Gloyd writes this garbage himself and quotes himself as if he's being interviewed by a real person and not just the voices in his head. His posts echo the goofy press releases that Smitherman puts out. What a joke.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The Old Hag of Blue AshOctober 19, 2010 at 1:24 PM

    Anonymous, Direhaus is a pro-abortion nut, abortion is only ok when it's supported by right-wing candidates, because they are closer to God. We need Chabot back, I agree with Gloyd.

    - Steph Stoller

    ReplyDelete
  4. Joe,
    Are you dense? The article you repeatedly cite is titled, "Leaders meet to talk future of Brent Spence". Where in the headline, or anywhere else in the article does it state that campaign contributions were solicited at the meeting? Oh, that's right - it doesn't. I suppose we're all supposed to believe that it was mere concidence that PB checks found their way into the Driehaus campaign bank accounts the very next day.

    Anon, do you actually read the articles that you re-cite, or do you just listen to the voices in your head. Maybe you just regurgitate Joe's insightful drivel.

    Let's all repeat this - the meeting was announced, but the quid prio quo for campaign contributions was NOT. If I'm wrong, please point out the sentence in the article where it states that immediately following the discussion of the contracts that PB stands to benefit from they wrote checks to the campaign account of Driehaus." I bet you can't find it, because you're a liar and manipulator.

    Finally, in looking back at the last PB COAST item I see that Randy Simes assured us all that none of this happened and he would contact Driehaus' office to make sure of it. Either you were too busy looking at choo choo trains, or you are ashamed to admit that you were wrong and little stevie driehaus took the money. Which is it Randy?

    ReplyDelete
  5. The Mustache of Blue AshOctober 19, 2010 at 3:49 PM

    Raising taxes is bad, except when me and my fellow tax-and-spend friends are the ones doing it.

    - Rick Bryan (with the blessing of Stephanie Stoller)

    ReplyDelete
  6. Dear Anonymous "Cred Fraig" (you guys are so cute with your funny little reverse letter names, really you are...), no, I'm not dense. It was clearly reported elsewhere in the Enquirer that a fundraiser was being held that night.

    Simply because COAST suggests there was a quid pro quo doesn't make it so. As I said, look at the contribution records of Parsons Brinkerhoff and their personnel. It's to both parties and it's to a number of candidates over the years. This is the way things are in our system.

    Again, when is COAST going to stand up and call for public financing of campaigns to eliminate the smell of such things? You didn't seem to mind when Mike DeWine was getting the money and, as Anon wrote, COAST doesn't bother to talk about Parsons Brinkerhoff being involved on Brent Spence, so why the double standard?

    ReplyDelete
  7. What do you think of this one, Joe M?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Barsons PrinkerhoffOctober 19, 2010 at 7:30 PM

    And just because you say there wasn't a quid pro quo doesn't make it so. The only thing we know for sure is that Driehaus and Oberstar met in a private closed-door meeting with PB Executives, and the very next day campaign contributions from PB were deposited into Driehaus' campaign account. As always, follow the money.

    Furthermore, Jesus, Mike DeWine hasn't been in the Senate for almost 5 years. That's all you got? Maybe you didn't see any COAST blog outrage in 2006 because COAST didn't have a blog back then, moron.

    By the way, you never answered if you would still be smiling after John Kasich kills the funding for the beloved 3C snail-rail boondoggle. I know I will. :)

    ReplyDelete

We follow the "living room" rule. Exhibit the same courtesy you would show guests in your home.