Response to NY Daily News Article: Pastor: NYCHA makes big effort to avoid repairing congregants’ apartments

This is TrueHarlemite's comments to the following article:
Pastor: NYCHA makes big effort to avoid repairing congregants’ apartments
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/pastor-nycha-big-effort-avoid-repairs-article-1.1503457

COMMENT 1
To NANCY DIAMOND, it may not be the neighbors but it may be people who can get into the buildings and do not live there. See:
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/flimsy-locks-broken-intercoms-manhattan-nycha-houses-easy-criminals-break-article-1.1164421

NYCHA has been famous for not installing video cameras (that it has the money for) so that Residents can have "some" feeling of safety. These cameras would also monitor behavior like urinating and defecating in the elevators (human and animal) and stairways and enable the police to identify who is doing this so they can be arrested. John Rhea has video cameras all around where he lives. See:
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/high-crime-nycha-developments-waiting-cameras-article-1.1395635 and
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/caught-cameras-article-1.1396708 and
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/queens/nypd-sitting-cash-surveillance-cameras-rockaways-stakeholders-charge-article-1.1281128 and
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/42-million-allotted-security-cameras-city-projects-years-new-york-city-housing-authority-fails-install-single-article-1.1113507

Agree however that NYCHA has been sabotaging its own management in order to privatize the buildings. It also has a massive stock of uninhabited apartments it is warehousing while aggressively evicting needy Residents. See:
http://amsterdamnews.com/news/2013/jul/11/nycha-policies-contested-elderly-woman-fights-evic/


COMMENT 2
If John Rhea and his entire management staff do not go to jail, (to include Margarita Lopez) they all must know somebody.

Probably how Rhea got the job in the first place.

TH

Response to NY Daily News Article: "Elected officials, union call for incoming NYC Controller to audit the city Housing Authority"

This is TrueHarlemite's comment to the following article:
Elected officials, union call for incoming NYC Controller to audit the city Housing Authority 
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/lawmakers-new-city-controller-audit-nycha-article-1.1511168

Hi "SKIP MOONEY" we have to ignore Ann Coulter because she is good at distracting people from pertinent issues by her use of outlandish and on many occasions racist comments. Thank you for the information, however. 

This New York City Public Housing Authority (NYCHA) + Use/Lost of Money issue is too important to allow Coulter and her "Adam's Apple self" to distract those of us concerned about the preservation of Public Housing in NYC. 

Mayor-Elect Bill DeBlasio. Please create a separate Transition Tent for Public Housing Residents. And please do not listen to just housing organizations. They have a way of hogging meetings so that individuals do not get an opportunity to have their say. Please allow time for individuals to speak by creating a path for independent participation. 

After saying all that: 
SOMEBODY NEEDS TO GO TO JAIL (INCLUDING MARGUERITA LOPEZ) IF ANYTHING RELATING TO ABUSE "OF USE OF MONEY" AND "CONSISTENTLY POOR JUDGEMENT" IS REVEALED. 

How John Rhea got the job of Director of NYCHA is bewildering, but how the NYC Council turned a "blind eye" to his appointment with only a handful of Council Members questioning it's inappropriateness is also a mystery. There were no loud and clear comments from Congressional Representatives either at the time. The two US Senators also remained silent along with the State Senate and Assembly. 

Apparently because it looked like a situation that would only affect the poor and mostly minority poor, the politicians did not seem to care. They did not show any real cohesive outrage. They may have felt that those most affected may yell a lot about a lot of things but they do not go to important meetings and/or vote opting instead to watch TV, go to the Club and spend money, complain to each other and/or discuss sports, get hypnotized at Political Clubs not to do anything, et cetera..... 

Agree! There must be an investigation! But who should do it? Scott Stringer? Pleaseeeeeeeee! 

If you said Spitzer, now that would have made sense. This investigation must be independent of the government. Stringer will have to pay someone who unlike himself knows what a Comptroller is suppose to do. But then he will be in control of the results of the investigation and how it is "couched" prior to their release. 

With Stringer the public are essentially a bunch of Chickens asking the Fox to watch the Fox House. Do you think a Fox is going to do anything about the other Foxes? No matter how much the Chickens complain, the Chickens will eventually be eaten and the Foxes will walk around laughing about how tasty the Chickens were and go on their merry way. 

And in case you did not know it, Stringer is the person who came up with the "INFILL" idea. See: 
"Borough President Stringer has released a detailed report titled “Land Rich, Pocket Poor” on the issue of NYCHA’s unused air rights. In the appendix of that report, he has listed the developments have unused development rights." 
http://www.mbpo.org/uploads/policy_reports/Land%20Rich-Pocket%20Poor.pdf

Also take a peek at the following article in ShelterForce referencing the present Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer's report noted above: 
The Case of NYCHA’s Disappearing Open Space 
http://www.shelterforce.org/article/3066/the_case_of_nychas_disappearing_open_space/ 

It should be demanded during the investigation that the Federal Government (HUD - Housing and Urban Development) explain their "hands off"/minimal interaction approach to NYCHA. This approach is what has allowed NYCHA to "Run Wild" with itself.

NYCHA cannot be an authority unto itself. This must change and Albany, if it really gives a d.....n should start on changing NYCHA's authority status to one where it is responsible to the people it is suppose to serve. 

Changing the NYCHA Board from an appointed board to an elective one SHOULD BE DONE IMMEDIATELY and would bring the NYCHA Board inline with the other Public Housing boards in the State of New York. (Scott Stringer is also big on wanting to appoint everybody - including Residents - to the NYCHA Board - http://www.mbpo.org/uploads/nychareportcolor.pdf > CONTROL! CONTROL!) 

Changing the name of the NYCHA entity might also give it a fresh start. Just an idea. 

For politicians to change NYCHA from an ineffective agency to another ineffective agency just so they can keep their hands on the money and give money to their friends and associates is not the change that Public Housing in NYC needs. 

It will be interesting to see how this all plays out.

A little "Back Stab" never hurt anyone!

Just continues to get nastier. 

Talk about "stab in the back". 

The Rev. Dr. Johnnie G. Green of Mt. Neboh Baptist Church located in Harlem is one of the Reverends quoted in the New York Daily News October 14, 2013 article about Reverends who criticized Al Sharpton's lack of involvement in local issues that affect their "flocks". 

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/holy-war-harlem-pastors-al-sharpton-article-1.1484356 

Rev. Dr. Green is also a Member of the Board of Directors for Sharpton’s National Action Network. http://nationalactionnetwork.net/news/board-of-directors/

The Chronicles of Reverend Kris Erskine - Is the Community being used to rehabilitate another Preacher?

Kettle calling the pot black or Changed Man? 
Is the Community being used to rehabilitate another Preacher?
You Decide! 

Erskine Hired to Preach in Harlem
By: Ashlea Sigman Email
Jun 21, 2008
http://www.kbtx.com/home/headlines/20633704.html

Bryan Police have been looking for him for two and a half weeks.

Now, a former Bryan pastor, wanted for embezzlement, turns up at a church in New York

A Harlem website announces "officers and members of the Bethany Baptist Church family are proud to announce that Dr. Kris Erskine, Pastor-Elect, will be preaching dynamic sermons on potential, purpose and power each Sunday beginning June 1st."

On June 5th, Bryan Police issued a warrant for Erskine's arrest.

He's accused of taking $10,000 from the church he pastored in Bryan, Shiloh Baptist Church.

Police say he funneled money meant for the church, into his own account.

Money like checks meant for tithe offerings, scholarship funds, and even hurricane Katrina help.

None of the Deacons KBTX spoke with say they were contacted by the Harlem church, as a reference.

Shiloh Baptist's interim pastor, Carl Idelbird says he wasn't contacted as a reference either, and doesn't know what to think about Erskine's new position.

KBTX notified Bryan Police about Erskine's whereabouts on Saturday.

Chief Ty Morrow says the District Attorney has authorized his extradition, and that Bryan Police will notify the Fugitive Task Force, as well as the FBI.

TUESDAY, JUNE 24, 2008
Former Bryan Pastor Arrested, Bonds Out of Jail
http://onanite.blogspot.com/2008/06/former-bryan-pastor-arrested-bonds-out.html

Former Bryan Pastor Kris Erskine has been arrested after turning himself in on theft charges, this after he left the state during the investigation into his alleged wrongdoings.

It was News 3 that tipped authorities off to Erskine's new employment in the New York City area. A website promoted Erskine for services at Bethany Baptist Church in Harlem, a site KBTX let authorities know about, one they say they hadn't seen.

Erskine is accused of stealing money from his former church, Bryan's Shiloh Baptist. Authorities believe he took in the neighborhood of $10,000 for his own personal uses, including money that was designated for hurricane victims and scholarships among other things, this according to the church.

The pastor turned himself in early Monday morning, and was confined at 4:18 a.m. according to the county. When News 3 contacted Bryan PD about the arrest mid-Monday-morning, officials were unaware he was sitting in their local jail.

Erskine's bond was set at $5,000, but just after 1 p.m. Monday, he bonded out of jail.

Officials with Bethany Baptist Church in Harlem, say they will wait to hear from Erskine, before they take any action.

"Sometimes they just blow it out of proportion and we're not quick to judge," Duane Causweli with Bethany Baptist Church said. "We here at Bethany knew him different then from what he did in Texas, so when he comes back here we'll talk but I'm not quick to judge anyone."

Bethany Baptist Church tells us it had been looking for the ideal pastor for the church for years, and thought Erskine was the perfect match.

News Three tried to get in touch with Shiloh Baptist Church deacons who originally went to police with the allegations.

According to Deacon Willie Pruitt, the Brazos County District Attorney's office has told the deacons not to talk about the on-going case, but he says "I'm just happy he turned himself in and I'm happy he got a job."

Brazos County Justice of the Peace Tommy Munoz set Erskine's bond Monday morning, but no conditions were added. That means Erskine can leave the state.

News Three talked with the Brazos County District Attorney's about the investigation. It says the case will go to a grand jury in the near future.

Jailed Pastor's Friend Speaks Out
Posted: Jun 25, 2008
by Loren Korn
http://www.abc40.com/global/story.asp?S=8556296

BRYAN - He went from being in the pulpit to behind bars. Bryan Pastor Kris Erskine was charged with stealing over $10,000 from the Shiloh Baptist Church in north Bryan.

Bryan police say Erskine then eluded them when he got another job at a church in Harlem.

ABC40 has exclusive details about his life away from church. Also, his frame of mind before he turned himself in to Bryan Police early Monday morning.

"I spoke with him before he left for New York.  He did say that he was seeking employment and he was going to go on with his life," said the Rev. Robert Wilson, Publisher for the Brazos Valley Informer.

Wilson has known Erskine for years and sought out ABC40 to tell his side of the story. He says the way Erskine has been portrayed publicly is not an accurate description.

"He's an intelligent man. He's made some mistakes. He's very articulate and he's very sharp," said Wilson.

Wilson said he came forward because he felt Erskine's positive influence on the community outweighs any possible wrongdoing.

"He's done a lot of good things in the community. Reverend Erskine enforced the Hour of Power on Wednesday. Reverend Erskine done an excellent job gaining young people to Christ. Teaching, counseling and working with people elsewhere in the Brazos Valley. They should just forgive Dr. Erskine, Reverend Erskine, and allow him to make restitution and go on with his life," said Wilson.

Wilson hasn't spoken to Erskine since he turned himself in on Monday. However, he expects to talk to him in the coming days. Wilson also told ABC40 that he would be more than happy to testify on Erskine's behalf.

Former Pastor to Pay Back Local Church
By: Brenna Flores
Jul 31, 2009
http://www.kbtx.com/news/local/headlines/52226077.html

Shiloh Baptist Church will be repaid $6,000 by its former pastor, Kris Erskine.

Erskine was found guilty November 17 of misapplication of fiduciary property. He was sentenced to four years probation, had to pay a one-thousand-dollar fine and complete 100 hours of community service.

Erskine took funds from the church and put them in a personal bank account.

A hearing on Wednesday determined the amount of money that was owed as restitution. Erskine agreed to repay the money after members of the church and two local bank representatives testified.

Rev. Al Sharpton fires back at the clerics who criticized him; blames their comments on 'jealousy.'

The circus continues.........

Rev. Al Sharpton fires back at the clerics who criticized him; blames their comments on 'jealousy.'
The preacher/civil rights activist challenged the four local pastors who accused him of 'jet-setting' to 'match what we do every day, all day.'
BY SIMONE WEICHSELBAUM , CELESTE KATZ , TANAY WARERKAR AND DANIEL BEEKMAN /
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS MONDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2013
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/rev-al-rebuke-sharp-article-1.1485676

Holy war in Harlem: Pastors want Al Sharpton out

Monday, October 14, 2013
By Simone Weichselbaum / NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
Holy war in Harlem: Pastors want Al Sharpton out 
Four prominent clergymen invited over 100 churches to unify in an attempt dethrone Reverend Al Sharpton.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/holy-war-harlem-pastors-al-sharpton-article-1.1484356

Freak Out Cuz I'm Back

Hello Harlem!

Took a bit of a hiatus but now I'm back.

Rangel just keeps rooooooooooling along!
(Emphasis TH's)

December 11, 2008

Editorial

Mr. Rangel’s Problems Roll On

Speaker Nancy Pelosi is heading into the new Congress without the quick resolution she dearly hoped for on Representative Charles Rangel’s mushrooming and deeply embarrassing ethics problems.

The normally mute and far-too-passive House ethics committee has done the right thing in announcing that it is broadening its inquiry to look into the recent report that Mr. Rangel — chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee — helped preserve a lucrative off-shore tax loophole for an oil drilling executive.

While Mr. Rangel and the executive deny any link, the businessman conveniently pledged $1 million for a planned Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York. (Now that’s what we call service from the public.)

“Bar nothing,” demanded Mr. Rangel, the powerful New York Democrat, calling on the ethics panel to look into various questionable dealings. He insists the charges are either false or honest mistakes.

Beyond suspicions about the offshore tax loophole worth tens of millions, the panel must look into Mr. Rangel’s use of congressional letterhead to solicit support for his eponymous center. Then there’s his use of rent-stabilized apartments in Harlem at cut rates and his failure to pay taxes and disclose $75,000 in income from a Dominican villa on which he enjoyed an interest-free mortgage.

The ethics panel must muster the courage to actually vet one of the House lions (especially with voter cynicism again rising with fresh headlines about the Illinois Statehouse scandal). Ms. Pelosi must muster the courage to urge — or demand — that Mr. Rangel give up his chairmanship while the investigation proceeds. If he won’t, she should strip him of his gavel.

There can be no clean start here until the ethics panel answers all of the questions about Mr. Rangel, his center, his apartments, his villa and that loophole. With huge fiscal and tax issues looming for the next Congress, there can be no doubts about the leadership’s priorities.

Original Article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/11/opinion/11thu3.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=rangel&st=cse

TH
Watching Out For The Village!

The Charles Rangel Saga Continues

The saga continues. Read the article below.

The community may want Charlie gone, but who is there to replace him?

Again, the community needs to begin to have earnest and productive discussions about who it feels should replace this albatross around the Harlem's neck.

The discussions do not need to focus on just one person, having several choices would lead to competitive and revealing political campaigns among "the best" in the Village.

Let us hope this drama does not continue to go on endlessly and that Harlem will have some good candidates for the position.

December 10, 2008
House Ethics Panel Expands Rangel Inquiry
By DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI

The House ethics committee voted on Tuesday to expand its investigation into Representative Charles B. Rangel to examine his role in preserving a tax loophole for an oil drilling company whose chief executive pledged $1 million to a City College of New York project that will bear the congressman’s name.

Mr. Rangel, whose personal finances and fund-raising have been the subject of an inquiry for several months, came under renewed scrutiny last month, when The New York Times reported that he was a pivotal figure in stymieing efforts to close a tax shelter for Nabors Industries and three other companies during the same month that the chief executive of Nabors made a $100,000 donation to C.C.N.Y.’s Rangel Center of Public Service.

The chief executive, Eugene M. Isenberg, had acknowledged that he and a company lobbyist met with Mr. Rangel at the Carlyle Hotel in New York on Feb. 12, 2007, the same day that the Ways and Means Committee, of which Mr. Rangel is chairman, was considering a bill that left the loophole intact, but said they did not discuss his pledge to donate $1 million to the school.

Mr. Rangel, a Democrat from Harlem, has strenuously denied any wrongdoing and this week asked that the ethics panel examine his relationship with Nabors.

The ethics committee statement did not set a timetable for the inquiry, but lawyers and congressional aides said that the expansion of the investigation means it is unlikely that the panel will complete its case by Jan. 3, as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi suggested last month.

Republicans have called for Mr. Rangel to step down as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, which shapes tax policy and will be instrumental in crafting President-elect Barack Obama’s proposed fiscal stimulus program to jump-start the flagging economy.

Original Article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/12/10/nyregion/10rangel.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=rangel&st=cse

TH
Watching Out For The Village!

More Shenanigans from Chanles Rangel.

Charlie is now involving more of his family in his shenanigans. At one time he tried to blame his wife, that is, tried to say his wife was the responsible one for managing the finances associated with the unreported rental income from a luxury villa in the Dominican Republic. Now, apparently, he has been overpaying his son for web site work.

Read the articles below from the Wall Street Journal and Politico.com!

Tick, tick, tick .....

DECEMBER 6, 2008, 11:37 A.M. ET
Rangel Paid Son $57,500 for Web Work


By CHRISTOPHER COOPER and JOHN R. WILKE

U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel paid $57,500 from a campaign account to a Web-design company owned by his son over two years, paying more for Internet services than any other House member during the same period, according to federal records.

Using campaign funds to pay relatives is legal, as long as the products or services are priced at fair market value.

Associated Press

House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel is currently facing four investigations by the House ethics panel for possible misuse of his office.

House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel is currently facing four investigations by the House ethics panel for possible misuse of his office.

Federal records show Rep. Rangel paid Edisonian Innovative Works LLC, which Steven Charles Rangel ran from his Maryland home. Rep. Rangel, 78 years old, a New York Democrat, also lives there when the House is in session, according to his autobiography.

The amount of money paid to Edisonian exceeds what fellow House members paid for similar services during a two-year period beginning in 2005, according to the analysis of federal records by the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan group that tracks money in politics.

The average House member buying Internet services spent $4,541 on campaign Web sites during that period. Mr. Rangel paid his 40-year-old son $57,500, the analysis shows. The second-highest spender was Rep. Ralph Regula, an Ohio Republican, who paid $44,000 during that period. Seven other congressmen report spending more than $20,000 on their Web sites.

In total, Rep. Rangel's campaign account paid his son's company $79,000 over 30 months, from 2004 to 2007, records show.

A spokesman for the lawmaker, Emile Milne, said Steven Rangel earned less than a Web firm the congressman used in 2004 to perform essentially the same work. During that year, a Brooklyn company called Networked Politics received $41,000 from Rep. Rangel's political action committee and campaign committee, while the junior Rangel received $19,560 for about a half-year of work, Mr. Milne said.

Rep. Rangel, chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, is currently facing several separate House ethics committee investigations for possible misuse of his office reported by the New York Post and New York Times in recent months.

Among the allegations under review by the committee are that he improperly used a rent-subsidized New York apartment as his office; and that he failed to disclose rental income from a luxury villa in the Dominican Republic purchased in part with loans from a lobbyist.

Rep. Rangel denied wrongdoing in the ethics complaints, though he has said that he will restate his financial disclosures, which are required annually from all lawmakers.

Earlier, Rep. Rangel helped his son get a job with the Federal Communications Commission in 2000. The younger Rangel worked on various projects at the FCC in 2000 and 2001, including ensuring telecommunications access on tribal lands, according to commission records. Mr. Rangel through Mr. Milne, the spokesman, acknowledged that he "did make an initial call on Steven's behalf to the FCC -- an agency he had no legislative oversight or responsibility for."

A spokesman for the FCC declined to comment, and Steven Rangel didn't return a call for comment.

After leaving the FCC, Steven Rangel, an ex-Marine, incorporated his Web company in June 2004. The first $9,780 payment from Mr. Rangel's political action committee came a week before the company was incorporated. A second $9,780 payment was made one month later. In 2005, Steven Rangel's company received $22,500 from his father's re-election campaign, and in 2006, the company received another $32,500, federal records show.

It isn't uncommon for congressmen to pay family members small amounts of money for campaign or administrative work. Most lawmakers disclose the names of relatives receiving these payments, although it isn't required. Rep. Rangel's disclosure doesn't indicate his son was associated with Edisonian.

The payments from the Rangel campaign account to Steven Rangel's company ended January 2007, the same month he got a job on the staff of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. The job coincided with the arrival of a new chairman, John Dingell (D., Mich.), a close political ally of Rep. Rangel.

"No one is alleging that Steven Rangel performed poorly," Mr. Milne said. He added that Steven Rangel is fully qualified for his House staff job.

A spokeswoman for Rep. Dingell's committee issued a statement calling him "one of the most hard-working members of our staff," who has been involved in both FCC and Food and Drug Administration inquiries. "Steven has been a welcome addition to the committee and would serve any chairman well," the statement said.

A person with direct knowledge of Steven Rangel's hiring on Energy and Commerce said his father helped him get hired. "How does anyone get any gig on Capitol Hill? It's who you know," this person said.

Write to Christopher Cooper at christopher.cooper@wsj.com

Original Article:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122852432614184499.html?mod=googlenews_wsj#articleTabs%3Darticle

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

Tangled Web: Rangel son got campaign cash
By: Luke Rosiak and Glenn Thrush
December 5, 2008 03:22 PM EST

Between 2004 and 2007, Rep. Charles Rangel steered nearly $80,000 in campaign cash to an Internet company run by his son. Photo:AP

Between 2004 and 2007, Rep. Charles Rangel steered nearly $80,000 in campaign cash to an Internet company run by his son — paying lavishly for a pair of political websites so poorly designed an expert estimated one should have cost no more than $100 to create.

The payments are apparently legal under federal law, but their disclosure raises new questions about the Ways and Means Committee chairman as he faces House ethics committee probes into his failure to pay taxes on rental income and his alleged use of House stationery to solicit contributions for a public policy center that bears his name.

Rangel’s leadership PAC and congressional committee shelled out $79,560 to Edisonian Innovative Works for “websites,” according to Federal Election Commission filings.

Edisonian Innovative Works, which lists several clients on its homepage — none of them politicians — was founded by Rangel’s son, Steven Charles Rangel, 40, of Greenbelt, Md.

“This is probably legal but is definitely wrong,” said Meredith McGehee of the Campaign Legal Center, a nonprofit organization that monitors compliance with electoral law.

“You're in a situation where you were given money for a campaign and it's being used to enrich family members,” she added. “The return argument is they're performing legitimate services. The question that needs to be asked in this case is: Was this a legitimate payment or was this a payoff?”

Rangel spokesman Emile Milne said Rangel’s son was a valuable member of the congressman’s re-election team and was paid a modest monthly retainer to build, maintain, update and publicize the site.

“Steven Rangel's firm was paid roughly $2,500 on a monthly basis — less than the firm that had previously managed Congressman Rangel's Web and online operation (Network Politics) — and the firm's fees included money for Web advertising designed to promote traffic to the website,” Milne wrote in an e-mail message to Politico.

“In 2007, the Rangel political organization made the decision to go with a scaled-back Web presence and hired NGP software” to run the site, he added.

Still, the sum paid to Rangel’s son was the most paid for websites by any House member during the 2004-2006 election period, according to an analysis of Federal Election Commission filings provided to Politico by the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

Rep. Ralph Regula (R-Ohio) and since-ousted Rep. Christopher Shays (R-Conn.) were distant runners-up, shelling out $44,000 and $30,000 for their websites, respectively, during the 2006 cycle.

Both Regula and Shays may have needed the exposure to fend off serious challengers. Rangel, a Harlem Democrat and dean of his state’s House delegation, hasn’t faced serious competition in years and retained his seat with 94 percent of the vote in 2006.

The vast majority of House candidates who set up campaign sites in 2006 paid a relative pittance, with 200 members spending less than $10,000 each for websites, according to the CRP analysis.

The payments to Steven Rangel began in mid-2004 and stopped in early 2007 when the former Marine, who is also a lawyer, was hired by the House Energy and Commerce Committee as an $80,000-per-year “investigative counsel,” according to records.

“It is difficult and often misleading to compare what individual members pay for Web services because of the wide range of activities that websites can support, depending on what campaigns choose to do with their sites,” Milne said.

Steven Rangel is close to his father and has long played an active role in his campaigns, even videotaping his dad’s campaign events in the early 1980s. The 78-year-old chairman often sleeps at his son’s house in Maryland, according to people who know both men.

Rangel is hardly the first House member to hire his family for campaigns. Between 2002 and 2005, Julie Doolittle was paid $136,000 in fundraising fees by the campaign of her husband, retiring Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.).

And Long Island Democratic Rep. Timothy Bishop raised eyebrows in 2005 when Newsday reported that he had paid his daughter Molly $87,828 in salary and travel expenses to act as his campaign’s finance director for two years.

But few relatives have ever played such a visible role.

Steven Rangel’s design for his father’s National Leadership PAC site appears to have been slapped together in a hurry, intermittently updated and never spell-checked.

An apologetic note near the top of the site warns readers that the page is undergoing “routine maintenace [sic]” and cautions that “much of our content is currently unavailable.”

Another button urges visitors to “Give Contribuition [sic].”

The site “is a one pager with a third party site taking donations,” said Jamie Newell of 7AZ Web Design, a company that creates sites for a wide array of businesses in Washington. “For something of that standard, I would not pay more than $100.”

The now-dormant page for the congressman’s 2006 reelection campaign should have cost “no more than $900,” excluding maintenance fees, Newell said.

Rangel’s 2008 campaign site was designed and run by nonrelatives for less than $25,000.

Messages left on Steven Rangel’s work phone weren’t returned.

In a short bio written on his now-defunct personal Web page, he described how his frustration with designers led him to learn the ropes himself — and write an e-book on how to make money on the Internet.

"I… spent a lot of money trying to get third-party vendors to develop to my standards. Fed up with their performance, I decided to teach my self,” he wrote.

Original Article:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1208/16219.html

TH
Watching Out For The Village!

World Aids Day and Harlem

Today is World AIDS Day.

Wanted to take a moment to remind the Village of the importance of this day.

Many Harlem Residents have been touched by this disease. They have been touched either as one who has been infected by the AIDS virus or as one who is a relative, friend and neighbor of one infected by AIDS.

It is not a day to judge but to understand and to care.

Do something positive for someone with AIDS today. Go by their home or phone them to say hello. Ask them how they are doing. Make it something you do often.

Let us hope this is one world health day that will go away in our lifetime because a cure has been found.

To learn more about 2008 World AIDS Day:
http://www.worldaidscampaign.org/static/en/

TH
Watching Out For The Village!

Seniority appears to be taking its last few breaths in Washington, DC

The seniority argument for keeping Charles Rangel in congress is going by the wayside under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi, speaker of the House of Representatives. Take a read on the following article posted in the Capitol Briefing section of the Washington Post newspaper on November 20, 2008. It appears that Seniority is not just dying but may be dead altogether.

Community! We must be about the business of getting some worthy people to run for the 15th Congressional District. We cannot be lax about this. Otherwise we open ourselves for opportunistic interlopers to run for and possibly win the seat.

Waxman's Win Marks Seismic Shift in House

The clash between Reps. Henry Waxman (Calif.) and John Dingell (Mich.) was notable in the recently quiet and stable House Democratic caucus.

By Ben Pershing

Democrats have a comfortable majority now in the House, and they will again in January. Nancy Pelosi is the Speaker now, and she will be again in January. In a capital that is in the midst of a titanic change, House Democrats have been a relatively calm sea of stability since Election Day. Until this morning.

Rep. Henry Waxman's (D-Calif.) defeat of Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.) for the Energy and Commerce Committee gavel represents a huge shift in the way the Democratic Caucus runs itself, and in the broader culture that has developed over decades around a few hard and fast rules governing the distribution of power on Capitol Hill.

What does Waxman's victory really mean going forward? Given the shear scope of the panel's jurisdiction, and how long it's been since anyone other than Dingell was the committee's top Democrat, it will be weeks or months before all of the effects of Waxman's win are known. But here are three implications that are clear right now.

1) Seniority Is Dead. In a way, the House Democratic Caucus has long operated like a public employees' union. Seniority ruled the day, and if you stuck around long enough -- meaning you had a safe enough district to get reelected cycle after cycle -- you would keep moving up the committee ladder, almost without regard for merit. That's not to say the current crop of chairmen are necessarily bad at their jobs (though some probably are), only that the people who hold gavels don't necessarily have them because they are the agreed-upon masters of their field

In theory, Democrats did away with seniority as the determinative principle for chairmen back in 1974, but in practice the longest-serving committee member has nearly always gotten the gavel

Notably, since Democrats captured control of the House in the 2006 elections, Pelosi has kept on the books a Republican-authored rule mandating six-year term limits for chairmen, so many of the current chairs would be termed out in 2012. But there have been rumbles from Dingell and his ilk that they would try to get that rule scrapped, a step that appears highly unlikely given today's events.

Now, there are some nervous chairmen out there. If Dingell can be beaten, why not Ways and Means Chairman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) or Judiciary Chairman John Conyers (D-Mich.)? Yes, those chairmen will support each other, just as most probably voted for Dingell. But there are a lot more members in the Democratic Caucus who aren't chairmen than members who are, and many of them would like their own shots at a gavel someday.

Also nervous today -- lobbyists. The seniority system has made it easy for K Street to know who will be in charge of a committee tomorrow, and the day after that, and thus where to put its money and whose former aides to hire. The system begat a cycle: The longer chairmen stayed in place, the more allies they had on K Street and the more money they raised, thereby cementing their power and helping them stay even longer.

Dingell has been the top Democrat on the Energy panel for 27 years. Is that really fair to the other members of the committee? The most common argument made in favor of the seniority system is that it allows chairmen to build up expertise. But Waxman has been on the committee for more than three decades himself. Is he really not an expert? Obviously, the "seniority = expertise" argument didn't fly today with the majority of the Democratic Caucus, which means it probably never will again.

After this morning, seniority isn't out the window altogether -- no freshman will chair a committee anytime soon -- but it's hurting.

2) Ideology Matters. The fact that seniority was the deciding factor in handing out chairmanships for so long meant that ideology wasn't. Members didn't get and keep their gavels because the majority of their colleagues thought they were right on the issues, they got them because their constituents did and kept sending them back to Washington for another term.

The lawmakers who can be reelected for decades tend to be from the safest districts. Which has generally meant that the most conservative Republicans and the most liberal Democrats have accrued seniority. Dingell is an unusual case, in that he is actually to the right of his Caucus on a few issues, notably on abortion and, most importantly, on the environment. His district has a massive auto industry presence and his wife, Debbie, is a senior executive at General Motors; she is actually a descendant of the company's founders.

So for years, Dingell has resisted efforts to force auto companies to make cleaner, more fuel-efficient vehicles. Though there are other Democrats who represent industrial states and share Dingell's concerns, most members of the party lean toward the environmentalist side. Dingell simply does not represent the majority of Democrats' views on environmental issues, and until today, he suffered no consequences for that.

Now, he's suffering, and the next time a chairman decides to use his committee to advance the interests of his district while ignoring the interests of most of his colleagues, he might think twice.

3) Pelosi Rules. Lest anyone doubted who was in charge of House Democrats, today's vote provided a helpful reminder.

Pelosi was publicly neutral in the race, but her silence spoke volumes. Her unwillingness to back the longtime chairman or publicly back the seniority system made it clear where she stood. Generally, if journalists write something that Pelosi or her staff think is wrong, they will hear about it in short order. Many reporters wrote that Pelosi was believed to be silently backing her fellow Californian Waxman, and Pelosi's office made no effort to dissuade the press from that storyline

(House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), meanwhile, tried to broker a deal between the two gavel contenders and then spoke out in favor of Dingell at Wednesday's Steering Committee meeting, and Dingell lost that vote anyway, before losing today's as well.

Pelosi has made it clear to chairmen since becoming Speaker that they answer to her. Most of the time, their interests and hers coincide, but her battles with Dingell have been the most high-profile exception. The Speaker created a special panel on global warming issues specifically because she knew Dingell wouldn't move a bill she found acceptable, and then Dingell mocked and tried to stymie the creation of that special committee. Pelosi is a committed environmentalist, and Waxman's win has cleared away her biggest internal obstacle to passing more stringent regulations on that front.

Beyond Dingell, the erosion of the seniority system means that Pelosi's hand is stronger than it was yesterday. Whereas before chairmen were able to defy their leaders largely without fear of losing their jobs, now they know that's no longer the case. Pelosi was already shaping up to be one of the most powerful Speakers in recent history. Now, with chairmen less likely to freelance and a larger majority being sworn in next January, she's even stronger.

Original Article:
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/11/what_waxmans_win_means.html

TH
Watching Out For The Village!

The times, they are a changing.

Almost forgot this nugget.

Esquire Magazine endorsed Republican Edward Daniels and not Charles Rangel this election cycle for Congressman of the 15th Congressional District. This is how they summed up their decision. (italics by TH).

"District 15

Edward Daniels (R)
Charles Rangel (D)

Firebrand, infighter, mover, shaker, polarizer: For nearly four decades, Charlie Rangel, chairman of the powerful Ways and Means Committee, has earned these compliments--or epithets. We'll add two more: tax evader, for "forgetting" to pay taxes on $75,000 in rental income he earned. And sweetheart dealmaker, for living in four cherished rent-stabilized New York City apartments priced far below market value. Maybe it's time for Charlie to retire and tend to his real estate holdings full-time.
Esquire endorses: Daniels"

And check out the following article dated November 20, 2008 (Again italics by TH). Yes Charlie, the seniority thing is playing itself out. Hopefully the Residents of the 15th Congressional District will understand that the one main playing card you had to keep them voting for you is slipping away from you. And, who appears to be the instigator of all of this? Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House of Representatives. Ha!

Waxman Defeats Dingell

By Paul Kane

Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) won the vote, 137-122, to become the new chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, defeating the legendary Rep. John Dingell (D-Mich.).

The vote came a day after the House Democratic steering committee recommended Waxman for the post in a narrow 25-22 vote. The powerful Energy panel, with jurisdiction over health care, energy issues and telecommunications policy, will play a significant role in moving much of President-elect Barack Obama's agenda in the 111th Congress.

"It's the mantra of the Obama election. People want change," said Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), who supported Waxman. "He'll work best with the new administration."

Senior Democrats were stunned by the Waxman victory, which seemingly dealt a blow to the party's long-held principle of seniority.

"It's just been buried," Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, said of seniority.

Despite House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's public neutrality in the race, Rangel accused her of playing a role. "I assume that not playing a role is playing a role," Rangel said.

Ouch! Charlie you really are pissed off about this!

Original Articles:
http://www.esquire.com/features/esquire-endorsements-2008/new-york-1108
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/capitol-briefing/2008/11/waxman_defeats_dingell.html

TH
Watching Out For The Village!

The Hill newspaper kicks in with its take on the matter of Congressman Charles Rangel.

Washington Post says Rangel should step down
By Susan Crabtree
Posted: 11/29/08 06:05 PM [ET]

The Washington Post has joined the New York Times in calling for Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) to step down as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee in light of new ethics charges that emerged earlier this week.

The Times reported Tuesday that Rangel helped preserve a valuable tax loophole for an oil and gas drilling company while the company’s chief executive, Eugene Isenberg, was pledging $1 million to the Charles B. Rangel School of Public Service at City College of New York.

Rangel has said the timing of the donation’s pledge was not related to his decision to oppose legislation closing the tax loophole.

But the Post editorial board on Saturday was skeptical about the coincidence, noting that Rangel met Isenberg to discuss the businessman’s support of the Rangel school the same day the tax legislation was being considered in the Ways and Means Committee. Right after his meeting with Isenberg, Rangel met with the company’s lobbyists, to make sure Rangel would not close the loophole.

The revelation is the latest in a series of allegations that have surfaced in the past five months. Rangel also has been accused of paying below-market rents on four apartments, including one that he illegally used as a campaign office. He has since given that office up. In addition, Rangel failed to pay tens of thousands of tax dollars on rental income on a vacation home in the Dominican Republic. He has since hired a forensic accountant to determine exactly how much he owes for the past 17 years. He failed to report the value of a condominium in Florida and did not report a privately sponsored trip on his House travel disclosure forms. He also used congressional letterhead to request meetings to promote donations to the City College education center bearing his name.

The ethics committee is investigating the allegations, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Wednesday said she expects the panel to wrap up its investigation by the end of this Congress, Jan. 3.

The Times on Wednesday called on Pelosi to force Rangel to step down from the Ways and Means panel. The Post also argued that the time has come for Rangel to relinquish the post.

“At a time when President-elect Barack Obama is holding frequent news conferences to reassure the markets and the American people that he is ready to lead the nation to economic recovery, the last thing he will need is a chairman of Ways and Means caught up in a swirl of serious allegations,” the Post opined.

Original Article: http://thehill.com/leading-the-news/washington-post-says-rangel-should-step-down-2008-11-29.html

TH
Watching Out For The Villiage!

Charles Rangel and the Clock

Tick, Tick, Tick, Tick, Tick, Tick ..........!

Time is running out for Congressman Charles Rangel.

Check out yesterday's Washington Post Editorial on Charlie.

Step Aside, Rep. Rangel

The chairman of Ways and Means becomes an unnecessary distraction.

Saturday, November 29, 2008; A14

WHEN WE last wrote about Rep. Charles B. Rangel (D-N.Y.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, we urged that the House ethics committee be allowed to investigate before anyone drew final conclusions. But the latest revelation of Mr. Rangel's ethical tin ear is the most galling yet. While he remains innocent until proven otherwise, he should step aside as chairman while the ethics committee expands its inquiry.

The New York Times reported on Tuesday that Mr. Rangel helped preserve a valuable tax loophole for an oil and gas drilling company while the company's chief executive, Eugene M. Isenberg, was pledging $1 million to the Charles B. Rangel School of Public Service at City College of New York. Mr. Rangel insists that the mutual favors were entirely coincidental. And quite a coincidence it seems to have been. On Feb. 12, 2007, the Times reported, the day the tax legislation was being considered in his committee, Mr. Rangel met in New York City with Mr. Isenberg to discuss the businessman's support of the Rangel School. Then Mr. Isenberg escorted Mr. Rangel across the room to his lobbyist, Kenneth J. Kies, who wanted to make sure Mr. Rangel would not close the loophole.

The revelation is the latest in a litany that has come to light since the summer. It was disclosed that Mr. Rangel was paying below-market rents on four Harlem apartments. One, which he has since given up, was illegally used as a campaign office. He owed taxes on at least $75,000 in rental income on a vacation home in the Dominican Republic. (He has since paid $10,800 to the IRS and New York State for three tax years and has hired a forensic accountant to determine how much he owes for the remaining 17 years.) Mr. Rangel underreported the value of a condominium he and his wife owned in Florida. He neglected to fully account on House travel disclosure forms for some privately sponsored trips. And he used his official stationary to ask for meetings to discuss his eponymous school of public service with titans of business and philanthropy.

At a time when President-elect Barack Obama is holding frequent news conferences to reassure the markets and the American people that he is ready to lead the nation to economic recovery, the last thing he will need is a chairman of Ways and Means caught up in a swirl of serious allegations.

Original Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/28/AR2008112802519.html

TH
Watching Out For The Village!

Charles Rangel just keeps on doing his thing.

More mess, more mess, more mess. Charlie just keeps operating as usual. It does not matter to him if anyone (15th Congressional District) is watching or not. As long as he gets what he wants, the 15th CD can just go to H......l! Harlem needs better representation.

Interlopers, need not apply (aka Craig Schley).

The Congressman, the Donor and the Tax Break

Brendan Smialowski for The New York Times

At a press conference in July, Representative Charles B. Rangel denied acting unethically in his fund-raising for a local graduate school and his leasing of several rent-stabilized apartments.

By DAVID KOCIENIEWSKI
Published: November 24, 2008

Representative Charles B. Rangel has helped raise $11 million for a City College of New York school of public service to be named in his honor. In recent months, as questions have emerged about his fund-raising, he has insisted that he has kept his efforts to attract donors scrupulously separate from his official duties in Congress.

Multimedia

Enlarge Image
Loophole

Enlarge Image

Associated Press
Eugene M. Isenberg, chief executive of Nabors Industries.

But Congressional records and interviews show that Mr. Rangel was instrumental in preserving a lucrative tax loophole that benefited an oil-drilling company last year, while at the same time its chief executive was pledging $1 million to the project, the Charles B. Rangel School of Public Service at C.C.N.Y.

The company, Nabors Industries, was one of four corporations based in the United States that were widely criticized in 2002 and 2003 for opening offices in the Caribbean to reduce their federal tax payments. Mr. Rangel was among dozens of representatives from both parties who bitterly opposed those offshore moves and, in 2004, pushed unsuccessfully for legislation to make the companies pay more tax.

But in 2007, when the United States Senate tried to crack down on the companies, Mr. Rangel, who had recently been sworn in as House Ways and Means chairman, fought to protect them. The tax shelter for the four companies was preserved, saving Nabors an estimated tens of millions of dollars annually and depriving the federal treasury of $1.1 billion in revenues over a decade, according to a Congressional analysis by the nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation.

Mr. Rangel said he stood with Nabors because, as much as he was offended by the company’s attempts to get around some of its United States taxes, he thought it wrong to impose a retroactive tax increase. The congressman said he has long believed that retroactive punishments are bad public policy.

Mr. Rangel also said that the pledge from the Nabors chief executive, Eugene M. Isenberg, one of the largest the school received, played no role in his decision to protect the loophole, and maintained that he did not even know about it until this summer, more than a year later. His aides said he also later pushed tax legislation that would have adversely affected Nabors and hundreds of other offshore companies, though those efforts came to naught.

Mr. Isenberg said that he pledged the money — $200,000 of which he has already paid — because the school is a worthy cause, and that he never sought or received special treatment from Mr. Rangel.

“There was no quid pro quo,” Mr. Isenberg said in an interview on Friday.

What is clear is that Mr. Rangel played a pivotal role in preserving the tax shelter for Nabors and the other companies in 2007. And while the issue was before his committee, Mr. Rangel met with Mr. Isenberg and a lobbyist for Nabors and discussed it, on the same morning that the congressman and Mr. Isenberg met to talk about the chief executive’s potential support for the Rangel center.

Mr. Rangel’s opposition to closing the loophole surprised his Congressional colleagues, who had viewed him as an outspoken ally in the effort to eliminate the tax shelter.

The House ethics committee is now investigating Mr. Rangel’s solicitations for donations for the school, along with several other issues involving his personal finances and fund-raising. Mr. Rangel used Congressional stationery when he wrote to many potential donors to the project and, after criticism, asked the ethics committee to determine whether or not he violated any rules.

When asked to comment on this subject, Mr. Rangel referred questions to the lawyer who is representing him before the ethics panel. The lawyer, Leslie Kiernan, said that Mr. Rangel’s efforts on behalf of Nabors and the other companies were unrelated to the Nabors chief executive’s financial support for the Rangel center.

“The donation and his action on the tax matters had nothing to do with each other,” she said.

‘Sharing the Sacrifice’

Mounds of charred rubble were still being cleared from the World Trade Center site in January 2002, and American soldiers were searching for Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, so when news reports surfaced about a handful of major American companies opening small offshore offices to avoid paying millions in United States taxes, the issue quickly was cast as a battle between patriotism and greed.

Members of Congress from both parties moved quickly to file bills that would prevent the companies from sidestepping their United States tax obligations, branding the fleeing corporations as “taxpatriates,” and “corporate Benedict Arnolds” whose accounting maneuvers were “akin to treason.”

Mr. Rangel, whose service in the Korean War and seat on the Ways and Means Committee made him a respected voice on both taxes and defense policy, blasted the Bush administration for failing to move more forcefully against companies.

“Supporting America is more than about waving the flag and saluting — it’s about sharing the sacrifice,” Mr. Rangel told a reporter at the time. “That’s true of soldiers, citizens, and it should be true of big companies, too.”

As public outrage grew, some companies, including Nabors, which was based in Houston, raced to reincorporate outside the United States, a process known as corporate inversion, before the law could be changed to prevent them from doing so or imposing federal taxes on them.

But leaders in the Senate issued a bipartisan statement warning companies that it was pointless to try to beat the deadline, because whatever legislation was ultimately enacted would apply to all corporations that completed their offshore moves from that date (March 21, 2002) forward.

“Let me be clear to everyone developing or contemplating one of these deals,” announced Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the ranking Republican on the Senate Finance Committee. “You proceed at your own peril.”

But as the furor died down, four companies, including Nabors, went ahead and established themselves offshore in 2002 and 2003.

Soon afterward, Nabors and the other companies persuaded a group of House Republicans that any crackdown on companies moving offshore should apply only to those that did so after 2003 — which would exempt Nabors and the three others. The Republicans tried to push through such a provision twice in 2003, but House Democrats led by Mr. Rangel blocked them.

Then, in October 2004, despite howls of protest by Mr. Rangel and other Democrats, the Republican-led House attached language to a budget bill carving out the loophole for the companies, and preserving their tax bonanza.

And when lobbyists for the companies argued that depriving Nabors and the other companies of the loophole would amount to a retroactive tax increase, Mr. Rangel’s Democrats brushed aside that argument, pointing out that the companies had been warned.

Opposition to retroactive tax increases is often based on a concern that individuals or companies may have acted differently had they known a change in tax policy was coming. Nabors, and the other companies, the public record shows, had been warned.

“Making them pay taxes wasn’t a retroactive tax increase, it was common sense,” said Dan Maffei, who was a spokesman at the time for Democrats on Ways and Means, reporting to Mr. Rangel.

A Library as a Legacy

Mr. Rangel was born in Harlem in 1930 and has lived in the neighborhood nearly his entire life, so when he began thinking about how to memorialize his long Congressional career, he did not look far from home.

In 2004, Mr. Rangel and officials at City College of New York began discussing the possibility of leaving his papers at the college’s campus in Harlem. By the next year, Mr. Rangel and the C.C.N.Y. president, Gregory H. Williams, had agreed on a plan to build a library as part of a new school for public service, and for it to be named in the congressman’s honor.

At a cost of $30 million, the school, in a refurbished five-story brownstone, would allow the college to offer students a master’s degree in public administration and allow Mr. Rangel to maintain an office and preserve his legacy in a dignified academic setting.

But raising money for the project was not easy.

In June 2005, using his Congressional stationery, Mr. Rangel wrote letters to 100 foundations, many of them charitable arms of corporations like Verizon and Bristol-Myers Squibb, asking them to meet with school officials to learn about the project. While the letters did not directly ask for donations, Mr. Rangel later acknowledged in a statement to the ethics committee that “of course” he hoped they would lead to contributions.

But donations only trickled in, with the 100 letters leading to just $1.6 million in pledges, according to Mr. Rangel’s statement to the ethics committee. So in July 2006, he tried again, writing to 47 more foundations.

Later that summer, Mr. Rangel spoke with the Manhattan district attorney, Robert M. Morgenthau, a longtime friend and political ally, who wanted to put him in contact with another potential donor: Mr. Isenberg. For years, Mr. Morgenthau had been a supporter of C.C.N.Y. and knew of Mr. Isenberg’s generous donations to educational projects like the Parkside School in Manhattan and the University of Massachusetts at Amherst.

So on Sept. 18, 2006, Mr. Morgenthau hosted a meeting at his office in Downtown Manhattan that included Mr. Rangel, Mr. Isenberg, Dr. Williams from C.C.N.Y., and one of the school’s top fund-raising officials. Their discussion, which lasted about 75 minutes, touched on a variety of aspects of the proposal — plans to renovate the building, the school’s possible course requirements and curriculum, and efforts to attract top-flight scholars and professors.

During two interviews in recent weeks, Mr. Morgenthau recalled: “No one talked about money. The conversation was about the project, and the plans for the school, which will make a very important contribution.”

A few weeks after the meeting, Mr. Isenberg said, he received a call from school officials who asked for a contribution. By year’s end, Mr. Isenberg had promised the project its largest donation to that point: $1 million.

Rush to Close Loopholes

Democrats swept into control of Congress in January 2007 after promising to “drain the swamp” in Washington and end government giveaways to big business.

One of the top priorities, announced by the incoming House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, was to eliminate loopholes used by corporations to avoid taxes.

So in mid-January 2007, as the Democratic-led Senate Finance Committee put together a bill to increase the minimum wage and provide tax cuts for small businesses, it proposed paying for the plan by ending $8.3 billion in tax loopholes, including the one carved out for Nabors — one of the world’s largest oil-drilling companies — and the three others.

The finance committee chairman, Max Baucus, a Montana Democrat, said he was proud that Congress was finally closing loopholes for companies like Nabors “who reinvented themselves as foreign corporations to avoid paying tax here in America.”

On Feb. 1, the bill passed the Senate, 94-3.

When it arrived in the House of Representatives, however, the measure received a surprisingly chilly reception, especially from Mr. Rangel, whose new position as chairman of Ways and Means made him one of the more powerful members of Congress. A week later, Mr. Rangel released a counterproposal that left the tax shelter intact. Aides made clear that he considered the Senate measure a retroactive tax increase.

A review of Mr. Rangel’s record on retroactive taxes finds mixed results. He has supported them on a number of occasions, including in 1996, when he voted to reduce tax windfalls for life insurance companies.

His opposition in 2007 startled some legislators who had fought alongside Mr. Rangel during his earlier efforts to crack down on Nabors and the other companies, in part because he and the other Democrats had rejected the same argument about retroactivity three years earlier

Senator Grassley was so incensed that he issued a public statement warning that Mr. Rangel and House Democrats would be rewarding Nabors and the other companies for putting their narrow financial interests above their broader responsibilities as corporate citizens.

“It’ll be pretty disappointing if the new leadership of Congress fails to live up to its reform rhetoric by abandoning these reforms,” Mr. Grassley said. “For example, companies that rushed to beat our crackdown on corporate inversions and opened a post office box in Bermuda to avoid U.S. taxes will celebrate that they pulled off a fast one.”

At the same time, Mr. Rangel was also hearing from Nabors, which had an interest in saving the tax shelter and had expressed a willingness to support the Rangel center.

On Feb. 12, the day the bill was being marked up by the committee he leads, Mr. Rangel held two discussions at the Carlyle Hotel in Manhattan. First, the congressman sat down for breakfast with Mr. Isenberg and Mr. Morgenthau to further talk about Mr. Isenberg’s support for the Rangel center, Mr. Morgenthau said. Mr. Isenberg said that after breakfast, he escorted Mr. Rangel across the room, where the lobbyist for Nabors, Kenneth J. Kies, was waiting.

Over sweet rolls and coffee, Mr. Kies asked Mr. Rangel if he would maintain his opposition to the efforts to take away the company’s loophole. Mr. Rangel said he would, Mr. Kies and Mr. Isenberg said in interviews.

“His position against retroactive taxes was well-known,” Mr. Kies said, “so it wasn’t hard to sell at all.”

Mr. Rangel does not recall meeting with Mr. Kies that day, according to his lawyer, Ms. Kiernan.

Mr. Isenberg said that he was not asked explicitly about his financial donations to City College at either meeting, and that the congressman’s chat with the lobbyist lasted eight minutes, and only three were spent on the tax loophole.

Eleven days later, a check for $100,000 from Mr. Isenberg was cashed by City College. Mr. Isenberg said that the check was dated Feb. 7, but that he was not certain when he gave it to the school, and college officials declined to comment.

The next month, Mr. Rangel presided over Ways and Means hearings during which he presented four witnesses who testified that the effort to eliminate the loopholes was bad policy because it was a retroactive tax increase. No testimony was taken from those on the other side, and nothing was offered to explain why Mr. Rangel was now defending Nabors and the other companies.

Senator Grassley denounced the hearings, saying that they “left no lobbyist behind.”

“What changed?” Mr. Grassley demanded in a public statement, pointing out that Mr. Rangel and other Democrats previously “voted for exactly these same provisions.”

Mr. Rangel never formally responded, and by late April, he had killed the effort in committee, striking the language that would close the loophole from the bill that Congress ultimately passed.

Ms. Kiernan said Mr. Rangel did not know that Mr. Isenberg had made a pledge for $1 million or any donations to City College until this summer, after an inquiry from a reporter, well after the legislation involving the loophole had been settled. And even if he had known, she said, there was no need to recuse himself from the matter, because House rules require such a step only when a member has a personal financial interest in legislation.

Officials at C.C.N.Y. declined to say when they informed Mr. Rangel of Mr. Isenberg’s financial commitment or discuss contributions to the school.

Ms. Kiernan stressed that the money from Nabors had no effect on Mr. Rangel’s position on the tax shelter legislation. She also noted that in 2007, Mr. Rangel helped win House approval of a measure that would have significantly reduced the tax benefits received by hundreds of foreign-based companies, including Nabors. But that provision died in the Senate.

Still, the next time Mr. Isenberg and his lobbyist, Mr. Kies, met with Mr. Rangel at his office in Washington, on June 27, 2007 — to discuss what Mr. Isenberg described as education and other tax issues — Mr. Kies said he also took the opportunity to thank Mr. Rangel for quashing the effort to end the Nabors tax loophole.

Mr. Isenberg, in last week’s interview, acknowledged that he, too, “possibly, probably, did” thank Mr. Rangel, but emphasized that his gratitude was not for preserving the loophole, but instead “for keeping consistent with his position against retroactive tax increases.”

Original Article: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/25/nyregion/25rangel.html?_r=1

TH
Watching Out For The Village!