Optics, Again, A Problem For McCain

Optics is again posing a problem for Sen. John McCain on lobbying. Though there's no evidence that McCain did anything improper in investigating Boeing (which did seem to have the more wanker of a tanker) or in celebrating the awarding of a multibillion dollar tanker contract to EADS (Airbus), the public data raises questions about who is minding McCain's public image and why he would subject himself to associations that undermine his reformer's crest.

It's clear that he he's very friendly with ex-EADS lobbyists, including Tom Loeffler and John Green, who is now his chief liaison to Congress. He's taken $15,000 from EDADS -- the most EADS has ever given to a politician. In effect, the letters he sent demanding a "full, fair and open" competition in 2006 had one effect in practice: persuading the Air Force to change its bidding requirements to a process that benefited EADS.

Comments

EDADS! This is a shoddily written post.

Though there's no evidence that McCain did anything improper in investigating Boeing (which did seem to have the more wanker of a tanker)

What ... does this even mean? Is "wanker" bad when it refers to tankers? Or is it good? (If there's one thing I learned from Juno, it's that young people rhyme stuff when they think it's cool. "Wanker tanker, dude.") And if it IS a bad thing, are you talking about the KC-767 itself, or the original Boeing lease proposal?

Posted by Jeff Larson | March 11, 2008 3:47 PM

And did the revised process actually favor EADS? Or just remove requirements which favored Boeing? The latter could be said to have "benefitted EADS" -- but is hardly the same thing as prejudicing the competition in EADS favor.

Posted by wj | March 11, 2008 3:51 PM

The optics may be bad, but any fair minded look at this story shows that Sen. McCain did the taxpayers a solid on this one. Boeing's CFO went to prison for unseemly attempts to game the process in Boeing's favor. IIRC several Air Force brass were forced to resign as well.

Posted by Adam | March 11, 2008 3:52 PM

Thanks Marc for paying attention to this.

It may be another "lucky day" for Senator McCain with all the attention in the Media being given to the Spitzer (bless the family) mess.

There is a WHOLE lot more "wanker" to the 'tanker'....

Here's my take, Marc. Hopefully your commentors read as well as blog.

One of the things that most Americans respect most about John McCain is that he is a Vietnam War hero who endured 5 years in the “Hanoi Hilton”. Because he underwent torture while he was there, I for one, have lost respect for Senator McCain CHANGING his position on “Water boarding” as torture.

Last year, he voted FOR banning water boarding and just last month he voted AGAINST it, aligning himself with President Bush’s position.

I believe that changing one’s positions while in a political race is considered “Flip-Flopping” on the issue.

My BIGGEST issue and loss of respect for Senator McCain is concerning his “Doubletalk” ~ politics as usual, Washington insider positioning while ‘espousing’ himself as a Lobbyist Reformer.

This morning, MSNBC just ran a clip of McCain’s speech from Atlanta, Georgia calling Washington, D. C. “the city of Satan”.

The question that comment raises does McCain see and portray himself as an ‘Angel of Vengeance’ against ‘special interests’ while consorting and working with the ‘Dark Side’?

When the NY Times article, entitled, “For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk” broke: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/us/politics/21mccain.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=mccain+the+long+run&st=nyt&oref=slogin

Senator McCain asked and answered reporters questions ONLY hours after the story broke and has since refused to answer questions concerning this.

As the Washington Post has published, in follow up stories, one of which was a PDF file of the deposition from McCain in 2002 http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/pdf/mccain_deposition_20080222.pdf?sid=ST2008022203188
which contradicts his statements and rebuttal of the NY Times story. In that PDF, he admits that on page 61 (10) “I am tainted, it has tainted every officeholder that ever accepts anything from any group or individual that has an interest in Washington.”

The question that remains is this:

Does John McCain believe that he is held to a different standard when it comes to allowing Lobbyists to run both his Senate office and his campaign?

Does he believe that we, the voters, will let this slide because he says they are “honest”?

And where does that ‘honesty’ presently stand?

In an AP article, this morning, http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iiW1J4iWjV71TzWJ0uAmi9yL-N0AD8VB329G0
The Headline reads: “McCain Advisors Lobbied for Airbus”.

A portion of which follows below:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Top current advisers to Sen. John McCain's presidential campaign last year lobbied for a European plane maker that beat Boeing to a $35 billion Air Force tanker contract, taking sides in a bidding fight that McCain has tried to referee for more than five years.
… McCain, the Republican presidential nominee in waiting, has been a key figure in the Pentagon's yearslong attempt to complete a deal on the tanker. McCain helped block an earlier tanker contract with Boeing and prodded the Pentagon in 2006 to develop bidding procedures that did not exclude Airbus.
EADS retained Ogilvy Government Relations and The Loeffler Group to lobby for the tanker deal last year, months after McCain sent two letters urging the Defense Department to make sure the bidding proposals guaranteed competition.
"They never lobbied him related to the issues, and the letters went out before they were contracted" by EADS, McCain campaign spokeswoman Jill Hazelbaker said Monday.
According to lobbying records filed with the Senate, Loeffler Group lobbyists on the project included Loeffler and Susan Nelson, who left the firm and is now the campaign's finance director. Ogilvy lobbyist John Green, who was assigned the EADS work, recently took a leave of absence to volunteer for McCain as the campaign's congressional liaison.
"The aesthetics are not good, especially since he is an advocate of reform and transparency," said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with the aerospace consulting firm Teal Group. "Boeing advocates are going to use this as ammunition."
This is exactly what both the NY Times and the Washington Post reported on (see PDF link above) that WHILE Senator McCain chaired the powerful Commerce Committee, he also wrote letters to the FCC whose budget he controlled and in one instance, threatened the FCC with a shake up, if they didn’t respond to the issue by December 14th. Lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, was the lobbyist representing both Paxson and now Univision, the 2 companies that Senator McCain wrote letters on behalf of.

These ongoing Lobbyist relationships that Senator McCain has; while his public persona is that of a Lobbyist Reformer, reeks of hypocrisy and should have every voter asking themselves:

Does Senator McCain hold one standard of ethics and judgment for HIMSELF and demand a completely DIFFERENT standard for everyone else?

If elected, will John McCain govern at the EXPENSE of the people
OR
With the CONSENT of the people
AND
Exactly WHO are the ‘people’ that John McCain REALLY represents regardless of what he tells us to the contrary?

Posted by Dari | March 11, 2008 4:28 PM

I just find it hilarious, that after years of railing on Halliburton, Democrats suddenly are for no-bid contracts.

Posted by Clarendon | March 12, 2008 7:54 AM