Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington has again included Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-1st, in its annual report on "the most corrupt members of Congress."
The third annual list includes 22 members as well as "two to watch." Sixteen members have been replaced from last year’s list of 25.
Updating its allegations about Mollohan's earmarks, personal finances and related items from last year's report, CREW notes that while Mollohan was "named as the chair of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, State and Related Agencies, he recused himself from working on matters related to the Department of Justice’s budget."
CREW also cites press reports that say the FBI subpoenaed financial records from non-profits benefiting from Mollohan earmarks, and that at least one person has received a grand jury subpoena.
"Despite all of the legal questions surrounding some of Rep. Mollohan’s previous earmarks, Rep. Mollohan requested a $1 million earmark to allow the Department of the Interior to expand a wilderness area abutting property owned by the congressman," the report said. "At least one local real estate agent opined that the value of Rep. Mollohan’s property was likely to increase substantially as a result of the earmark."
Update: The Associated Press reported in August that "Mollohan says he has done nothing wrong and has yet to hear from federal investigators." CREW's 2006 list and the allegations it cited both played a role in the 1st District race that year. Mollohan won that race with 64 percent of the vote.
20 September 2007
Mollohan Remains on Group's "Most Corrupt" List - Updated
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
If this blog isn't linking to some journalism, then I guess it has to practice journalism in reporting this story. So where is the other side of the story?
Query: Is just linking to a one-sided website a pretty novel thing for this blog? More of that to come?
Maybe Mollohan is corrupt, but so far no one has shown very much of anything. He gets earmarks to improve his district, and people in his district who benefit from those earmarks contribute to his campaign. Wow!
He owns property in his district and in a rather attenuated way some people are willing to speculate that some earmark will benefit him -- and a heck of a lot of other people like him. it's clearly a stretch, at least so far.
I'm a little disappointed that this blog would pick up on and reinforce the word "corrupt" without somehow showing the other side. from the dominion post, it would be business as usual, but the AP? well . . .
I have sought to address the concerns raised above by updating the post and by emphasizing through quotation marks that the "corrupt" label is one affixed by the report's authors.
Appreciate the update.
One annoying thing about the claims that Mollohan is corrupt is that the "500-page complaint" that was filed against him, that kicked this off, was never publicly released. What's to hide?
Mollohan has shown a remarkable interest in historic preservation in his district, and in promoting public lands, as well as high-tech incubator stuff.
It's the kind of pork that Byrd gets praised for, and it seems unfair that Mollohan is tarnished for it without (as of yet) any real showing that he is feathering his own nest in an illegal fashion.
When will the results of this "investigation" be produced, one wonders?
Post a Comment