Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Enron is not Bush's Whitewater: It's Worse
CBS Marketwatch ^ | 1/10/02 | David Callaway

Posted on 01/10/2002 7:00:04 AM PST by brbethke

Enron is not Bush's Whitewater Commentary: It will be worse

By David Callaway, CBS.MarketWatch.com Last Update: 12:10 AM ET Jan. 10, 2002

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) - The Enron Corp. debacle won't be President Bush's Whitewater. It will be much worse.

Unlike the financial sideshow over a twenty-year-old failed land deal that dogged the Clinton administration, the collapse of the nation's largest energy trader into the nation's largest bankruptcy last month is set to go straight to the heart of exposing what is wrong with the way the Bush administration is conducting itself these days.

Once a buyer for Enron's (ENE: news, chart, profile) energy-trading business is announced Thursday in New York, this story is going to shift in dramatic fashion to Washington D.C., where there are already eight separate congressional probes into the collapse, one Justice Department investigation, and scores of unanswered questions. Many of them concern the White House.

Don't expect to see either Bush or Vice President Cheney directly linked to the financial shenanigans that brought Enron down. They won't be. This is not about finding a smoking gun, as much as some Democrats might wish it were.

What it is about, and what the public will get to hear and read about in wrenching detail over the coming months, is how business gets done down in Texas. How a small group of business leaders exert enormous clout over Bush and his team in getting the rules changed to their benefit.

It will explain why Bush has locked up presidential records, locked out any voices opposed to his pro-business agenda and rammed through an expensive economic plan that wiped out the budget surplus but to date hasn't had any positive effect on the economy.

It will explain what influence Enron Chief Executive Ken Lay and his advisers had with Cheney and his energy taskforce when they met six times last year while the Vice President was putting together the administration's energy policy.

And it will explain why Bush is now thinking about acting on a proposal from that very taskforce that seeks to roll back a key provision of the Clean Air Act that helps keep factory pollution down by requiring new controls when old plants are upgraded.

A history of seeking favor

Business leaders have always sought favors from politicians. That's nothing new. But in the case of Enron and Lay, a night in the Lincoln Bedroom was never going to be enough.

Enron cultivated Bush from the time he first decided to run for governor of Texas, with executives donating a total of $623,000 to his two gubernatorial campaigns and presidential campaign, according to The Center for Public Integrity.

The company played a major role in Bush's decision to deregulate the Texas energy markets in 1999. It played a major role in Cheney's energy taskforce last year, meeting with the Vice President's staff right up until a week before it stunned Wall Street in October by slashing its shareholder equity by $1.2 billion to cover losses in its off-balance sheet partnerships.

And Lay, who donated $100,000 to the Bush Inaugural, remains mired in a controversy about whether a curious phone conversation he had with Federal Energy Regulatory Commission head Curtis Hebert last May had anything to do with Hebert's replacement by Bush last summer with the head of the Texas Public Utility Commission.

This is just the beginning of what is going to come out once investigators do a little more digging, and once Lay and his minions are required to testify before Congress. Expect a steady diet of revelations about the extent of the energy giant's influence, at state, national and even international levels.

Enron won't bring down Bush. He remains enormously popular for his handling of the war and the rebuilding of the country's psyche after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. But it will be a major thorn in his side through the rest of this presidential term, and may even play a role in the next election, depending on what comes out.

Enron the company will soon be gone. But Enron, the symbol of how big business and big politics conspire to sometimes fix the game, is just starting to dawn on the national conscious.

It's an ugly story. One that explains a lot about what's going on in our nation's capital right now. And it's only just beginning.

David Callaway is executive editor of CBS.MarketWatch.com.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: michaeldobbs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-204 next last
To: CrabTree
You are an idiot. You have no idea how an Audit Committee is required to operate under SEC for public companies like Enron.

Well, I work for an energy company equivalent to what Enron was, and I have for over 20 years. I'm also an attorney. If you're saying I don't know how it really works, and that you in your pathetic liberal ivory tower knows better, then I'll defer to you, because I don't need to get into an insult match with a dopehead.

141 posted on 01/10/2002 7:19:59 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

Comment #142 Removed by Moderator

To: CrabTree
I'll add one bit of clarification. My company is equivalent in size to what Enron was. We are not engaged in the same activities as they were.

However, I am quite familiar with Enron and I am quite familiar with the roles of the Directors.

You are the one without a clue.

143 posted on 01/10/2002 7:42:00 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 138 | View Replies]

To: CrabTree
On the other hand, I bet you delete files every day that would put you or someone in jail, pursuant to your company's "Document Retention Policy."

LOL. Sure.

144 posted on 01/10/2002 7:44:08 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

To: CrabTree
Oh, and your claim to be a conservative?

We're not nearly as stupid as you think we are.

145 posted on 01/10/2002 7:45:48 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 142 | View Replies]

Comment #146 Removed by Moderator

To: spqrzilla9
"not a shred of evidence"

The article was totally amazing! I was expecting to read some awful stuff, and all it was was supposition, inuendo, wishful thinking and nothing else. THEY DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AND THEY KNOW IT. Why do you think Lanny Davis is now telling the dems to let go of it?? The reason is x42's fingerprints, along with Ron Brown and the Clinton admin., are all over it and it will be much worse for the dems than it will be for the repubs.

147 posted on 01/10/2002 8:05:16 PM PST by Sueann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CrabTree
The case is so clear that a judge is close to ordering a prejudgement asset seizure for the first time for a civil plaintiff against Gramm

Care to back that up? Whose assets will be seized?

Well then, what did she do to earn $400,000?

It is common practice for members of the Board to be paid handsomely for two or three meetings per year.

You're also ignorant about the workings of a corporation. The Board is never held legally responsible for wrongdoings by the CEO, the CFO and Operations Executives.

Under the mail fraud and wire fraud statutes it is a scheme to get paid for not doing work.

Wendy Gramm performed her duties as a Board member according to her contract.

148 posted on 01/10/2002 8:10:36 PM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

Comment #149 Removed by Moderator

To: brbethke
I think the Demoncraps are involved more deeply then the Repubs.
150 posted on 01/10/2002 8:18:06 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CrabTree
The news articles about the Court order on asset seizure were posted on this list yesterday.

You made the accusation, you re-post it.

I'm not going to do your work for you. Otherwise, I'll just assume you made that little tidbit up.

Directors do go to prison for conspiring with CEO's. I have seen such cases with my own eyes. It happened a lot during the S&L crisis.

Maybe you'd like to back that up too.

We don't take anybody's "word" around here, pal. You make an assertion, you back it up, or it's bogus.

151 posted on 01/10/2002 8:20:30 PM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: Eva
That was Jeep and me. But let me give you another take on this. Archives aplenty on this.
ENRON thought they had the WhiteHouse by the proverbials. They knew they were in deep trouble and expected the Bush White House to help them get a bailout from Congress rather than allow so many people to lose so much money ala the airline bailout. They ASKED and were given a flat NO.
Bush did the right thing. And this WILL come out no matter how it looks now.
152 posted on 01/10/2002 8:21:39 PM PST by Nix 2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: CrabTree
Interesting ... $400,000 in two years from the Board of Enron.

Enron's BOD met nine times in 2000 with the members receiving $79,000 each in cash and stocks.... things must have been better in 1996/8.

153 posted on 01/10/2002 8:25:02 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: brbethke
So true.

I've seen more "mainstream" coverage of the Bush "scandal" in one day than I saw coverage of BC's rape of Juanita Broaddrick over a three-year period.

Brace yourselves...

154 posted on 01/10/2002 8:25:35 PM PST by daler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CrabTree
Lanny J. Davis, who counseled the Clinton White House on scandal management, warned Democrats against overreaching. "I don't think there's any shred of evidence that the White House has any connection to what went wrong with Enron," Davis said. "Democrats should not go down the road of focusing on innuendo."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28593-2002Jan10.html

THE SMEAR OF BUSH BY PEOPLE LIKE YOU CRAB ASS

155 posted on 01/10/2002 8:26:44 PM PST by TLBSHOW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

Comment #156 Removed by Moderator

To: CrabTree
Ahhhhh. So she sold stock that had appreciated in value most likely over when it was issued to her. So she got appreciation value on it over an above the issue value...
157 posted on 01/10/2002 8:32:07 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]

Comment #158 Removed by Moderator

To: CrabTree
Back it up with sourced facts and stand back.

Nuts and sluts usually doesn't work here but you never know.

Good luck.

159 posted on 01/10/2002 8:33:26 PM PST by nunya bidness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: CrabTree
Gramm made $275,000 in sale of stock options in November 1998, less than 2 years after going on board

Interesting that she sold when the stock was at $45, and just before her husband assumed the chairmanship of the Banking Committee to avoid a conflict of interest.

She could have doubled her money if she'd held on.

160 posted on 01/10/2002 8:34:02 PM PST by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 156 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 121-140141-160161-180 ... 201-204 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson