Buda Rabblerouser -- Part 3

My Photo
Name:
Location: Buda, Texas, United States

Technologist, entrepreneur, writer, idealist, activist. A lot of things in our country and world are screwed up right now (government corruption is a prime example), and we can either just watch things get worse or tackle the problems head-on. We need to choose the latter path.

Friday, December 28, 2007

USDOT IG Scovel on the Hot Seat


The key question at this point is: Will USDOT Inspector General Scovel vigorously pursue an objective and comprehensive investigation into the ITIP/TTID Program and Traffic.com monopoly/scam or -- because of intense pressure from his boss (USDOT Secretary Mary Peters) -- will the IG's audit be just a cursory review of this program?

Mr. Scovel, a retired Brigadier General in the U.S. Marine Corps. with an impressive record of accomplishment, is undoubtedly feeling intense pressure right now. By design, the IG for any federal department faces a potentially huge conflict of interest because he or she reports to two masters, the department to which they are assigned (e.g., the USDOT) as well as to Congress. However, there's little doubt that day-to-day the IG reports to the departmental secretary and, of course, that's where the rub comes in with the Traffic.com scam, because USDOT Secretary Peters' failure to adequately respond to Senator Hatch's very pointed letters relative to the USDOT's continued support for Traffic.com's monopoly is the main reason for Sen. Hatch's and Cong. Weiner's calls for an IG investigation in the first place.

At this point, all eyes are on the IG's office. Congressman DeFazio, the chairman of the House Highways and Transit Subcommittee that has oversight responsibility for the TTID program, recently told Congressman Weiner that he was awaiting the IG's investigation into this matter. The IG's Legislative Counsel told Sen. Hatch's legislative assistant that they have already assigned staff to conduct a comprehensive audit of the TTID program. More importantly, they said that they would be reviewing the program both "pre-SAFETEA-LU" and "post-SAFETEA-LU," which means that they are going to look closely at all the shenanigans that went on early in the program that created the underpinning for this monopoly. I have little doubt that if they truly do conduct a comprehensive investigation/audit into this program, they'll find that former USDOT Secretary Mineta, former USDOT Deputy Secretary Jackson, and current Secretary Peters (who was formerly Federal Highway Administrator under Mineta and Jackson when this whole scheme was gaining momentum in 2001-2003) all have inordinately pushed Traffic.com's monopoly, to the point of actually "reassigning" a senior career manager in the FHWA who saw through this scam and refused to go along with it. If the OIG is willing to work with the SEC, DOL, and IRS in this investigation, it's likely that they'll also find that at least Messrs. Mineta and Jackson did so because they had a substantial hidden financial interest in Traffic.com's success. (I remain hopeful that Ms. Peters has supported Traffic.com's monopoly out of loyalty to Mr. Mineta rather than her own financial interest in it, but time will tell.)

Interesting, the bipartisan Inspector General Reform Act of 2007 -- if it passes soon -- could strengthen Mr. Scovel's ability to spearhead a comprehensive investigation into senior USDOT officials' roles in this nasty and long-running scandal.

My gut feeling is that the OIG will do the right thing whether or not that bill passes in time. It's time that folks with real integrity -- and from all I've read about him Mr. Scovel appears to be one -- started cleaning up the mess in DC.

Jerry

Sunday, December 09, 2007

Some Good News for the Truth (but Bad News for Former USDOT Secretary Mineta)

This week, the Center for Responsive Politics finally received a copy of Mr. Mineta's CY2000 Public Financial Disclosure report from the U.S. Office of Government Ethics, thanks to CRP's persistence. This is the disclosure in which Mr. Mineta checked the box marked "none" regarding any equity transactions that year, despite the fact that in Schedule A ("Assets and Income") of that disclosure he reported a capital gains income from stock options in Trimble Navigation of up to $1 million. I believe that he clearly lied on that disclosure to hide the fact that he received many more stock options in Trimble than he would have been entitled to by the company's official compensation policy for directors.

You can access those disclosures here.

(The key CY2000 disclosure is called the "2000 Amendment.")

Now that the "official unofficial source" of these disclosures has received this key disclosure and made it available online, it really won't make any difference if OGE destroys this disclosure next April -- the disclosure will still be in the public domain via CRP. This disclosure is key because it is the only one (of three) covering his 2000 finances in which he was required by law (the Ethics in Government Act) to disclose the details of his transaction(s) in Trimble Navigation stock options. His failure to do so, coupled with his support of policies designed to benefit Trimble (see below), clearly constitutes a violation of federal law.

As I've said in this blog several times before, I believe that Mr. Mineta very likely received a whole lot more stock options in the company than he should have been entitled to as a Board Member for just 13 months, and that he then biased his leadership of national policies when he was Commerce Secretary under President Clinton and Transportation Secretary under President Bush to benefit Trimble. In effect, they paid him up-front to push policies that would have long-term benefit to them. Hardly what you would expect an honorable, high-level "public servant" to do.

If you want to understand the nitty gritty detail that led me to believe that Mr. Mineta was "bought and paid for" by Trimble, read this white paper that I have provided to the authorities. This white paper is by now somewhat dated, as I have since discovered more specific information about why Trimble would have wanted to have the Commerce Secretary on their side back in mid-2000.

Interestingly, just last week I talked with a long-time friend of mine in the USDOT who (unprompted by me) recounted that former USDOT Deputy Secretary Michael P. Jackson (Mr. Mineta's second in command) demanded that the USDOT's ITS Joint Program Office (JPO) give Jackson $7 million for the new E-911 initiative, which confounded the folks in JPO and FHWA because it wasn't a transportation-related initiative at all. So-called "location technology" in which Trimble in a market leader is a key to make E-911 work, and it's clear to me that the E-911 initiative was one (of several) Mr. Mineta was pushing to pay Trimble back for their earlier generosity.

I have provided detailed information about this violation to the authorities, including the FBI, OIG, SEC, and IRS. Will these "guards" ultimately have the courage and integrity to fully investigate my allegation (which I'm quite certain is true)?

I'm betting that they will.

Jerry

Saturday, December 08, 2007

We Will Guard the Guards

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

Translation: "The Guards will guard us, but who will guard the Guards?"

From Satires by Juvenal, Roman poet and satirist (55 AD - 127 AD)

The answer to that time-honored question is probably more important than ever today, with all of the scandals that are sprouting up in our nation's capital.

In theory, the FBI, the Justice Department (especially U.S. Attorneys), departmental Inspector Generals, the Office of Government Ethics, Congressional oversight committees, the Office of Special Counsel, the General Accounting Office, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and other agencies and departments all guard our government's operation by investigating unethical and unlawful activities and prosecuting those involved in fraud and corruption.

That's the theory. In practice, however, the objectivity and integrity of these "guards" is often compromised these days by political pressure (especially from this White House, which I believe will likely go down as by far the most corrupt in our history). For example, it's been well documented how political considerations drove former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales -- an incompetent and amoral sycophant, if there ever was one -- to fire a number of top-notch U.S. Attorneys for purely political reasons because they would not do the political bidding of Karl Rove and other political operatives in the White House.

Another "guard" -- Scott Bloch, the head of the Office of Special Counsel -- just recently got exposed by the Wall Street Journal destroying evidence on his computer and two subordinates' laptops by hiring "Geeks on Call" to completely wipe out the content of the hard drives on all of these machines. According to a recent article in the Journal (Head of Rove Inquiry in Hot Seat Himself), Block claims that he wiped out those hard drives to such a level that the data could never be reconstituted to get rid of a pesky virus. You don't have to be a geek yourself (and I are one) to know that his stated reason is a bunch of bullshit, there's just no other way to accurately describe it.

John Wilke, the Wall Street Journal investigative reporter who filed that story, is in fact one of the guards who are guarding the guards, and he does a pretty good job of it. From what I can see, he is entirely apolitical -- he has broken stories about both Republicans and Democrats. He's particularly known for his efforts to "out" suspicious earmarks (see this blog item, as well as this story about Cong. Murtha's earmarking largess), as well as stories about legislators who use favoritism and earmarks to end up filthy rich. He knows fraud and corruption when he sees it.

I met John over coffee during my trip to DC last January, and have continued to communicate with him and send him information about the Traffic.com scandal as I have unearthed it. I know that he's swamped with all kinds of fraud and corruption story leads and only has a certain amount of time to investigate each lead, but I suspect that he'll be writing about this one soon. He's particularly interested in the recent developments in this story, particularly the pending IG investigation.

As long as we have reporters who are driven by the belief that exposing fraud and corruption in our government can help make things better -- and it can -- there's at least a chance that some of that corruption can be stymied.

Over the past 2+ years I've talked and worked with a number of these "guardians of the guards," including:

- Investigative reporters, not only with the "established press" but "new age" Internet publications and bloggers, too.

- Other whistleblowers, rabblerousers, and muckrakers (like me).

- Elected officials with a combination of courage and integrity, particularly Senator Orrin Hatch and Congressman Anthony Weiner, who put doing what's right ahead of political expediency.

- Non-profit government watchdog organizations, like the Sunlight Foundation, Project on Government Oversight, National Legal and Policy Center, Center for Responsive Politics, and on and on.

New technology -- particularly the Internet -- is making it much easier for anyone to uncover wrongdoing. Much of what I have learned over the past two years about the Traffic.com scandal -- including my first inkling that DHS/DOT Deputy Secretary Jackson is up to his neck in it, the extent of Bud Shuster's connections to it, and Traffic.com's widespread "influence peddling" through lobbying and political donations -- I've learned from searching the Internet.

The Sunlight Foundation, which has continued to assist me in digging into this scam, is spearheading the development of new Internet tools that will make it even easier for "John Q. Public" to investigate and impact the business of our nation's policymakers. One of the most interesting projects they're sponsoring is called EarmarkWatch, which lets anyone comment on pending congressional earmarks. In a real sense, this tool lets anyone become an investigative reporter for an issue they feel is important to themselves and/or our country. The recent ethics law changes mandating earlier disclosure of intended earmarks make the EarmarkWatch concept potentially even more powerful.

My bottom line is that the "official guards" -- FBI, OIGs, SEC, oversight committees, etc. -- could investigate and expose the seemingly runaway corruption in both Congress and the Executive Branch, but often don't and won't instigate those investigations because of political influence -- unless and until there's sufficient public pressure so that they have no choice.

That means that the rest of us -- "we," including all the groups I mentioned above -- need to drag these so-called "guards" into these matters, "kicking and screaming" if necessary.

Jerry