The Hill reports that Majority Leader Bill Frist is enlisting the support of Sen. Rick Santorum to craft a conservative version of a lobbying reform bill. The selection of Santorum suggests that the Senate leadership is not seriously committed to lobbying reform. Santorum cannot reasonably be considered a credible messenger for reform because he was largely responsible for creating the culture and environment in which Abramoff’s criminal activity thrived.

Santorum was a key player in implementing the “K Street Project,” an effort by conservatives in the wake of Bush’s 2000 victory to monopolize influential positions at trade associations and corporate government affairs offices. The Washington Monthly described Santorum’s role:

Santorum’s Tuesday meetings are a crucial part of that effort. Every week, the lobbyists present pass around a list of the jobs available and discuss whom to support. Santorum’s responsibility is to make sure each [job opening] is filled by a loyal Republican–a senator’s chief of staff, for instance, or a top White House aide, or another lobbyist whose reliability has been demonstrated. After Santorum settles on a candidate, the lobbyists present make sure it is known whom the Republican leadership favors.

Santorum created an environment in which Abramoff flourished. From NPR’s Marketplace (1/5/06):

The infamous K Street Project”¦set up a money-generating machine to fuel GOP campaign coffers and think tanks. But in the process, jobs also got traded for official acts, including legislation, and that’s illegal. Abramoff simply took advantage of K Street’s ingenious scheme. Trading jobs for official acts is one of the charges against him.

Having recently returned his campaign contributions from Jack Abramoff, Santorum has apparently been deemed clean enough to help fix the problem he once helped create.

Abramoff isn’t the only mega-scandal that could rock Washington this year. Two powerful committee chairmen in the House could soon find themselves ensarled in the scandal that has already taken down former Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham.

Cunningham pled guilty “to taking more than $2 million in bribes in a criminal conspiracy involving at least three defense contractors.” Cunningham resigned from Congress but this mess is far from over.

Cunningham received $630,000 from a military contractor named Brent Wilkes, who is referred to as “co-conspirator No. 1″ in Justice Department documents. Wilkes worked for Audre Inc., a job he took in 1992 when the company was near bankruptcy and desperate for federal contracts. That’s where Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA), the chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, comes in. The San Diego Union Tribune is on the case:

Cunningham and House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, worked closely with two local companies – ADCS Inc. of Poway and Audre Inc. of Rancho Bernardo – to make the Pentagon pay for converting printed documents to computer files. They and a few other lawmakers got Congress to allocate $190 million for “automated data conversion” projects from 1993 to 2001.

Did the Pentagon want this “help”? No. As a 1994 General Accounting Office report noted, it already had the tools for such work.

But Cunningham, Hunter and their House allies didn’t care. Audre and ADCS were generous with contributions – and ADCS executive Brent Wilkes allegedly was bribing Cunningham…This led to such absurdities as a $9.7 million contract for ADCS to digitize historical documents from the Panama Canal Zone that the Pentagon considered insignificant. This isn’t governance. This is looting.

But Hunter isn’t the only committee chairman with problems. Read more

Right-wing evangelist Pat Robertson suggested that Ariel Sharon’s stroke occurred because he was “dividing God’s land.” Robertson: “I would say woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course…God said, ‘This land belongs to me, you better leave it alone.’” (Video at Media Matters)

American Progress President (and ThinkProgress blogger) John Podesta squares off with Chris Matthews tommorow on Abramoff and domestic spying. 5PM EST on MSNBC.

is one of the deadliest days in Iraq since the war began in March 2003, according to the AP.

“[T]he Bush administration says it wants to be able to form ‘coalitions of the willing’ more efficiently for dealing with future conflicts rather than turning to existing but unreliable institutional alliances such as Nato.”

The Bush administration has announced that they will begin an investigation into the events surrounding the Sago coal-mine incident, an investigation that should explore the administration’s record on mine safety.

The Labor Department denies that budget cuts and staff reductions under President Bush have hindered the ability of the department’s Mine Safety and Health Administration to ensure coal-mine safety. But Jack Spadaro, a former mine safety investigator, claims that mine inspectors raised concerns before Sago about the disastrous consequences that might result from the Labor Department’s unwillingness to enforce safety regulations:

Jack Spadaro, former director of the MSHA National Mine Safety Academy, said inspectors told him privately that Labor Department opposition to vigorous safety regulation has hindered their work.

“Two weeks before this explosion, I was told by an inspector, ‘Jack, there’s going to be another disaster because we can’t do our jobs,’ ” he said in an interview.

The MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Administration) should question Spadaro as part of its investigation.

This is not to suggest the administration’s budget cuts caused the West Virginia accident, nor is it the president’s fault that an explosion occurred. But there is a legitimate question as to whether future mining accidents can be prevented through greater enforcement of mining safety regulations and whether the Bush administration is doing all it can in this area.

UPDATE: Christian Science Monitor: “Sago raises red flags for mine oversight”
Read more

President Bush is donating $6,000 in campaign contributions linked to Abramoff to charity. He is donating money raised from Abramoff, his wife and a Native-American tribe he represented. But that’s a small fraction of the amount of money raised for Bush by Abramoff, which is at least $120,000 and potentially much more. From the 7/21/03 New York Times:

As President Bush’s re-election campaign races to accumulate the largest treasury in history, a similarly fierce contest has begun among his best-connected supporters. Raising $100,000 for the president is a bit passe in this competition; now loyalists must bring in $200,000 or more to be considered top-tier, and they had better come with sharp elbows and plenty of prosperous friends.

“Everyone in town is trying to be a Pioneer or Ranger,” said Jack Abramoff, a top Republican lobbyist here, using the campaign’s terms for the most elite levels of money collectors. “But the only way to do it is to have contacts outside of D.C., which fortunately I do. So far I’ve raised about $120,000, and I haven’t even really started making calls.”

The exact amount raised for Bush by Abramoff remains unknown. A spokesperson for the Bush/Cheney campaign, Tracey Schmitt, said “At this point, there is nothing to indicate that contributions from those individual donors represents anything other than enthusiastic support for the [Bush-Cheney] re-election campaign.” If that’s the case, President Bush shouldn’t have any problem disclosing the total.

were so limited that they violated the law, according to Jane Harmon (D-CA), the ranking member on the House Intelligence Committee.

it’s investigating whether the Bush administration bugged CNN’s Christiane Amanpour.