Lawmaker helped brother's lobby clients (Chris Cannon)

WASHINGTON - Three times this year, a lobbyist sought help from Rep. Christopher Cannon for his clients and got it. The lobbyist was the congressman's brother, Joseph Cannon.

The Utah lawmaker acknowledges helping his brother's clients, including pressing Congress last month to intervene in a business dispute over an Internet contract estimated to be worth as much as $1.3 billion.

"If my wife decided to lobby, then we would probably say, 'No talking to my office.' I just don't see my brother in the same category," Cannon, R-Utah, told The Associated Press.

Cannon has a financial interest in his brother's success: The lobbyist owes him more than $250,000, according to the lawmaker's financial disclosure reports.

There are no U.S. laws prohibiting relatives from lobbying lawmakers. House ethics rules require lawmakers to behave in ways that "reflect creditably" on Congress, avoid any special favors for family members and avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest.

"A lot of people I know are lobbyists," said Rep. Cannon, who has been elected five times. "I would put Joe in that category, not as a family member."

"It's an obvious conflict of interest," said Wendell Rawls Jr., acting executive director at the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity, a nonpartisan watchdog group. "It's an obvious use of an insider position to further the best interest of a family member."

Fred Werthheimer, head of the Democracy 21 group that endorses lobbying and campaign finance reforms, said Cannon has created appearance problems — months before midterm elections — inside a Congress already tainted by lobbying scandals and bribery investigations.

"When a member of Congress starts taking action based on the requests of a brother or spouse, you create the impression that the action may be taking place to provide a financial benefit for the family rather than to carry out proper public policy," he said. "This is the kind of appearance problem no member needs."

Dozens of Republican and Democratic lawmakers have children, siblings or spouses who work as lobbyists. Some told the AP they prohibit relatives, even siblings, from lobbying them or anyone working for them.

Rep. Nick Rahall (news, bio, voting record), D-W.Va., whose sister is a lobbyist for nuclear and energy interests, does not allow her to lobby his office. Likewise, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay limited access to his office by his estranged brother, Randy, after 1996, when Randy DeLay's lobbying activities prompted an ethics complaint that later was dismissed. DeLay, R-Texas, left Congress earlier this year under an ethics cloud.

Joseph Cannon, who also is chairman of the Utah Republican party, is his congressman-brother's one-time business partner. He leads a team of 10 lobbyists at Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP, a law and lobbying firm. He represents nearly a dozen lobbying clients and specializes in environmental cases.

In the Internet dispute, Rep. Cannon joined with three other lawmakers last month at his brother's urging to press for a congressional hearing. They signed a letter that expressed concerns about a proposed contract — which is subject to approval by the Bush administration — between the Internet's primary oversight body and VeriSign Inc., a $4.2 billion California company.

Joseph Cannon is a lobbyist for a competing company, Network Solutions Inc. That company sells Web addresses and opposes price increases it would pay to VeriSign under the pending agreement.

"My job was to talk with Chris," the lobbyist brother told AP. "After I talked with him, the fact is, we hardly ever talked about it after that. I don't spend much time lobbying my brother on things. I can't use him just because he's my brother to go do something; it's got to be something he's got a legitimate interest in."

Rep. Cannon, chairman of the House Judiciary commercial law subcommittee, said he has closely followed Internet issues. "He had a client. I had an interest," the lawmaker explained.

Joseph Cannon's lobbying firm helped draft the July 7 letter his brother signed asking Rep. Lamar Smith (news, bio, voting record), who heads the House Judiciary Internet subcommittee, to hold a hearing. Smith, R-Texas, said he has not yet decided whether to conduct such an oversight hearing.

Joseph Cannon said he has lobbied his brother on other occasions, twice involving higher education issues. Rep. Cannon's home district in Provo, Utah, includes Brigham Young University, which last year paid Joseph Cannon roughly $70,000 as its Washington lobbyist. Both brothers graduated from the university.

Joseph Cannon sought his brother's help earlier this year establishing a "complexity center" involving Brigham Young and the University of Utah. Joseph Cannon said it was to be run by a defense contractor, System of Systems Analytics Inc. of Chantilly, Va.. The contractor employs Joseph Cannon's Utah-based company, The Western Standard Publishing Company Inc., as a subcontractor.

Joseph Cannon said he disclosed his own business relationship with the project, which both he and Rep. Cannon said was scuttled in its early stages.

Rep. Cannon also favored a bill earlier this year to exempt religious colleges from certain accreditation guidelines, such as rules on discriminating against gay students and teachers and requirements for courses that conflict with the schools' philosophy.

Joseph Cannon said he sought his brother's support on behalf of Brigham Young. The House bill passed on a voice vote.

Joseph Cannon said he also introduced leaders of the Israel Policy Forum, a pro-Jewish group, to his brother and other Republicans the day fighting broke out in Lebanon earlier this summer.

"It doesn't make sense not to approach him just the way I would approach anybody else," Joseph Cannon said. "I believe his response would have been exactly the same if ... someone else from my firm had talked with him."

As for the unpaid debt to his brother, Joseph Cannon said it stems from his own unsuccessful campaign for the U.S. Senate 14 years ago.

Joseph Cannon said he approached his brother about the Internet agreement as part of a behind-the-scenes campaign to convince lawmakers on some Senate and House committees the deal would be bad for consumers.

The agreement would permit VeriSign to increase the wholesale price it charges companies like Network Solutions for each Internet dot-com address from $6 per year to $7.86 — or more if it can justify further price increases.

In the weeks after Network Solutions hired the lobbying firm, two lobbyists there — both Democrats — contributed a combined $1,500 to Rep. Cannon's Republican campaign.

One of those lobbyists, Thomas O'Donnell, worked closely with Rep. Cannon's office on behalf of Network Solutions after June 15. O'Donnell gave $1,000 to Rep. Cannon on May 17.

O'Donnell said he gave the money because Rep. Cannon was his lobbying partner's brother and because he supports Rep. Cannon's moderate views on immigration reform, a key issue in Cannon's primary. O'Donnell said Joseph Cannon did not solicit the contribution.

Network Solutions said it was unaware of Joseph Cannon's family ties when it hired his firm in April to rally opposition to the Internet agreement.

"I, personally, and no one at Network Solutions had any idea," said the company's chief counsel, Jonathon Nevett. "I had never heard of Chris Cannon or Joe Cannon."

Network Solutions spent $80,000 on lobbying last year; VeriSign spent at least $440,000 over the same period, Senate records show.

VeriSign's Washington lobbyists include former Attorney General John Ashcroft and Ashcroft's former chief of staff, David Ayres. VeriSign's political action committee donated $1,000 to Rep. Smith in April and $1,000 to Cannon in November.

Rep. Cannon said his relationships with his brother's clients can be discerned by reviewing congressional lobbying reports. He did not mention in his July 7 letter that he was acting at his brother's request.

"The rules really come down to disclosure," the lawmaker said. "It's easy to make the connections you made between me and my brother."

If no Democrat who takes donations from Hollywood elitists votes on regulation of porn, regulation of movie content, TV content legislation, etc., is NOT investigated for corruption, how can a business-related vote in favor of a lobbyist be any different?

Any "constituent", such as MoveOn.org is not considered a "lobbyist"? The whole corrupt system of donations to candidates, including the propoganda by the MSM for Liberals, is a joke.

Eliminate ALL donations to political candidates and parties, and put Americans ALL on the same footing. Elections will become LOCAL, and representation of the little guy would result.

I know it is counter-intuitive, but you have it backwards, in fact: the way to break the lobbyist/incumbent lock on DC power is to remove all donation limits, not to further gut the First Amendment by imposing more. With full disclosure, of course, so the voters can clearly see who bought whom...

"If my wife decided to lobby, then we would probably say, 'No talking to my office.' I just don't see my brother in the same category," Cannon, R-Utah

Well, we do. They're in the same category, and your 'ethical' promises are now so much b.s.

Eliminate ALL donations to political candidates and parties, and put Americans ALL on the same footing.

Pie in the sky happy claptrap.

Money = speech, whether you like it or not.

Better yet, there should be no restrictions on political donations, but there should also be full disclosure.

Cannon is a festering heap of parrot droppings who has made no secret of the fact he wishes to turn over the American Southwest to Mexico.

http://www.americanpatrol.com/GUESTCOLUMNS/MILLARD/CannonStiffMormons060624.html

this is one case that i hope the democrat wins.

With republicans like cannon, we don't need democrats.

Actually, while I am posting, I should complete my thought...

The organizations you support and have allied yourself with have the financial transparency of a block of cement. Not only that, but they are involved in a non-profit shell game that exists to build direct mail lists and solicit donations.

Looks to me like you're the one with the double standard.

DC is loaded with organizations/lobbyists that support those who are tearing down our Constitution and national sovereignty...for money and/or the power it garners them; and they all operate EXACTLY like the conservative organizations you've taken to criticizing of late. They all have to, they think, and their lawyers think, since legally, that's EXACTLY the way the politicians have rigged the game.

If you knew me, which you really don't, you'd know that I've always been a critic of that top-down, money-driven, way of doing politics. I think there is a much better way, morally and pragmatically.

But that doesn't mean that I'm going to attack people who are playing the game as it exists who happen to be forwarding the conservative agenda as they do it. I save my rhetorical bullets for liberals and their useful idiots.

So, to get back to the topic of the thread: Are you now a defender of Chris Cannon? Do you think its a good thing that he's carrying his lobbyist brother's water for him? What do you think of folks like Daschle and Harkin, et al, whose spouses have made tens of millions peddling their husband's influence?

I am critical of both Cannon and his lobbying brother (and others) as I am of the so-called conservative organizations that pretend to do the work that conservatives believe in but instead focus on building direct mail lists for further fundraising.

So I say, look in the mirror. You will see that the people you are involved with professionally display many of the same ethical and moral lapses that you find so upsetting in this article. You know, it's always better to clean up your own house first. btw, do you really agree with how money is raised and spent by the DF, DA and the other supposed non-profits that you are involved with or support? Have you examined their filings? What about your OWN little fundraising websites and organization(s) Tom? (The American Life and Liberty Coalition and the USBorderSecurity.ORG to name a few)

Do you really believe that what you are doing there is good for the conservative cause, or have you been so brainwashed to believe that these sham organizations are actually good for what you espouse to believe in?

"the way to break the lobbyist/incumbent lock on DC power is to remove all donation limits, not to further gut the First Amendment by imposing more. With full disclosure, of course, so the voters can clearly see who bought whom...
"

Full disclosure is a joke. So many 501 organizations never file, go out of business, or file after elections that there is virtually no disclosure at all.

I think that full and TIMELY disclosure should be the order of the day with regard to all lobbyists and political organizations. It's only right.

You're beginning to sound like John McCain...ie "all money is dirty if it hasn't been given to me". Or just a leftist in general...ie "all money, all profit, is dirty".

Do you make any distinctions between the campaign organizations of those who are running for public office and private for-profit and nonprofit organizations? (They say that one definition of insanity is the inability to make distinctions.)

Are you hot on the trail of Grover Norquist? Ed Gillespie? Any of the thousands of other DC-based organizations run by lobbyists and influence peddlers?

No?

Too bad. The connections you'll find there make Chris Simcox's little grassroots startup look like an ant standing next to an elephant.

I think that full and TIMELY disclosure should be the order of the day with regard to all lobbyists and political organizations. It's only right.

I agree.

But those who want conservatives to unilaterally disarm are nuts.

Folks have to play the game by the rules as they exist, not by the rules as partisan critics might want them to be.

Oh, you're kill'n me. Calling me a lefty, lol.

People reading your posts are well aware of how shady and disengenous you are. From your own little fundraising websites to the job you do here in the forums for those that pay you. You have lost all objectivity. We ALL know who and what you are. It's too bad honest conservatives have to put up with those that use the ideology to line their pockets at the expense of actually changing things for the better. That's right Tom, you and the likes of you cost us more than you realize. Sure, the money and donations flowing into your wallets is one thing, but the way you taint the rest of us should make us all want to vomit you out.

I haven't called you any names, however if I were to choose words to describe you it would be "mini-shyster-wannabe".

"I agree.

But those who want conservatives to unilaterally disarm are nuts. "

Now, that just makes no sense at all. It seems to me that conservative organizations should set the tone for everyone, by always filing accurate reports and on time.

The old excuse of "everyone does it" just doesn't wash with me. I condemn misbehavior whether it is done by one party or the other. It's all the same thing.

Unethical behavior by conservative organizations does nothing of value. It only sours people on all such organizations.

I'm sorry EternalVigilance, but you can't use childhood excuses in the big, grown-up world. I will support conservative organizations that are on the up and up, and condemn those that aren't.

When y'all set out to expose the corrupt way influence in DC is bought and sold daily by those who are profiting from the destruction of our republic, I might start to believe a little bit in the sincerity of some of those who are attacking Simcox/Keyes et al.

Until then, the whole thing looks to me like a hypocritical witchhunt by those with personal problems, old axes to grind, or RINO political agendas.

"I might start to believe a little bit in the sincerity of some of those who are attacking Simcox/Keyes et al.
"

I have no idea what you are talking about. I see stories about all sorts of non-profit PACs and other organizations on both sides of the political equation. It seems like an awful lot of them are less than honest.

The Simcox thing is a good example. From the news stories I've read, a lot of people, including those involved in the organization are questioning the collection and distribution of donations to his organization. I have no way to check on this, so I have to rely on people who are involved.

There have been several stories posted here about Simcox and his Minuteman organization. They do not seem to be written by leftists, so I assume they have some validity.

The stories about corruption on the Democrat side are legion.

Surely, the GOP side of the coin can eliminate corruption in its non-profits and take the high road on this issue. If they do not, then contributors and voters, alike, will be justified in questioning where their money is going.

I'm a Republican, not a Democrat. I leave the Democrats to deal with their own problems.

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.