Skip to comments.Gingrich Gave Push to Clients, Not Just Ideas
Posted on 11/30/2011 3:10:53 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
Newt Gingrich is adamant that he is not a lobbyist, but rather a visionary who traffics in ideas, not influence. But in the eight years since he started his health care consultancy, he has made millions of dollars while helping companies promote their services and gain access to state and federal officials.
In a variety of instances, documents and interviews show, Mr. Gingrich arranged meetings between executives and officials, and salted his presentations to lawmakers with pitches for his clients, who pay as much as $200,000 a year to belong to his Center for Health Transformation.
When the center sponsored a health transformation summit at the Florida State Capitol in March 2006, lawmakers who attended Mr. Gingrichs keynote speech inside the House chamber received a booklet promoting not just ideas but also the specific services of two dozen of his clients. Executives from some of those companies sat on panels for discussions that lawmakers were encouraged to attend after Mr. Gingrichs address.
Gerard White, president of Clearwave, which paid about $50,000 to become a center member, used the occasion to pitch his companys system for managing patient medical data. It was a way for companies who were part of Newts group to say to health officials in Florida, Hey, here are some exciting things were doing, Mr. White said.
Mr. Gingrich and his aides have repeatedly emphasized that he is not a registered lobbyist, an important distinction in their effort to position him as an outsider who will transform the ways of Washington. They say that he has never taken a position for money and that corporations have signed on with him because of the strength of his ideas.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
...."Newt is famous for being all over the board," Cary Gordon, an influential pastor from Sioux City, Iowa, told the Des Moines Register. "He is admirable in many ways, but I won't back him. I don't trust him."....
......." YOU AND MR. GINGRICH SHARE A MUTUAL FRIEND IN JIM NUSSLE
In 2006, Mr. Nussle ran for Governor and asked that you serve as his running mate; an offer your willfully accepted.
In the nineties, Mr. Nussles current wife was working for Mr. Gingrich; while Mr. Gingrichs current wife was working for a committee which Mr. Nussle served on in the House of Representatives.
Furthermore, both men were married when they began affairs with each others staff members all while Mr. Gingrich was leading the investigation into Bill Clintons extramarital affair with Monica Lewinsky. This is an unfortunate irony.
More importantly, it points to a willful disregard of personal behavior and you are forever linked to both of these candidates in a way that is unacceptable for many of us who demand Christian leadership.
Which brings us to our next concern."..............
Its unknown who created the criteria and what it all entails, but the meeting has a large contingent of Bachmann supporters. The reason why this is important is because TheIowaRepublican.com was told that this group has been charged with making a recommendation to the FAMiLY Leaders board before they decide on who they will endorse. When asked why his board of directors cannot make a decision on their own, Vander Plaats admitted that the board will seek the input of others, and added that, Wisdom comes in a multitude of counsel.
Since showering praise on Gingrich in an interview with the Des Moines Register following the forum, social conservatives leaders around the state have been grumbling about what they think is a likelihood that Vander Plaats may endorse Gingrich.
Yesterday, an anonymous letter from a group called Iowans for Christian Leaders in Government distributed an open letter that they had sent Vander Plaats warning him about the negative ramifications that endorsing Gingrich would bring. The letter stated that Vander Plaats endorsement may be guided, not by prayer and conviction, but by personal benefit and prior relationships.
Vander Plaats traveled the state in 2008 to advocate on behalf Gingrichs American Solutions. Gingrich also provided financial support to Vander Plaats effort to defeat three Iowa Supreme Court justices last fall. Vander Plaats also received financial support from the American Family Association and worked with Wayne Hamilton, a key Perry aide.
While Vander Plaats and the FAMiLY Leader are still searching for clarity, there is one thing he was very clear about. The process is more difficult because their goal is not to just find a candidate who can beat President Obama next fall, but this candidate also needs to be able to beat Mitt Romney.
The only question for Vander Plaats and the FAMiLY Leader is, what kind of candidate will best accomplish that goal? A surefire conservative whose core convictions match theirs, or a candidate who already has momentum or has the connections that may pay dividends down the road?
Bull, newt was lobbying by a different name just like his amnesty by a different name. The slug got kicked out of congress because he thought the rules did not apply to him. He still thinks the rules do not apply to him.
That's my top four right there, but not in that order. One has to factor in electability, power of ideas, oratory, past history, and statesmanship.
No independents or swing voters will vote for him. He is a guaranteed loser.
Come on, Newt’s a healthcare genius. His ideas are gold. It has nothing to do with his access and influence in D.C.
“.....lawmakers who attended Mr. Gingrichs keynote speech inside the House chamber received a booklet promoting not just ideas but also the specific services of two dozen of his clients.”
Gee...you mean people actually paid for this? And geee you mean Newt made money doing this? My gosh, the shame of it all....
I’ll bet a week’s wages that this dumb think piece, probably put together by Romney’s people...will be on the side bar before you can say “colonscopy”.....
I know what you mean. Newt is a genius just like Obama. We have to keep being told how smart they are because it’s so hard to tell by what they do.
Honestly, I don’t fault any of them. They know how the system works and have played it to the hilt to gain enormous wealth and power. It’s the way it’s designed to work, and they work it. Just don’t piss on my leg and tell me it’s raining.
Now he's chasing ambulances with Morgan and Morgan, but I'm sure Newt made this venue in 2006 attractive to Charlie to arrange for Florida politico big wigs to be at Newt's disposal.
RINOS flocking together for their own personal gain in God's Waiting Room - one of the biggest population in need of Newt's magical mystery tour.
I do fault them for playing the system. The system is the same as the evil system we fought wars to rid ourselves of. Washington and many of the other founding fathers refused to play the system and chose personal loss in order to give us this nation. Many of the politicians we have now aren’t sons of liberty, they are illegitimate children that should be sent home to their whore mothers.
Nov. 13, 2011: Pelosi fires back at 60 Minutes report on soft corruption
Pelosi and her husband participated in an initial public offering of Visa in 2008, according to CBS. They bought 5,000 shares at the initial price of $44; two days later, shares were trading at $64, CBS said........... Source
Pelosi Bashes Catholics: 'They Have This Conscience Thing'... After having some of her behind the scenes shenanigans exposed, Nancy Pelosi has turned to her friends in the MSM to help her with damage control. The effect is something akin to watching what scrambles out after you overturn a large rock.
Pelosi sought to defend herself from allegations that she and her husband made millions from insider trading in what the Washington Post calls a wide ranging interview ..
Pelosi added a startling, if inadvertent, admission. Addressing the effects such [ObamaCare] legislation would have on Catholic health care providers, Pelosi said:
"I'm a devout Catholic and I honor my faith and love it . . . but they have this conscience thing."
November 16, 2011
Dear Leader Pelosi,
After reading about House Minority Whip Steny Hoyers outburst over my Overhauling Washington plan, I wonder if his obstructionism reflects your own opposition and that of the Democratic Caucus to urgent reforms the American people so vehemently demand.
After increasing the debt by $4 trillion in less than three years, no one can believe that Americans are satisfied with business as usual, and that a permanent political class in Washington can get us out of the mess you and your colleagues have created.
A part-time Congress with half the pay would still make $38,000 a year more than the average American family. Do you truly oppose lawmakers spending more time in their districts? Is it so important for the Washington power brokers to build their fiefdoms of influence, including providing bailouts to Wall Street while businesses on Main Street are being boarded up every day?
Here is the fundamental question: do you believe Washington is broken? Before answering that question, consider these facts:
1) the Washington Metro area is now the most affluent metropolitan area in the country because lobbyists, contractors, elected officials and bureaucrats have been insulated from the economic ruin prevalent in the private sector;
2) Congressional office budgets have doubled since 2000 while employers all across America are laying off workers;
3) Our nations total debt is nearing the size of our nations economy, increasing our dependence on competitors like China;
4) The number of Americans out of work has increased by more than two million since January 2009, despite the massive stimulus package Democratic leaders promised would revive the economy, and;
5) on top of the job-killing spending policies of the previous Congress, employers are faced with a staggering $1.1 trillion in costs related to federal regulatory compliance.
Do you truly believe the answer to massive debt, over-regulation and bloated big-government policies is to continue to protect the status quo, which enriches and empowers Washington insiders at the expense of the American People?
My plan would overhaul Washington, eliminating certain agencies and reducing the size and scope of others. It will force Congress to make the tough decisions to balance the budget or require a further reduction in their pay. It would end lifetime appointments to future appointees to the federal bench. I dont want to tinker around the edges when the American People demand a complete overhaul of Washington.
Let me conclude with an invitation: I am in Washington Monday and would love to engage you in a public debate about my Overhaul Washington plan versus the congressional status quo. I think it would be a tremendous service to the American public to see a public airing of these differences. Let the people decide. If Monday doesnt work, perhaps we could find a time in Iowa over the course of the next month to discuss these issues in front of the people of Americas heartland.
Should you choose not to respond or engage in such a healthy discussion, I will take it to mean you will continue your obstructionist ways in the face of much needed Washington reform.
Governor of Texas
Maybe I’m too cynical, but I think human nature is human nature. Founding Fathers included. Yes, they risked a lot, but only to put themselves in place to benefit. None of this is new. It goes back as long as human history. Governments are nothing more than wealth engines designed to benefit those who run them.
Shockingly, the Consultancy's main activity appears to be running the family's private hedge-fund-of-funds.
In a year which should be about "throwing out the bums", how come we end up with one of the most inside-the-beltway candidates ever? Gingrich is 20% conservative, 80% Ted Kennedy's not-so-evil twin.
The divorce rate for Christians is HIGHER than the general population.
Newt is not lobbyist. He merely took money in exchange of assuring conservatives about the merits of Fannie Mae and individual mandate in health care law.
Now that's an interesting claim. I'd like to see the study. Many people don't get married (just say they're engaged or baby-daddies), aren't really opposite sex to get married, and then of course there are those arranged marriages. It's a mixed bag. I'd like to see how that study was done. If you would provide the source. Thank you.
Of course the Newt marriages involved infidelity stints too. But now all should be forgiven because he's a grandfather and his daughters are campaigning with him and Callista. It's amazing how things just fly out the window on claims made by Newt that he is a master debater with ideas. This man's moral foundation is flawed and everything he's built on it is too.