Abramoff says he got 'every appropriation we wanted'

By GWEN FLORIO
Tribune Capitol Bureau


HELENA — Jack Abramoff, the Washington lobbyist at the center of a congressional influence-peddling scandal, told Vanity Fair magazine that "every appropriation we wanted, we got" from U.S. Sen. Conrad Burns' committee.

"Our staffs were as close as they could be," Abramoff told Vanity Fair, which hit newsstands in New York and Los Angeles Wednesday with a story on Abramoff headlined "Washington's Invisible Man."

State Senate President Jon Tester, one of Burns' two main Democratic opponents, called Wednesday for Burns to resign. And Larry Sabato, director of the University of Virginia's Center for Politics, suggested that the state Republican Party would be better off if Burns stepped aside and let Republican U.S. Rep. Denny Rehberg run in his place.

"It may be their best chance to hold the seat," he said.

Burns' staff furiously disputed the Vanity Fair story Wednesday.

"A pathological liar who has no credibility and belongs in jail," Burns' communications director, Jason Klindt, termed Abramoff.

Another Burns spokesman, James Pendleton, said that since lobbyists don't submit requests to committees, "this fact negates the entire Abramoff quote from Vanity Fair." Most of the allegations concerning Burns and Abramoff center on Burns' chairmanship of a Senate subcommittee, Interior Appropriations.

"That's pretty nuanced," said Jerry Calvert, a political science professor at Montana State University. Few people pay attention to the details of congressional maneuvering, he said.

The Vanity Fair story "is a problem for the senator because it suggests that Abramoff is saying (Burns) traded policy for money," Calvert said.

Abramoff pleaded guilty in January to federal conspiracy and fraud charges, and is cooperating in a separate Capitol Hill corruption investigation.Burns received more in donations from Abramoff and his associates, about $150,000, than any other member of the Senate or House, according to a Bloomberg analysis. Burns has vowed to return the same amount of money.

Three aides associated with Burns either worked for or had dealings with Abramoff and his clients, mainly casino-wealthy Indian tribes.

So far, only one congressman, who has not officially been named, has been implicated in the probe. But an attorney for Abramoff said this week that the disgraced lobbyist would "name names" at his sentencing March 29. The Vanity Fair story is a rare example of Abramoff talking publicly about the case.

Jennifer Duffy, who assesses Senate races for the nonpartisan Cook Political Report, said that while "just about anything Abramoff is saying these days is suspect," the Vanity Fair story is "pretty problematic" for Burns' re-election campaign.

Both the state and national Democratic Party have pounded Burns for months because of his association with Abramoff and his clients, forcing Burns to respond by distancing himself from the lobbyist.

Burns' first television ad, in January, labeled the Democrats' allegations "stockyard you-know-what." The senator frequently denigrated Abramoff in campaign appearances, saying he barely knew him, and said at one event that he wished Abramoff had never been born.

"That's quite a statement, coming from a pro-life Republican," Abramoff told Vanity Fair.

Abramoff told Vanity Fair writer David Margolick that his own and Burns' staff "were as close as they could be. They practically used Signatures (a restaurant Abramoff owned) as their cafeteria. I mean, it's a little difficult for him to run from that record."

Duffy said that while the article gives Democrats even more fodder for their anti-Burns commercials, "it doesn't change the bigger picture. Burns is laboring against being implicated in one of the bigger scandals to hit Washington in a decade, and he's already running in a less-than-favorable environment for Republicans."

Democrats view this year's mid-term Congressional elections as their chance for taking back the U.S. Senate, and Burns' seat is seen as one of the most vulnerable.

Burns has been adamant that he intends to stay in the race. President George W. Bush is hosting a fundraising event for him in Washington, D.C., on March 27, four days after the state filing deadline.

State Republican Chairman Karl Ohs said Wednesday that Burns "is going to continue to work on behalf of all Montanans."

While Ohs' Democratic counterpart, Dennis McDonald, called the Vanity Fair story "a disappointment and embarrassment for Montana," Tester went a step further and said Burns needs to leave now.

"From the beginning," Tester said, "this hasn't passed the smell test. It smells like a barnyard that needs a cleanup."

If Burns were to resign, he would have to do so within the next two weeks if the GOP wanted to nominate someone to take his place on the ballot. If he stepped down after the March 23 filing deadline, his name would remain on the ballot. Another Republican could run only as a write-in candidate.

Some Montana observors said, however, they doubted he would leave the race.

Polls taken well before the Vanity Fair article was released indicated that support for Burns is slipping. Cook recently changed the status of Montana's Senate race from "leans Republican" to "toss-up," and Sabato, while he still classifies Montana as leaning Republican, said Tester and his fellow Democrat, state Auditor John Morrison, could prove "very competitive."

"If Burns persists (in running), it's looking more and more likely that he will lose," Sabato said.

"I would say that he's not necessarily toast, but you can smell the bread burning."

LINK