PDA

View Full Version : Clinton's lime green goldmine


Cochise
08-28-2007, 02:23 PM
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/images/NA-AN824_DONATE_20070827193848.jpg

Big Source of Clinton's Cash
Is an Unlikely Address
Family's Donations
Closely Track Those
Of Top Fund-Raiser
By BRODY MULLINS
August 28, 2007; Page A3

DALY CITY, Calif. -- One of the biggest sources of political donations to Hillary Rodham Clinton is a tiny, lime-green bungalow that lies under the flight path from San Francisco International Airport.

Six members of the Paw family, each listing the house at 41 Shelbourne Ave. as their residence, have donated a combined $45,000 to the Democratic senator from New York since 2005, for her presidential campaign, her Senate re-election last year and her political action committee. In all, the six Paws have donated a total of $200,000 to Democratic candidates since 2005, election records show.

That total ranks the house with residences in Greenwich, Conn., and Manhattan's Upper East Side among the top addresses to donate to the Democratic presidential front-runner over the past two years, according to an analysis by The Wall Street Journal of donations listed with the Federal Election Commission.

It isn't obvious how the Paw family is able to afford such political largess. Records show they own a gift shop and live in a 1,280-square-foot house that they recently refinanced for $270,000. William Paw, the 64-year-old head of the household, is a mail carrier with the U.S. Postal Service who earns about $49,000 a year, according to a union representative. Alice Paw, also 64, is a homemaker. The couple's grown children have jobs ranging from account manager at a software company to "attendance liaison" at a local public high school. One is listed on campaign records as an executive at a mutual fund.

The Paws' political donations closely track donations made by Norman Hsu, a wealthy New York businessman in the apparel industry who once listed the Paw home as his address, according to public records. Mr. Hsu is one of the top fund-raisers for Mrs. Clinton's presidential campaign. He has hosted or co-hosted some of her most prominent money-raising events.

People who answered the phone and the door at the Paws' residence declined requests for comment last week. In an email last night, one of the Paws' sons, Winkle, said he had sometimes been asked by Mr. Hsu to make contributions, and sometimes he himself had asked family members to donate. But he added: "I have been fortunate in my investments and all of my contributions have been my money."

Mr. Hsu, in an email last night wrote: "I have NEVER asked a single favor from any politician or any charity group. If I am NOT asking favors, why do I have to cheat...I've asked friends and colleagues of mine to give money out of their own pockets and sometimes they have agreed."

Lawrence Barcella, a Washington attorney representing Mr. Hsu, said in a separate email: "You are barking up the wrong tree. There is no factual support for this story and if Mr. Hsu's name was Smith or Jones, I don't believe it would be a story." He didn't elaborate.

A Clinton campaign spokesman, Howard Wolfson, said in an email: "Norman Hsu is a longtime and generous supporter of the Democratic party and its candidates, including Senator Clinton. During Mr. Hsu's many years of active participation in the political process, there has been no question about his integrity or his commitment to playing by the rules, and we have absolutely no reason to call his contributions into question."

Kent Cooper, a former disclosure official with the Federal Election Commission, said the two-year pattern of donations justifies a probe of possible violations of campaign-finance law, which forbid one person from reimbursing another to make contributions.

"There are red lights all over this one," Mr. Cooper said.

There is no public record or indication Mr. Hsu reimbursed the Paw family for their political contributions.

For the 2008 election, individuals can donate a maximum of $4,600 per candidate -- $2,300 for a primary election and $2,300 for a general election -- and a total of $108,200 per election to all federal candidates and national political parties.

In the wake of a 2002 law that set those limits, federal and state regulators and law-enforcement officials said they have seen a spike recently in the number of cases of individuals and companies illegally reimbursing others for campaign donations. Those cases don't necessarily implicate the candidates, who sometimes don't even appear to be aware of such payments executed on their behalf.

The 2002 law also raised penalties for infractions and included the prospect of prison sentences for offenders for the first time. That increased incentives for the FEC and federal prosecutors to investigate and prosecute infractions. Since the law was enacted, the FEC has collected millions of dollars in fines for illegal donations, including its largest-ever penalty, a $3.8 million levy against Freddie Mac last year.

According to public documents, Mr. Hsu once listed his address at the Paw home in Daly City, though it isn't clear if he ever lived there. He now lives in New York, according to campaign-finance records, on which he also lists a half-dozen apparel companies as his employer. In the campaign-finance forms, Mr. Hsu lists his companies as Next Components, Dilini Management, Because Men's Clothes and others.

He is on the board of directors of the New School in New York. News stories in the mid-1980s said he criticized trade policies that made it harder to import goods from China.

Mr. Hsu is also a major fund-raiser for Mrs. Clinton and other Democrats. When Democrats won control of Congress in November, he threw a party at New York City hot spot Buddakan with many prominent party leaders. Press reports said that toward the end of the night, he grabbed the microphone from the deejay and shouted: "If you are supporters of Hillary for President 2008, you can stay. Otherwise, get out."

Mr. Hsu has pledged to raise $100,000 or more for Mrs. Clinton, earning the title of "HillRaiser" along with a few hundred other top financial backers of her campaign. Earlier this year, he co-hosted a fund-raiser that raised $1 million for Mrs. Clinton at the Beverly Hills, Calif., home of billionaire Ron Burkle. He is listed as a co-host for another Clinton fund-raiser next month in northern California.

The Paw family is just one set of donors whose political donations are similar to Mr. Hsu's. Several business associates of Mr. Hsu in New York have made donations to the same candidates, on the same dates for similar amounts as Mr. Hsu.

On four separate dates this year, the Paw family, Mr. Hsu and five of his associates gave Mrs. Clinton a total of $47,500. In all, the family, Mr. Hsu and his associates have given Mrs. Clinton $133,000 since 2005 and a total of nearly $720,000 to all Democratic candidates.

The Paw's Daly City home is a one-story house in a working-class suburb of San Francisco. On a recent day, a coiled garden hose rested next to a dilapidated garden with a half-dozen dried out plants. The din of traffic from a nearby freeway was occasionally drowned out by jumbo jets departing San Francisco International Airport.

William and Alice Paw are of Chinese descent. The entire family got their Social Security cards in California in 1982, according to state records. All but one of the Paws registered to vote as "nonpartisan." A San Mateo County elections official said that members of the Paw family vote "sporadically."

No one in the Paw family had ever given a campaign contribution before the 2004 presidential election, according to campaign-finance reports. Then, in July 2004, five members of the family contributed a total of $3,600 to the presidential campaign of Sen. John Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat. Five of the checks were dated July 27, 2004. About the same time, Mr. Hsu made his first donations to a political candidate, contributing the maximum amount allowed by law to Mr. Kerry in two separate checks, on July 21, 2004, and on Aug. 6.

From then on, the correlation of campaign donations between Mr. Hsu and the Paw family has continued. The first donations to Mrs. Clinton came Dec. 23, 2004, when Mr. Hsu and one Paw family member donated the then-maximum $4,000 to her Senate campaign in two $2,000 checks, campaign-finance records show. In March 2005, the individuals gave a total of $17,500 to Mrs. Clinton.

Since then, Mr. Hsu, his New York associates and the Paw family have continued to donate to Democratic candidates. This year, Alice Paw and four of the Paw children have donated the maximum $4,600 to Mrs. Clinton's presidential campaign.

Write to Brody Mullins at brody.mullins@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/images/NA-AN825A_DONAT_20070827214042.gif

BucEyedPea
08-28-2007, 02:33 PM
Interesting. I had always wondered if a rich person could make a gift to another citizen who would then give money to their candidate just by knowing who'd they support. I wondered if that was illegal because it seemed like a way to get around these laws. Then their pacs.

HonestChieffan
08-28-2007, 02:35 PM
happens in all campaigns

Chief Faithful
08-28-2007, 02:54 PM
happens in all campaigns


Ala Kazam! The Clinton defense rises from the dead.

HonestChieffan
08-28-2007, 03:03 PM
Not at all a defense...just beware of where this leads cause every candidates campaign is guilty as hell

ChiefaRoo
08-28-2007, 03:04 PM
Ala Kazam! The Clinton defense rises from the dead.

Shazam! it's just like old times.

StcChief
08-28-2007, 03:58 PM
Color me surprised. Follow the money

jAZ
08-28-2007, 04:02 PM
Publicly funded elections, please.

jAZ
08-28-2007, 04:04 PM
Ala Kazam! The Clinton defense rises from the dead.
Wouldn't that just be an elaboration of this point from the article?
In the wake of a 2002 law that set those limits, federal and state regulators and law-enforcement officials said they have seen a spike recently in the number of cases of individuals and companies illegally reimbursing others for campaign donations. Those cases don't necessarily implicate the candidates, who sometimes don't even appear to be aware of such payments executed on their behalf.

patteeu
08-28-2007, 04:12 PM
Shades of Al Gore squeezing campaign contributions from a Buddhist turnip.

Laz
08-28-2007, 04:58 PM
Ala Kazam! The Clinton defense rises from the dead.
you muther fugger ...... ROFL

what defense has the dammed GOP been using for all these resignations and charges etc that have happened en masse during the Bush administration?





this money stuff is wrong ... election fraud needs to be stopped on both sides.


hell .... political finance reform needs to happen everywhere.

patteeu
08-28-2007, 05:01 PM
you muther fugger ...... ROFL

what defense has the dammed GOP been using for all these resignations and charges etc that have happened en masse during the Bush administration?





this money stuff is wrong ... election fraud needs to be stopped on both sides.


hell .... political finance reform needs to happen everywhere.

Why don't we just make it legal for guys like Mr. Hsu to give unlimited amounts and then there won't be any reason for this kind of cheating?

Laz
08-28-2007, 05:09 PM
Why don't we just make it legal for guys like Mr. Hsu to give unlimited amounts and then there won't be any reason for this kind of cheating?
wow .. the ol' Bush 'if you do something illegal just change the laws' method of governing has really taken hold with
you. :eek:



because this gives people with money too much access and too much power.

the government is supposed to be about "we the people ..... not "We the filthy rich"

Braincase
08-28-2007, 05:28 PM
Maybe we could get all of the politicians to wear stickers on their suits, so we can identify their sponsors, kind of like NASCAR?

patteeu
08-28-2007, 05:43 PM
because this gives people with money too much access and too much power.

You can't be under the impression that people with money are lacking access and power under the current system can you?

The only people discouraged from "getting around" the current system are the most honest rich people. The system shifts the influence toward those who are willing to circumvent the rules to cheat the system.

Baby Lee
08-28-2007, 05:45 PM
You can't be under the impression that people with money are lacking access and power under the current system can you?

The only people discouraged from "getting around" the current system are the most honest rich people. The system shifts the influence toward those who are willing to circumvent the rules to cheat the system.
If you outlaw unlimited donations, only outlaws will make unlimited donations. ;)

BucEyedPea
08-28-2007, 05:49 PM
I agree. Free it up but have FULL disclosure.

This got worse when we started regulating it with laws in an attempt to make it more fair. Another case of unintended consequences or the tyranny of good intentions. Chalk this one up to domestic blowback!*



* props to pat :p

patteeu
08-28-2007, 06:00 PM
I agree. Free it up but have FULL disclosure.

This got worse when we started regulating it with laws in an attempt to make it more fair. Another case of unintended consequences or the tyranny of good intentions. Chalk this one up to domestic blowback!*



* props to pat :p

You can require full disclosure if you want (and I think it is worth doing), but some will end up trying to get around that requirement too to avoid the appearance of buying influence.

patteeu
08-28-2007, 06:01 PM
If you outlaw unlimited donations, only outlaws will make unlimited donations. ;)

:D

Cochise
08-28-2007, 06:03 PM
Thank goodness for McCain-Feingold.

Anyway, I had noticed a lack of concern lately about campaign contributions in the media... figured it was because of who was raising the most money this cycle.

Laz
08-28-2007, 08:48 PM
You can't be under the impression that people with money are lacking access and power under the current system can you?

The only people discouraged from "getting around" the current system are the most honest rich people. The system shifts the influence toward those who are willing to circumvent the rules to cheat the system.
so it's bad now ...... so let's just make it worse



i just have no words

Laz
08-28-2007, 08:51 PM
hey i know ...... since companies paying fines for dumping toxic chemicals into the environment just pass those cost on to the consumer, let's just stop the fines.

since criminals can get guns even thought it's illegal ..... let's just hand out guns to everyone like candy to even the odds.

BucEyedPea
08-29-2007, 08:11 AM
You can require full disclosure if you want (and I think it is worth doing), but some will end up trying to get around that requirement too to avoid the appearance of buying influence.
Last time I posted that on this topic you agreed with it.
I agree there's a problem in this area.
There's no perfect solution. There will always be crooks.

Two questions though:
1) What does the Constitution say?
2) Why is this happening?

1) The Constitution does NOT grant Congress the power to regulate campaigns. Article II of the Constitution expressly authorizes the regulation of elections—not campaigns. Congress is not granted this power.

It's also regulation of political speech. The First Amendment grants individuals and businesses the free and unfettered right to advertise, lobby, and contribute to politicians as they choose.

2) It's happening because the stakes are so high because the govt controls nearly every aspect of our economy and lives so those with more money try to influence govt to protect it's interests. Solution is to return to a proper constitutional govt that does not exert excessive control over the economy and redsitribute wealth. Big govt and big campaign money go hand in hand.

Campaign finance laws keep incumbents in power. More free communication, not less, throughout an election cyle, which includes the people running ads through their own groups is the answer. This is now much cheaper and easier for the average citizen with the net.

BucEyedPea
08-29-2007, 08:26 AM
Thank goodness for McCain-Feingold.

Anyway, I had noticed a lack of concern lately about campaign contributions in the media... figured it was because of who was raising the most money this cycle.
Ahhhhhhhh! Cochise fields his own conspiracy theory.

StcChief
08-29-2007, 08:27 AM
Clean 'em all out and start over

patteeu
08-29-2007, 09:59 AM
hey i know ...... since companies paying fines for dumping toxic chemicals into the environment just pass those cost on to the consumer, let's just stop the fines.

While it's true that companies will try to pass along costs to their customers, at some point they price themselves out of the market, so fines are an actual punishment and this analogy doesn't really work.

since criminals can get guns even thought it's illegal ..... let's just hand out guns to everyone like candy to even the odds.

Good point, but of course, I'd be against a government handout.

patteeu
08-29-2007, 10:01 AM
Last time I posted that on this topic you agreed with it.

I agreed with it this time too:

You can require full disclosure if you want (and I think it is worth doing), but some will end up trying to get around that requirement too to avoid the appearance of buying influence.

BucEyedPea
08-29-2007, 10:03 AM
I saw the part in parens....but I thought you were only agreeing with the full disclosure part, not the freeing it up part. Just so ya' know.

patteeu
08-29-2007, 12:53 PM
Democratic fundraiser is a fugitive in plain sight

WASHINGTON -- For the last 15 years, California authorities have been trying to figure out what happened to a businessman named Norman Hsu, who pleaded no contest to grand theft, agreed to serve up to three years in prison and then seemed to vanish.

"He is a fugitive," Ronald Smetana, who handled the case for the state attorney general, said in an interview. "Do you know where he is?"

Hsu, it seems, has been hiding in plain sight, at least for the last three years.

Since 2004, one Norman Hsu has been carving out a prominent place of honor among Democratic fundraisers. He has funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions into party coffers, much of it earmarked for presidential hopeful Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York.

more...