The Ties That Bind

By: Bridget Gibson

"The corporations of America today effectively oversee the Congress, and the regulatory agencies and indeed the presidency itself."

- E.L. Doctorow

George Bush and Kenneth Lay are old friends. Just how far that friendship goes is the question of the day. Just like Enron, is the robber baron's mentality occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? Are they creating a giant Ponzi scheme where the money is stolen from the workers (substitute taxpayers) and transferred to those at the highest level?

There's a company that a few people are trying not to talk about lately. They would prefer that no one mention this company in their presence or with their names attached to it. What relationships have been formed that would embarrass or implicate office holders or staff with the mutual use and abuse of powers that might be difficult to explain away. I am extremely interested in what those dealings meant to a vast number of Americans and non-Americans. What did it mean to the consumers of the products where price gouging and overinflation of stock value and lies of financial malfeasance occurred? What did it mean to the stockholders of shares that had been purchased in good faith; to the employees that had their retirement accounts relying upon the continuation of the company that they worked for and expended their energies in growing?

The company's name is Enron. With meteor rapidity Enron became a dominant force with which to be reckoned. Enron's CEO was Kenneth Lay. Mr. Lay's and George Bush's relationship has been lengthy and by all accounts, mutually beneficial. Mr. Lay allowed G.W.Bush to use Enron's jets for travel around the US during the election campaign of 2000. Their relationship was extremely personal, also. Exchanging Christmas cards and wives being friends. Quite chummy. Everyone should have such friends. Mr. Lay's contributions to G.W.Bush's campaign were the best. Showed exactly how much support and belief that Bush was "his man" for the presidency. Enron, Lay and Enron's CFO contributed $550,000 to G.W. Bush's presidential campaign and another $300,000 for his inaugural committee. Gee, that's a lot of green. I wonder what one gets for that much money. Looking back over the years it is fairly clear that Mr. Lay thought he would get his money's worth. A sound investment in future policy affecting his business was the intention. Or do friends pony up that much money just for fun?

When Mr. Bush was governor of Texas, the policies of his administration seemed mighty friendly to Enron. Through G.W. Bush's governorship, Enron's plant in Pasadena, Texas, won special concessions allowing the company to pollute without a permit, as well as giving the company immunity from prosecution for violating the law.

In 1971, the Texas Clean Air Act allowed plants built prior to that time to continue to pollute. G.W. Bush extended this clause under the 1999 Clean Air Responsibility Enterprise (CARE) program that his office drew up in a series of secret meeting with representatives of the top polluters in the state. The CARE Act also made audit documents confidential from the public and allowed polluters to escape responsibility for environmental violations.

In January 2001, shortly after taking the oath of office, G.W. Bush was faced with the energy "crisis" in California. G.W. Bush's response to this "crisis" was to say that the problem was the California consumer's, not the nation's and not the energy companies that were charging $1,400 for a megawatt hour (up from $30 a year earlier). He then announced that Dick Cheney would be responsible for writing the nation's "Energy Policy". This policy was crafted in the dark, away from the prying eyes of others, with the assistance of 48 people, people inextricably tied to corporate backgrounds and energy lobbyists. There was no input from environmentalists or alternative energy sources.

It has been said that Mr. Cheney and Mr. Lay met and discussed our nation's energy policy. We don't know if that is true. Although Mr. Cheney was requested to divulge the sources for his policy and its benefactors (the energy sector), he has refused and is continuing to refuse and has even called upon "executive privilege" to continue to not disclose the facts. Does Mr. Cheney need to be reminded that he is not the "executive"?

The similarities between the history of G.W. Bush as Governor of Texas and his administration in Washington, D.C. are becoming more apparent. Mr. Bush's priorities have been to take the resources of all of the citizenry, whether it is natural or material, and compensate the corporate interests that have contributed to his campaign coffers. He and his administration have crafted orders in secret and have failed to disclose the operations of our "open" government. It has been historically proven that when someone does not want to come forward with the evidence, the evidence usually will not support the action. Honesty and forthrightness are the only policies that people in an open society can tolerate.

There seems to be a pattern emerging here. In Texas, Mr. Bush was wont to draw up laws and plans with no input from the citizenry or legislature. In Washington, D.C., Mr. Bush is wont to draw up laws and orders with no input from the citizenry or legislature. These laws and executive orders affect all of us, not just the corporations. A country is more than just a profit and loss sheet, with shareholders expecting a return on their investment. It is a collective arena of citizens, the land that we live in and upon and the future that we give to our children.

Enron was valued at $84.00 a share at its pinnacle earlier this year. Yesterday it traded for $0.81. Rumor and lawsuits are flying. Alleging fraud, Amalgamated Bank of New York is suing 29 current and former top Enron executives and board members, including Ken Lay and Wendy Gramm, wife of Texas Senator Phil Gramm.

Our current administration is full of people that have strong ties to Enron. Lawrence Lindsay is Bush's top economic advisor. He was a paid financial consultant to Enron. I hope that he is giving better advise in his current position. Tom White is the Army Secretary. He was Vice Chairman of Enron Services and held $25 million in Enron stock. I hope that he understands the needs of our servicemen and women and plans positive things for their futures. Mitch Daniels is our Budget Director. He held $100,000 in Enron stock. I hope our investments are strong and that we can pay our bills in the future. Karl Rove is Bush's Chief Political Advisor. He held $100,000 in Enron stock. I hope that his advice to Bush considers all the population, not just the elite few.

Will the complicity of those at the highest levels of government allow all laws to be flouted and these white collar criminals to escape any form of justice? Will these "executives" be allowed to keep their millions and hide behind the laws that have been bought and paid for by them and passed just for their "benefit"?