Back in college, I had a friend. Let’s call him “Dom.” Dom wasn’t one who was much given to following society’s “rules” or obeying its “laws.” He had a simple rule when it came to potential repercussions for his transgressions: “deny, deny, deny.” One time he told me, “I don’t care if they have you on tape. Deny it. ‘I don’t know what this is! That isn’t me!'”

So, naturally, I thought of Dom when TPMMuckraker followed up on its coverage of the Buyer/Frontier Foundation story:

And the award for boldest denial in the face of evidence of financial mischief goes to … Rep. Steve Buyer!
. . .
He and his office have repeatedly denied that the Frontier Foundation has any special connection to Buyer.”

To recap: There are campaign finance laws in place. They exist to avoid undue influence by individuals and corporations over elected officials who are in a position to do them favors. One dodge to these campaign finance laws is for moneyed interests to contribute to non-profit organizations closely associated with the elected officials. Those organizations can, in turn, employ family members, pay for travel and dining expenses under the guise of helping the organization, and, potentially, create a nest egg the elected official can use after retiring from office – perhaps becoming employed at a nice salary to “manage” the organization. In Buyer’s case, the Frontier Foundation was ostensibly created for the purpose of providing scholarships to Indiana students. Despite taking in donations from lobbying organizations having to do with the pharmaceutical and broadcast industries for years, the Foundation has yet to provide a scholarship.

Buyer’s claims that he has no special connection to the Frontier Foundation is ridiculous. TPM Muckraker has provided a handy list of some of the reasons why:

*The foundation shares an address and phone number with Buyer’s campaign headquarters on North Main Street in Monticello, IN.

*Buyer’s daughter Colleen was the president of the foundation until August 1 of this year.

*His son Ryan is a director of the foundation, according to filings with the Indiana Secretary of State.

*Answering the phone number of the campaign office (and foundation) today, Stephanie Mattix, until recently the secretary-treasurer of the foundation, told TPMmuckraker that the foundation shares the office but works out of “a separate room.”

*The real estate company that owns the space says the lease is for Buyer, and adds that the foundation is not subleasing the space. Mattix told TPMmuckraker, though, that the foundation does pay rent.

*While drawing an annual salary in the $12,000-$17,000 range from the foundation, Mattix also served as the executive director of Buyer’s Storm Chasers PAC. She is currently the finance director of his campaign and the webmaster of the campaign Web site.

*Buyer was listed as the “honorary chairman” of the foundation on a 2004 donor solicitation, sent from Buyer’s office, the Lafayette Journal & Courier reported.

*Companies have made donations to the Frontier Foundation “in honor of” Buyer.

One of the amazing things is just how little effort Buyer has made to dress this foundation up into something that looks vaguely above board. It would take very little to put a veneer of plausible deniability on this thing. Get a P.O. Box. Sign up for a different phone number. Give out a couple of scholarships. Do that, and suddenly you’re in the gray areas of how close a relationship is “too close” and how little scholarship money is “too little.”

At the moment, he looks like he is being just a little too greedy and a little too brazen for his own good. As a resident of this district, it seems too much to ask to get new representation. It’s very unlikely that a Democrat will win in this district. For good or bad, that’s just the nature of the district drawing game. More frustrating, in my opinion, is the acquiescence of the local GOP. There are plenty of honest, smart Republicans around here. One of them should really be moving to take his place.

Update Looks like Rep. Buyer is changing his tune about having a special relationship to the Frontier Foundation. In a soft ball piece run by the Monticello rag, Buyer is suddenly very closely involved with the Foundation.

Compare
June 2008. The Frontier Foundation is just another charity Rep. Buyer helps:

In an interview, Buyer said “there is no connection” between his legislative actions and donations to the foundation. “I’m not an officer. I’m not a board director,” he said of his role in the non-profit. “Do I help the foundation? Yes, I do. Do I help other charity groups? Yes, I do.”

October 11, 2009. Still in denial.

Attempts to reach Buyer for comment were unsuccessful. His press secretary referred questions to Frontier Foundation and said there was no connection between Buyer and the foundation.

“It’s not Congressman Buyer’s foundation,” press secretary Anjulen Anderson said.

But, now that the heat is on, October 14, 2009 in an “exclusive interview” with his friendly hometown newspaper, the Monticello Herald Journal, Buyer is “creating a sustainable foundation.” He founded the organization. Everything in the article speaks to (now that it’s abundantly obvious) an extremely close relationship between Buyer and the Frontier Foundation. He says that he didn’t give out any scholarships or really advertise its existence because he wanted the organization to stockpile a bunch of cash. That part I believe. It’s the part where he intended to give out a bunch of scholarships with no intent of enriching himself or his family where I get a little skeptical, particularly given his rapid shift in stories about his involvement with the organization.

Blue Indiana has posted video from a Channel 13 story on the Frontier Foundation which follows on the heels of the Journal & Courier story a few days ago. The short version is that industry groups with an interest in currying Rep. Buyer’s good favor are contributing to this Foundation which is ostensibly devoted to raising scholarship money. The Foundation shares office space with Buyer and has employed Buyer’s daughter and campaign manager. It has not, apparently, provided any actual scholarship money to students.

My previous entries are here (10/11/09) and here (6/16/09). The USA Today article that seems to have kicked off the whole thing is here (6/10/09).

Update TPM Muckraker is getting in on the party as well.

None of Indiana’s Congressional races were even close with all of the incumbents winning re-election comfortably: IN-01 Visclosky (D); IN-02 Donnelly (D); IN-03 Souder (R); IN-04 Buyer (R); IN-05 Burton (R); IN-06 Pence (R); IN-07 Carson (D); IN-08 Ellsworth (D); and IN-09 Hill (D).

To represent Indiana’s Fourth Congressional District, the Lafayette Journal & Courier has endorsed Democratic challenger Nels Ackerson over incumbent Steve Buyer.

Ackerson seems the better choice. He views the job of governance as one involving compromise and negotiation.

Buyer’s approach has too often been one in which political ideology trumps all else.

Allegiance to Republican ideals and ideas is a fine thing in a Republican-leaning congressional district, as long as it’s not allegiance for the sake of allegiance.

Others have said it, and we’ll echo it here: Neither Democrats nor Republicans have a monopoly on what’s right or righteous.
. . .
Residents of the 4th want a congressman who is responsive and who engages in political discussion and debate.

Buyer’s decision to agree to only one, invitation-only debate during the campaign hurt him with many voters. They expect and want more from their representative.

We recommend thanking Buyer for his years of service and giving Ackerson a shot at a seat in the U.S. House.

Maureen Groppe, writing for Gannett News Service, reports that Democratic challenger Nels Ackerson has outspent incumbent Republican Steve Buyer in the race to represent Indiana’s Fourth Congressional District. Buyer could be planning a massive advertising campaign since he apparently has $800,000 left in the bank versus Ackerson’s $51,000. (Assuming that is, Obama and Daniels have left any ad time unpurchased — here at Masson’s Blog, we can quote you a very reasonable fee.)

Ackerson spent about $137,000 during the first two weeks of this month and about $564,000 this election cycle. Buyer has spent about $56,000 for the first two weeks of the month and about $438,000 this cycle.

So at the very, very least, Ackerson has run a credible campaign. He has some hurdles in this District, not least of which is that it’s a big, sprawling mess of a District that historically has been very Republican. Whether he can overcome those hurdles is hard to say. But, for those in the Fourth District who happen to come across this, I would suggest very seriously considering a vote for Ackerson. He is an accomplished Hoosier and a smart, thoughtful guy who has earned a reputation as a distinguished lawyer in private practice. He is not primarily a conservative or a liberal; rather he is a pragmatist who appears ready, willing, and able to work with anybody who has good ideas about how to fix a given problem.

Meanwhile, Representative Buyer has been in office for 16 years without standing out in any notable way. He seems to be out of central casting from the Gingrich revolution except that he came into office two years prior to 1994. I was actually kind of excited back in 1994 when they swept into power. I was probably more conservative then than I am now, and I certainly knew less about politics. But, generally, I figured we’d see smaller government, lower budgets, and more attention to civil liberties. My expectations, obviously, did not come to pass. My disillusionment with the Republican House became complete upon the impeachment of Bill Clinton for actions which, while not commendable, were only impeachable in the sense that the House Republicans had enough votes and sufficient disdain for the Constitution to cast them. Buyer was one of the House prosecutors pushing the Clinton impeachment. But, even my anger at that has faded. Now that era has passed. Those who have shown talent aside from being movement conservatives from that time perhaps have something to offer yet. But Buyer has not shown himself to be one of those people, and, in my humble opinion, Indiana’s Fourth District should send some fresh energy to Congress.

Blue Indiana has a handy chart listing Congressional fund raising number for the quarter. Of note:

Indiana’s 2nd, 7th, and 8th appear locked up for the freshmen Democrats, Donnelly, Ellsworth, and Carson, respectively, in those seats. Their challengers have not raised any money to speak of.

Baron Hill seems to be doing very well in Indiana’s 9th with $684k on hand compared to Sodrel’s $263k.

In Indiana’s 3rd District, Mike Montagano has a disturbingly low cash on hand of $31k compared to Mark Souder’s $450k. However, the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee has been putting money into this race, so that might explain why his cash on hand has been allowed to get low and provide him with money to finish strong.

In Indiana’s 4th District, Nels Ackerson has put up some solid numbers, but he has his work cut out for him with $100k on hand compared to Buyer’s $800k. In fact, I received a copy of Buyer’s press release which states his intent to “own” the airwaves. We’ll see if his PAC money can buy this thing or if Ackerson has enough money to make a run for it.

Visclosky (IN-01), Burton (IN-05), and Pence (IN-06) also seem to have things locked up fairly well based on a comparison of their war chests to the money of their challengers.

The Clinton County Farm Bureau held an event that both Congressional candidates Nels Ackerson and Steve Buyer attended. Ackerson told the organizers about a prior commitment later in the evening and asked for an early speaking time. His campaign was told that they would try to accommodate his schedule. As it turns out, the President of the Clinton County Farm Bureau is also the chairman of a political action committee that has endorsed Buyer. That person was, for whatever reason, unable to let Ackerson speak before he had to leave. So, he left; and arranged for a supporter to speak in his absence.

Now Buyer is using this as yet another pretext to avoid debating Ackerson. (His last pretext was feigned outrage that Ackerson had the nerve to actually tell constituents that the two would be debating prior to the last debate. Buyer, apparently would have preferred that nobody know about the debate — or something; his reasoning is not easy to follow if one gives him the benefit of the doubt that he thinks his constituents should have some exposure to his positions on the issues outside of campaign events and press releases.) Buyer is claiming that Ackerson “walked out” on the event.

On Tuesday, Buyer said, “I don’t want to hear any more out of him about debates or joint appearances if he walked out on the Farm Bureau members last night when we were supposed to have a joint appearance.”

Ackerson responded in a news release Wednesday saying, “Steve Buyer wants to pretend that we’ve been skipping debates, and that’s laughable. Name the time, Steve. Name the place. We’ve been waiting. Stop hiding behind half-truths.”

Buyer’s campaign style is more petulant than statesman-like. I would expect a smoother style from him now that he’s been in office for 16 years.

In Indiana’s Fourth Congressional District, there is evidence that Nels Ackerson is running strong against incumbent Republican, Steve Buyer; with a survey showing Ackerson at 36% to Buyer’s 38% and 26% undecided. The very first thing to note is that the Journal & Courier poll was not scientific. Normally, I would not bother mentioning such a thing — if Candidate X does well in an online Internet poll, for example, that is evidence of exactly nothing. However, the other results for candidates in the Journal & Courier’s survey appear consistent with what I have seen in scientific polls. The survey has Gov. Daniels at 49% to Jill Long Thompson’s 30% and McCain up over Obama 51% to 45%. So, it seems reasonable to conclude that the Ackerson/Buyer responses are within shouting distance of what a scientific poll would reveal.