Wash. Post falsely claimed Blunt's wife does not lobby Congress
SUMMARY: The Washington Post falsely reported that the wife of acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt "does not lobby Congress." In fact, Abigail Blunt is a registered lobbyist for Philip Morris, as she was in 2002, when Blunt tried to modify Homeland Security legislation in a way that would have benefited Philip Morris.
In an article in the January 11 edition of The Washington Post, staff writer Jonathan Weisman falsely reported that Abigail Blunt, the wife of acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt (R-MO), is not a congressional lobbyist. In reporting on a move in 2002 by Blunt to modify Homeland Security legislation in a way that would have benefited tobacco manufacturer Philip Morris, Weisman noted that Abigail Blunt -- then Abigail Perlman -- was a lobbyist, but he then wrote that "[s]he does not lobby Congress." In fact, not only is Abigail Blunt currently registered as a congressional lobbyist, she lobbied Congress for Philip Morris at the time. Though she and Blunt were not married, they reportedly had a "personal relationship."
The weblog Fired Up! America was apparently the first media outlet to note the Post's error in reporting that Abigail Blunt "does not lobby Congress."
Rep. Blunt first took heat for the move in summer 2003 after a Washington Post report in June 2003 disclosed his involvement with Philip Morris. Democrats criticized the 2002 attempt to add a measure to the Homeland Security Act of 2002 intended to reduce cigarette smuggling, a provision many claimed was designed to benefit Philip Morris. At the time he was attempting to modify the Homeland Security Act, Blunt reportedly had a "personal relationship" with Perlman, a lobbyist for the tobacco giant. They married in 2003.
In detailing the controversy, the Post's Weisman reported that Perlman "does not lobby Congress." In fact, Perlman lobbied both houses of Congress for Altria Corporate Services Inc. (formerly Philip Morris Management Corp.) in 2002 and continues to do so under the name Abigail Blunt. Altria Group, which also owns Kraft Foods, changed its name from Philip Morris Companies Inc. in 2003; the tobacco division operates under the name Philip Morris International.
A lobbying disclosure report for July 1-December 31, 2002, indicates that Perlman lobbied both houses of Congress on behalf of Altria. She lobbied Congress on budget and appropriations bills (Page 4) and tobacco legislation (Pages 11-14). (The provision added to and then removed from the Homeland Security Act is not included with the bills listed in the disclosure.) Altria's lobbying report reflects Perlman's marriage to Blunt, and its 2003 "Year End" report lists her as "Abigail Blunt." The latest Altria report, "Mid-year" 2005, indicates that she lobbied the House on animal issues (Page 2) and both houses of Congress on budget and appropriations (Pages 4-5), food industry issues (Pages 6-7), health issues (Page 8), tobacco (Pages 13-14), torts (Pages 15-16), and trade (Page 17).
From a January 11 article in The Washington Post:
The stories are numerous. Just hours after Blunt was named to the House's third-highest leadership job in 2002, he unsuccessfully tried to insert a measure benefiting Philip Morris into the 475-page bill creating the Department of Homeland Security. Blunt's ties to the company are thick: He was very close to a company lobbyist, Abigail Perlman, at the time, and married her in 2003. She does not lobby Congress. One of his sons, Andrew B. Blunt, lobbies the Missouri legislature for Philip Morris.
Blunt has intervened in legislation on behalf of United Parcel Service of America Inc. and FedEx Corp. Andrew Blunt represented UPS in Missouri at the time. And the senior Blunt brokered a deal with then-Rep. Ernie Fletcher (R-Ky.) to fight for a vote on legislation that could open the door to Food and Drug Administration regulation of tobacco, a top priority of Philip Morris, because it is far ahead of rivals in designing products likely to gain FDA support.
"She does not lobby Congress. " Based on what? Did you look at congressional lobby registers, Mr. Weisman? MMFA did a great research job on this, as always. But, Weisman must have access to the same research tools. There's no excuse for this.
And I'm grateful that MMFA listed the other corporate connections here. Blunt is, bluntly (pun-intended), dripping with malfeasance.
Let's learn who the WaPo advertisers are, call them up - or better yet write - and tell them we'll be buying from their competitors until they either stop advertising with the Post or encourage them to correct their bad reporting and be more careful in the future.
Link to the Washington Post article in question; in spite of the strange five word sentence that appears, as you say, 'plopped' into the piece, the article is an excellent portayal of just how closely those who vie for the Majority Leader post are nothing but business agents themselves; how much the contenders for that position resemble Tom DeLay; heck, it's kind of amusing that one of those contending for the leadership position is married to a Jack Abramoff-like figure!
The Washington Post piece, despite the strangely out of context sentence, is an excellent article on Republican congressional corruption.
And that makes this mysterious sentence all the more so.
I would have never guessed that the statement was false. And wow. She's right there in the mid-year report.
They were called "lobbyists" back when they used to wait in the lobby to talk to the Congressmen. When do we start calling them "bedists?"
Great item: topical and timely (well before the Republican conference chooses it's leader, instead of after; too often this kind of door gets closed after that kind of horse gets out), and just what we want to know, which of course is...
to what degree are congressional Republicans acting as business agents?
...the degree appears great; but I hope nobody who reads this item gets the idea that the Washington Post article cited was anything like a 'pro-lobby', or even 'pro-Blunt' or 'pro-Boehner' piece; it was not, as the piece in question is titled...
Lobbying Colors GOP Leadership Contest Rivals for DeLay Post No Strangers to K St.
...and that article points out in even greater detail that congressional Republicans are business agents, to an even greater degree, than the MMFA does; and for good reason of course, as that was not the scope of the MMFA, but it was the scope of the Washington Post article; and that makes the sentence cited seem strangely out of context, and against the grain, of the article; a context and grain that may be summed up in this sentence, from the third paragraph of the article...
'Both Boehner and his rival for majority leader, Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), have extensive ties to the same K Street lobbying world that stained DeLay's reputation and spawned the Abramoff corruption scandal.'
...I love it! It's great. Will the nightly news be leading it's broadcasts with such a proclamation? Will anything at all resembling that statement come from any voice at FOX?
I bet not. Why would such an advertising revenue driven media as the televised nightly news is (enough ad revenues to qualify them as nothing but business agents too, right along with congressional Republicans), why would they 'out' the business agents on the hill? Why would FOX 'out' any conressional Republican, on any matter at all, when they are nothing more but the public relations media outlet of those same Republicans collectively; nothing more than the broadcast arm of the RNC?
Anyway, great item here, and truth be told, great article there, at the Washington Post; an article whose title I pasted, and whose theme I excerpted, makes the sentence that's been cited, seem so out of context, so against the grain, as to perhaps have been a typo? I don't know, I'm just glad I read the article.
The Washington Post article is such a timely piece on Republican congressional corruption, I just have to add a few more excerpts...
'Some (House) members, such as Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), have said the two candidates' (Blunt and Boehner) ties to K Street are so extensive that the race could still draw in a third candidate...'
'Just hours after Blunt was named to the House's third-highest leadership job in 2002, he unsuccessfully tried to insert a measure (concerning cigarette smuggling) benefiting Philip Morris into the 475-page bill creating the Department of Homeland Security.'
'Boehner's most famous act of the sort (as Mr. Blunt's deals) also involved the tobacco industry: In 1995, he distributed checks from tobacco political action committees to members on the House floor.'
'...both men have established a web of lobbying connections that touch Abramoff's fundraising and lobbying machine. Blunt, who modeled his political career on DeLay's...'
'Blunt, whose name appears as a "Friend of Owner" on a list Abramoff maintained of lawmakers...announced this month that he would donate to charity $8,500 that Abramoff and his wife had donated to his political action committee.'
'...like Blunt, Boehner has been known to accept the largess of companies with ties to his legislative agenda.'
From the Washington Post piece, I had excerpted...
'Some (House) members, such as Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), have said the two candidates' (Blunt and Boehner) ties to K Street are so extensive that the race could still draw in a third candidate...'
...today, Rep. John Shadegg, of Arizona (notice that he is a member of the above-quoted Rep. Flake's state delegation) has announced that he will seek the post of House Majority Leader in the elections on February 2...
[link to johnshadegg.house.gov]
...and he said...
'I believe that a majority of Republicans in the House understand the need for real, thorough reform. We must renew our commitment to the principles that won us a majority in the first place...I believe that we need a clean break from the scandals of the recent past. I hope every member of the Republican Conference will join with me in the coming days to craft an agenda of reforms that will fully regain the confidence of the American people'
GEE, Would anyone like to bet how Abigail and Roy met?
Hey, we had an effect!! Unfortunately, WaPo chose to misrepresent the error. Here's the statement they posted at the top of the web page that holds the story (emphasis is mine):
"Correction to This Article A Jan. 11 article incorrectly said that Abigail Blunt, the wife of acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt, no longer lobbies Congress. Since Roy Blunt assumed his temporary position Sept. 28, she no longer lobbies the House but continues to lobby the Senate. "
The article flatly states of Mrs. Blunt and without attribution: "She does not lobby Congress." The correction is dishonest - and incomplete.
Cool, thanks for the heads up on the correction; I imagine that MMFA will soon draw attention to it also.
As for the correction itself, I would have written it as...
'Abigail Blunt, the wife of acting House Majority Leader Roy Blunt, no longer professionally lobbies the House, as she now considers herself personally married to it; but she will continue to lobby the Senate, but only while her husband's out of town, and even then, only while nobody's looking.
Yep, they're married alright. Makes me wonder who does the lobbying for the WaPo/Newsweek/Slate sisterhood.