NPR wrongly suggested Reid, Stabenow face "ethics allegations" over Abramoff contributions
SUMMARY: NPR's Andrea Seabrook reported that one of Democrats' "big problems right now" is "convincing voters that the so-called 'culture of corruption' is a Republican thing." According to Seabrook, "there's a growing list of ethics allegations against Democrats in Congress," and as examples, she noted: "Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV], Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow, and others took campaign contributions from Indian tribes that were associated with [disgraced former lobbyist] Jack Abramoff." In fact, neither Reid nor Stabenow are facing allegations of ethical misconduct regarding Abramoff contributions, and the mere receipt of contributions from Abramoff clients is not an indication of corruption.
On the May 4 edition of National Public Radio's Morning Edition, Capitol Hill correspondent Andrea Seabrook reported that one of Democrats' "big problems right now" is "convincing voters that the so-called 'culture of corruption' is a Republican thing." According to Seabrook, "there's a growing list of ethics allegations against Democrats in Congress," and as examples, she noted: "Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid [D-NV], Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow, and others took campaign contributions from Indian tribes that were associated with [disgraced former lobbyist] Jack Abramoff." In fact, neither Reid nor Stabenow is facing allegations of ethical misconduct regarding Abramoff client contributions; the mere receipt of contributions from Abramoff clients was not prohibited by law or ethics rules.
From the May 4 edition of National Public Radio's Morning Edition:
SEABROOK: These tourists, strolling along the terraces at the U.S. Capitol Building, point out one of the Democrats' big problems right now: convincing voters that the so-called "culture of corruption" is a Republican thing. And maybe this is why it's so hard -- there's a growing list of ethics allegations against Democrats in Congress. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow, and others took campaign contributions from Indian tribes that were associated with Jack Abramoff.
Regarding Reid, the Associated Press twice reported -- on February 11 and 13 -- that the Senate Democratic leader coordinated with Abramoff to "oppose" a bill that would have raised the national minimum wage -- which included a provision addressing the Northern Mariana Islands, a U.S. territory represented by Abramoff. But, in fact, Reid was a co-sponsor of that legislation and spoke on the Senate floor on behalf of its passage, which the AP neglected to report in either article.
As Media Matters for America documented, a number of media outlets have wrongly conflated Abramoff's illegal influence peddling with the receipt by political officials of contributions from Abramoff clients or associates. At the same time as media outlets have suggested that receiving money from tribes is unethical, they have completely ignored the receipt of donations from Abramoff clients by Sen. John McCain (R-AZ). Instead, those media outlets have cast McCain as an "untainted" reformer with respect to the Abramoff controversy -- effectively holding McCain to a different standard from that to which they have held Democrats who received money from Abramoff clients. The Associated Press reported on January 5 that McCain's chief of staff acknowledged that McCain had received at least two campaign contributions from the Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians while Abramoff was their lobbyist.
NPR has itself ignored McCain's receipt of Abramoff client contributions while noting that Democrats have received them. One opportunity for NPR to report McCain's receipt of contributions occurred in a February 9 segment in which NPR correspondent Peter Overby reported that political scientist James Thurber, testifying before McCain's Indian affairs committee, said: "I think the individuals in the House and the Senate should look at themselves and the staff should look at themselves very clearly and not totally beat up on lobbyists, because much of what was associated with Jack Abramoff was going on for a long time by members of Congress and staff." While Overby reported that Thurber was speaking directly to McCain when he made the statement, he did not note that McCain, too, has received contributions from Abramoff clients and therefore might himself be characterized as having had some link to "what was associated with Jack Abramoff."
It is true that they face "allegations." From the same types of liars that swiftboated John Kerry and whitewatered Bill Clinton. And the allegations against Reid and Stabenow are equally without foundation or substance.
but a little disappointed with NPR. Putting Reid's name in the same context as the Abramoff is misleading. Being a Nevada resident I have been very proud of the job Reid has done as Minority Leader.
You're my lost hope for objective reporting.
Their tried-and-true method of soft-spoken objectivity has dwindled.... Apparently, too soft not to be influenced by the MSM.
Glad to see that MMFA picked it up. For the most part, I still prefer NPR to any other news radio in my area. However, this story was definitely not the straight reporting characteristic of NPR in the past.
Seabrook's wording definitely tries to make a story where there is none. If we didn't already no more about the contributions to Reid and Stabenow, I'd be willing to accept this as reported. But since these allegations have already been shown to be without merit, Seabrook does the listener a disservice.
Furthermore, the only caveat to the allegations came near the end of the item, noting that current Republican corruption still greatly outweighs Democrat. Even that was used in a back-handed way to deride Democrats, noting that Democrat's lack of corruption was just a natural consequence of them having no power.
Of course, the subtle message here is "if you put Democrats in power, they'll be just as much corruption or more; so, don't vote for Democrats." Besides being a stupid generalization, as long as we get back to a divided government, I'd be willing to bet we'd have less corruption.
enables this statement. I have no stake in Reid's integrity - he may be corrupt as Tom Delay for all I know. But it is troubling that reporters assume that their audience doesn't know the first thing about the scandal. It takes an astonishing degree of ignorance to equate donations from the tribes with donations from Abramoff even in passing - but this ignorance is assumed (and perhaps even shared sometimes) by these so-called professionals.
was on NPR this morning - and the interviewer was spouting the same crap - I didn't hear the whole thing, and I can't remember who the commentator was, but it was around 9am central time - might have been someone filling in for Dianne Rehm. I was just about to start yelling at the radio I was so pissed off. NPR used to be a terrific, objective source for news - and shows like Rehm's have been staples of my morning drive for years. But ever since that clown Tomlinson became CEO of CPB, even though he's no longer there - they apparently accomplished their mission of destroying ANY objectivity public radio once had. I never, ever viewed their programming as partisan - until now - and I'm extremely disappointed. I want my public broadcasting back.
"Democrats' "big problems right now" is "convincing voters that the so-called 'culture of corruption' is a Republican thing."
More like...
Republicans' "big problems right now" is "convincing voters that the so-called 'culture of corruption' is a not just a Republican thing."
WOW, now NPR is not liberal enough for you? They report on a story that gives you facts about democrats and you slam them?
>>WOW, now NPR is not liberal enough for you? They report on a story that gives you facts about democrats and you slam them?
But these weren't the facts, as you well know, or should know if you read the article.
NPR gave facts? When was the last time you said that righty?
to Abramoff are Republicans.
The only people that have been indicted regarding Abramoff are Republicans.
It also very clear that there are no Democrats are going to be indicted or even investigated.
WOW, now NPR is not liberal enough for you? They report on a story that gives you facts about democrats and you slam them?
I don't want my NPR to be considered liberal, democrat, conservative, or witch hunters. I want them to be objective and as accurate as possible. I accept that they may sometimes err, but on the whole they are still the most objective news source out there.
I will not let one item make an otherwise good radio network change my opinion of that network. I realize that there are usually two or more sides or views of the same story and NPR tries hard to present those views.