Perfect explanation and full-throated defense of the Iola water treatment plant earmark in today's Topeka Capital-Journal.
First, Iola had tired unsuccessfully for years to convince Jim Ryun's office to help them, but got nothing other than lectures on the hot button issues of the religious right. So, they decided when they had a new member of Congress, they'd try again.
The story in the Cap-J provides the exact course of events, wholly undermining all my conservative blogging friends and USA Today:
Timeline:It's sad shoddy reporting on the part of USA Today lead to a story like the one that ran, and we're glad the issue's been cleared up. In the end, the folks around Nancy Boyda that don't like her tried, unsuccessful thank God, to turn something wonderful she did for her district into something bad.
Late January 2007: A task force from Iola traveled to Washington, D.C. to meet with Boyda to discuss possible funding for the facility.March 15: Boyda made a request to the Interior Appropriations Committee for an earmark for the Iola project.
June 6: The earmark was included in the full committee markup of the Interior Appropriations Bill.
(Note: A June 13 article in The Topeka Capital-Journal described how a dozen Iola residents had traveled to Washington to discuss federal funding for three community projects, including the wastewater treatment facility.
"We're not talking about well-heeled lobbyists. It was 'Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.' " Iola city manager Judy Brigham said at the time.
June 27: The Interior Appropriations Bill, with the Iola earmark, was passed.
Early November: Boyda said Richard Zahn, a retired native of Iola who was appreciative of her efforts on behalf of the city, asked a lobbyist with whom he was acquainted to put together a fundraising luncheon for her in Washington.
"It was a small gathering that raised $6,800," Boyda said. "The topic of conversation for the entire hour was the struggles and challenges of rural America."
Dec. 17: The House passed the Omnibus Appropriations Bill, with the Iola earmark included.
But, of course, the Iola earmark was on the up-and-up, and the fundraiser held months after it was secured was on the up-and-up, too. This was all the politics of attack first, ask questions later, and that's disappointing.
15 comments:
Timeline:
Late January 2007: A task force from Iola traveled to Washington, D.C. to meet with Boyda to discuss possible funding for the facility.
March 15: Boyda made a request to the Interior Appropriations Committee for an earmark for the Iola project and asked how much she was getting for the request.
June 13: Boyda’s mouthpiece puts out an RFP to professional lobbyists that a bunch of bumpkins from Iola don’t know how to play ball.
October 15th: Van Scoyoc answers the call. Boyda says nothing less than $5000 will protect the request in the Omnibus.
November 1: Boyda gets payday.
December 19: Boyda forgets she’s on the take and being the whore that she is issues a press release.
January 31: Boyda gets caught with her hand in the cookie jar.
Whoops.
So separating your quid pro quo by a few months makes it ok?
you know what, how dare both of you....it's obvious and really really clear no one lobbied for the earmark, save folk from Kansas. It's clear the earmark was set to be in the budget months- MONTHS- before the fundraiser.
you're trying to make something outta nothing, and it's offensive
She explained it so perfectly that most people don't believe the story.
Of course it is a coincidence that the same lobbying firm that Iola used gave Nancy Boyda a fundraiser.
i think most people didn't give a damn at all...and now i think most people wonder what the big deal is.
it's not a big deal, nothing strange happened, and this is just a creation of right wing nuts.
Hmmmmmmm
After looking over the website further ... it looks like this story lacks accuracy ..... the same thing accusation you make about the USA Today article
don't copy and paste comments, please, it's annoying
Sorry, when you get elected because you made up an issue and made connections that didn't exist to give the appearance of impropriety, you can't cry foul when you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar.
Ring.
Hello?
Hi Ms. Boyda, this is fat cat so-and-so from Van Scoyoc. We really appreciate you supporting Iola's earmark and would like to throw a fund raiser for you.
No thank you. I don't take extra money for doing my job.
But it's completely legal. We came on the scene way after it had been stuck in a bill.
I realize that, but I promised the people of Kansas that I would be a different kind of politician. Not one who hobnobs with fat cats like you.
See how easy it is to stay above board and actually practice what you preach. I'm so disgusted I could spit in her face. She will NEVER get my vote again.
you've all lost your minds if you think anything weird, wrong, or hypocritical happened in this story.
Read what happened: Iola didn't have a lobbyist. the people of iola got this earmark themselves. someone from iola AFTER THE FACT helped get a fundraiser thrown for Boyda.
NOTHING happened that should make you decide not to vote for her, unless you have a problem with honesty and a problem with helping people in the city of iola
This is just another reason why I don't trust the mainstream media for my news. Luckily we have the internet, otherwise we'd never hear the truth!
the story into day's topeka paper makes this a nonstory...why are you people stll talking about it? why isn't anyone talking about the fact boyda outraised the repblicans and that lynn jenkins raised nearly no money?
If I've read the Hawver Report correctly .... Jenkins raised around $514,000 last year, with over $416,000 on hand. And if I remember correctly she didn't start fundraising until May or June.
Sounds pretty damn good for 6 or 7 months of fundraising.
Especially when most of it is from Kansas. The same people that vote.
*she raised less money in the 4Q than nearly every other republican challenger in the nation*
LOSER!!!
and still has more money in the bank than Jim "big spender" Ryun
It seems he is only fiscally conservative when it is his own money .... campaign and tax payer money seems to be a different story
Post a Comment