Newspaper Tree is the first print source to go ahead and report that the lobbyist quoted in the EP Times' story last week has basically retracted her statement to Brandi Grissom. You can find the post HERE on NPT's blog.
The lobbyist, Claudia Russell, broke the number one rule of lobbying - YOU NEVER TALK ABOUT LOBBYING TO OUTSIDERS! More on this in a minute.
What I read from the letter is that this woman told Brandi Grissom what she told her and is now backing away because she just ruined her career as a lobbyist. Don't jump Grissom for doing the story - she has three sources for the story and that's two more than most reporters get for a story like this.
Lobbyist never go on record saying they paid for a party - IT NEVER HAPPENS! The fact that Russell was willing to say what she said to a reporter was enough to have the story put on the front page. Any legislator receiving an unreported gift of any kind is a news story. It's even a bigger story when Austin watchdogs agree that her party was a little over the top compared to their normal birthday parties they do for each legislator. The ice sculpture was too much to go unreported.
Oh wait - and her staff was on the phone collecting the money which is something you don't want the public knowing. Using your elected position to get cash for anything other than campaign expenses is technically illegal. If anyone could match up a vote for one of the attendees of the party who paid the $150 or more, you could have a good case for corruption. Yet, we don't know who paid. Chavez won't tell us.
anywho...
After the story comes out Russell all of sudden claims she was confused. I'm sure the nightmarish phone call she received from Chavez was a big part of her decision to retract her statement.
We don't know if this woman actually gave money to Chavez for the party or not. Most lobbyists give it out of their own personal accounts and then get reimbursed for the expenditures through an expense account later. It works the same way as a sales rep taking a client to dinner.
We will probably never know if she actually did give money for the party and is now lying, or didn't and was actually confused. Only one person can help us with that and it's Norma Chavez.
The problem for Russell here is that she broke the unwritten rule for lobbyists that reads: "Never tell anybody what you do for a legislator."
You see, to be a trusted lobbyist you have to be a person who will take an elected official to a strip club where you pay for him to get sex in the back room and you don't tell anybody about it. A successful lobbyist is one that can be trusted to never tell anyone about what goes on in that world.
When Ms. Russell told a reporter, of all people, that she gave $150 under the table to a legislator for a party, she became persona non grata in Austin. No elected official can trust her now. She knows her career is about done. The retraction is damage control, but it's not enough. She's now trying to lie her way out of it to save her career and it just isn't going to happen. Nobody will meet with this woman for fear she will talk to the press afterwards.
I hate to paint a nasty picture of what goes on in Austin and many other state capitals, but it's the truth.
The issue is all but dead, I guess. Anytime the EP Times does a cartoon about an issue, it usually signals the death of that issue.
your tale of the strip bar incident goes on in many businesses and other municipal entities. i've known cad appraisers who were taken to the parrot by property tax consultants. it happens everywhere and almost in every industry and government. it all comes down to the ethics of the person who is receiving the "gift". are you saying you have never done this in business ? no taking a client's manager to juarez for a massage with the happy ending so he wont make waves when you make a mistake down the road ? the biggest difference in the 2 situations is one is private business and the other is government business. government must be held to a higher standard. thats for sure.
Posted by: observer | July 21, 2009 at 04:30 PM
Actually David there are two people who know who gave money - Norma (who won't say because everyone does it so why shouldn't I) and Brandi - who offered the specific number of contributors (17) and the total contributed ($3,500). Unless her source for this was Norma herself. I suggest someone contact Tom "smitty" Smith who was quoted in the story I bet he knows who gave what.
Posted by: Too Tired to Care | July 21, 2009 at 08:53 PM
Too Tired -
As I reported, Chavez provided the number of lobbyists and the total contributions. She didn't, and still has not, provided the names of those lobbyists or the amounts they gave.
Brandi
Posted by: Brandi Grissom | July 24, 2009 at 05:00 PM
Norma Chavez came out in the newspaper, demanding an apology from Ms. C. Russell, a lobbyist and attorney in Austin, TX. Ms. Russell let people know that Ms. Chavez had her staff (which is against the law) call 17 lobbyist and asked that they contribute for her graduation party. The total came out to be $3,500. Ms. Chavez on many occasions has belittled, put down, threatened and has done many other obnoxious things, to many many people. She called me a liar on public radio once and I was telling the truth. Has she ever apologized to me or others heck NO! So why should Ms. Russell have to apologize to her. Not once has Norma Chavez apologized to anyone. Also, as constituents of this city we want to know who those 17 lobbyists are. And if that money was not used for her graduation then where did that money go to?
Posted by: womanwarrior | July 31, 2009 at 11:24 PM