The Seattle Times follows up today with more details in the ongoing coverage of the relationship between Maria Cantwell and Ron Dotzauer. Today's story indicates the mystery loan that Dotzauer can't seem to remember, and which clouds the relationship between her as a sitting US Senator and him as a registered federal lobbyist, was to help Dotzauer pay a past due divorce settlement. It would be prudent, however, for both of them to lay all their cards out on the table on this issue since the AP story from yesterday that is running in many of today's papers raises worthy questions about the ethical propriety of some aspects of their relationship.
Posted by Eric Earling at September 09, 2006 10:12 AM | Email ThisYour loyal defenses of McGavick and bashing of Cantwell are commendable. But you don't have much to work with here. Looks like Cantwell loaned Dotzauer some money so he could pay a divorce settlement years ago. He needs to pay her back. And she's the one who keeps disclosing the loan. Makes him look dumb, not her.
Are there people who oppose the Lake Tapps project?
This may be sorta fun for political junkies, but that's all it looks like, political funsterism. Unfortunately it looks like McGavick's race has seriously stalled. He's taken a near-fatal nosedive in the most recent polls. Cantwell is now at 52%. He's at an all timve low of 35% in this poll even after spending millions.
Posted by: redflag on September 9, 2006 10:18 AMJudging by the organized blog reaction to the story by the Democrats and the delayed formal response by Maria herself, people should wonder is Maria stupid, guilty or both.
Posted by: Smokie on September 9, 2006 11:23 AMR.M.
Posted by: Robert Monty on September 9, 2006 11:36 AMDespite Democrats' pretense that this is no big deal, it IS a problem when a LOBBYIST WHO IS ADIVISING MARIA'S CAMPAIGN AND OWES HER MONEY is getting projects funneled his way. If Cantwell was a republican dems would be screaming their heads off and they know it.
Posted by: Misty on September 9, 2006 11:45 AMDid it happen in 1999 when she lent money to a friend who was not a lobbyist at the time (nor was Cantwell a senator)?
Did it happen in the intervening years when she was lenient in collecting on the outstanding loan?
Did it happen in 2002 when Dotzauer became a lobbyist? Of course, that wasn't something Cantwell had any control over. What was she supposed to do about it?
Maybe the problem was when she continued to support the Lake Tapps project along with Jennifer Dunn and, later, Dave Reichert. I'm not sure what her critics propose she should have done instead. Was she supposed to stop working in the interests of her constituents because someone she had lent money to 6 years earlier had also started advocating for the project?
I guess I'm just trying to understand which was the specific act of her alleged wrongdoing or what corrective action do her critics propose she should have taken? She can't be held accountable for the acts of others -- and it doesn't seem like anything she did was wrong at the time she did it.
Then, of course, there's the whole weirdness of implying that Cantwell was "bribed" because she gave money to her alleged briber seven years ago. How is that supposed to work?
Posted by: scottd on September 9, 2006 12:12 PMEven then, any announcement he makes will be civil ... authentic ... and in the great traditions of the way we do things here in the northwest.
Posted by: RonK, Seattle on September 9, 2006 12:20 PMIn 2000 when a corrupt KCE handed her a victory in a bogus "golly I just found another 2000 votes" recount.
Or
When she was banging another womans husband?
Thats a tough one, lets ask Hillary, I believe she might have some insight on the banging issue and shes a Senator too!
As to Lake Tapps, that is simply a power play to take control of the water supply for East King County and it's future development. Ron Sims and company are foaming at the mouth for this project and now Maria and Patty can deliver the goods and pay off some buddies in the process, Win-Win.
Posted by: Smokie on September 9, 2006 02:40 PMFirst, he asks her for money back when she is running for the Senate the first time, and he is going through messy divorce. She can't turn him down, for whatever reason, and a lot of money, at that.
Second, he registers as a lobbyist, but makes no attempt to clean up his personal life. This means that Cantwell has to report the loan on her disclosure statements year after year. So it stays in the public eye that she has a financial tie to a lobbyist whose firm brings legislation before her.
Third, when asked about it, Dotzauer claims he has no memory of why he needed a large sum of money. So Cantwell just loaned him thousands just because he asked her to? What kind of hold does he have over this woman, that she just jumps to his every command?
What it starts looking like is that Dotzauer is the puppetmaster, and Cantwell does whatever he asks. He wants money, she gives it. He refuses to pay it back, she submits. He wants earmarks for his clients, she uses her Senate power to make it happen.
If Cantwell had a brain of her own, she would either demand repayment or write it off as a loss. But both would reflect badly on Dotzauer, which she seems loathe to do. Who is in control of our junior senator?
Posted by: Janet S on September 9, 2006 08:01 PMEven if nothing illegal or unethical occured, he sure isn't helping his case any.
Posted by: Mike H on September 9, 2006 08:54 PMLet's recap:
Friend loans friend money. Doesn't matter when.
Friend becomes US Senator.
Other friend becomes lobbyist.
Senator friend appears to have channeled projects to lobbyist friend.
Lobbyist friend can't remember purpose of loan.
Lobbyist friend has yet to pay back loan.
Lobbyist friend is veteran campaign power player.
Senator friend is in the middle of a re-election campaign.
This appears to be nothing more than another Karl Rove scheme cooked up to make the Ds look bad. Nothing to see here.
Posted by: jimg on September 10, 2006 08:32 AMHe stopped the spin from Goldy. I hope goldy watched.
Posted by: Chris on September 10, 2006 09:51 AM