Senate Democrats May Return Thousands In Madoff Contributions

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Senate Democrats May Return Thousands In Madoff Contributions stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS


First Posted: 12-15-08 12:40 PM   |   Updated: 01-15-09 05:12 AM

I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Madoff

Bernard Madoff built a major investment shop largely on smoke and mirrors -- convincing investors that his fund was a safe and consistent return when it was mostly a house of cards.

And yet the relationship between Bernard L. Madoff Investment Securities and its investors wasn't entirely one-sided. One of the greatest recipients of the Wall Street veteran's largesse -- beyond those who cashed out before his fund was exposed as a scam -- was the Democratic Party, whose candidates, committees and causes received thousands of dollars in donations.

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee received $100,000 in donations from Madoff during the past four years. Sen. Chuck Schumer, who headed the DSCC until stepping down this year, separately has received $39,000 from Madoff since 1998.

Will the committee return these funds -- taken, in part, from duped investors? Matt Miller, a spokesperson for the DSCC, replied that "it is under review."

Or take, for example, Sen. Frank Lautenberg. The New Jersey Democrat left the bulk of his family's charity -- which donated to causes like breast cancer research, the NAACP, and performing arts -- to Madoff's stewardship, his foundation's lawyer told the Associated Press. But as of now, there is no telling where the funds went and what is left. The Senator, one of the wealthiest members of the Senate, received a $7,600 donation from Madoff to his Victory Fund in 2007 -- a pittance compared to the cash his charity likely lost.

An aide to Lautenberg said that the office would be "ridding ourselves of the contributions" but had not yet determined the best method of doing so.

Other Democrats who received Madoff money include Jeff Merkley, the incoming Oregon Senator, who took in $2,300 in donations this past April; Ron Wyden, the Oregon incumbent, who received $4,000 in donations in March 2003; Dick Gephardt, the former Speaker of the House, who got a check for $2,000; and Rep. Ed Markey, who was sent two checks of $2,000 each in June 2004.

Peter Madoff, Bernard's brother, was even more lavish with his contributions, spending more than $66,000 on candidates and committees in the past decade, including to Sens. Hillary Clinton ($2,300 in 2008, $4,600 in 2007), Chuck Schumer ($6,000 in total) and Ron Wyden.

Taken as a whole, these donations say little more than that the Madoffs were Democrats -- though there are a scattering of Republican officials to whom they donated. Certainly it would be beyond reasonable to expect political figures in Washington to have known that Madoff was duping investors when very few on Wall Street were raising alarms. For figures like Lautenberg, moreover, the loss of cash from his charity foundation far exceeds the relatively minor donations his campaign committee received.

But the extent of the donations has the potential to create headaches for the party. At the very least, it ties some major Democrats to the financial industry at a time when Wall Street's popularity has never been lower.

"With the bailout, one wonders to what extent the Democratic votes may have been influenced in the House and Senate by that," said Stephen Wayne, a political science professor at Georgetown University. "My guess is that, with the exception of the people like Schumer and Rahm Emanuel, who headed the committees that raised money, I'm not sure anybody was aware of Madoff... What struck me was that in Election Day surveys, 56 percent of the people said they opposed the [financial market] bailout. It wasn't an issue because both candidates were on the same side of it. What [these donations do] is fuel the cynicism that many people on Main Street have, that they are being raked over by big corporation and investment firms and executives who make millions of dollars."

Bernard Madoff built a major investment shop largely on smoke and mirrors -- convincing investors that his fund was a safe and consistent return when it was mostly a house of cards. And yet the relat...
Bernard Madoff built a major investment shop largely on smoke and mirrors -- convincing investors that his fund was a safe and consistent return when it was mostly a house of cards. And yet the relat...
Report Corrections
 
Comments
24
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- karinova I'm a Fan of karinova 25 fans permalink
photo

Such small donations, considering!
I mean, $25,000 a year to the DSSC?
Ten YEARS to total $39,000 to Schumer?

I mean, if you're going to break the law repeatedly and brazenly, why not go big?
It's not like it was his money he was spending.

What's up with that?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:25 PM on 12/21/2008

The US citizen is more concerned with ESPN than their own financial security.
See what happens when you are "entertained" to the point of utter stupidity?

As long as ESPN can glow on their hypno-tubes (TV's) they will remain complacent.

Bread and circuses for the new Romans!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:10 PM on 12/15/2008
photo

Hold it. I thought all crooks were Republicans.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:57 PM on 12/15/2008
- Geranium I'm a Fan of Geranium 14 fans permalink

The Dems have not only recently caught up, they have now taken the lead in scandals.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:48 PM on 12/15/2008
- karinova I'm a Fan of karinova 25 fans permalink
photo

Not to minimize the current scandal, but...
Are you joking?

Dems have a long way to go before they get anywhere near the Republican benchmark.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:19 PM on 12/21/2008

Just another corruptocrat. Seems the Democrats couldn't take in the cash fast enough. But it's ok since the Democrats did try to pay him back with their 700 Billion dollar bailout bill! So they were loyal and tried to help.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:09 PM on 12/15/2008
- lynettema I'm a Fan of lynettema 53 fans permalink

Madoff had many people fooled. He must have been slicker than goose grease. He had to know this was going to come to an end this way. There is no way any of those people are going to get their money back.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:25 PM on 12/15/2008

Shock and dismay! The Democrats took tainted guy money just like Republicans. As George Wallace said......"There ain't a dimes worth of difference between the Democrats and the Republicans". Shoot, if politicians couldn't take dirty money, there wouldn't be any money in politics.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:24 PM on 12/15/2008

Left or right they have one thing in common . . . they are all gangsters.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:52 PM on 12/15/2008

Again Democrat are "shocked, dismayed and saddened and they never knew"!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:12 PM on 12/15/2008
- stunsitfel I'm a Fan of stunsitfel 32 fans permalink
photo

OH MY!!! I thought this was all George Bush and his crew getting the $$$$ from Wall Street. And now we see the biggest dirtbad (so far) is a card carrying member of the DNC. MY MY. This is shocking.

As shocking as Nancy Pelosi earmarking StarKist to not have to pay the higher minimum wage. Google it.

Everyone on this blog panders the DNC like they are savior.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:18 PM on 12/15/2008
- karinova I'm a Fan of karinova 25 fans permalink
photo

Oh, spare me.

Remember, for example, Tom Noe?
Of COUSE you don't-- you're too busy pandering (?) the GOP.

Google it.

Since I know you WON'T, allow me to briefly remind you of this shocking, dismaying nugget from 2005: "A coin dealer and major GOP donor at the center of a scandal in Ohio state government was charged Thursday with illegally funneling $45,400 in contributions to President Bush’s reelection."

Now, here's the important part:
Because I'm not an idiot like you, I understand that Bush couldn't be expected to know how that money was earned. He did the only thing he COULD do: repudiate the crime and give the money to charity.

Well, whaddaya know! Looks like that's what the Dems are doing.

Now shut up.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:37 PM on 12/21/2008

This guy had enough cash to be anything he wanted to in the Democratic party . . . he could have been an IL Senator with that kind of cash.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:31 PM on 12/15/2008
- loyldem I'm a Fan of loyldem 3 fans permalink

Why would you return money back to the crook?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:26 PM on 12/15/2008
- PATina I'm a Fan of PATina 210 fans permalink
photo

hahahahahaha.... I was thinking the same thing. Maybe the "returned" money should be put into an account to help pay back some of those who lost money in his scheme.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:46 PM on 12/15/2008
- larry278 I'm a Fan of larry278 43 fans permalink

35 points each to PATina & VikingQuest. You 2 earned them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:14 PM on 12/15/2008

Ironic isn't it?

Crooks having to give back money to another crook.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:50 PM on 12/15/2008
- whognu I'm a Fan of whognu 6 fans permalink

So when the judge orders him to pay restitution, he'll have something to pay, even if only pennies on the dollar. As it stands now, his victims have nothing.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:21 PM on 12/15/2008
- karinova I'm a Fan of karinova 25 fans permalink
photo

They won't.
I guarantee they'll give it to charity.

Even better, it would be nice if EVERYONE who got money from Madoff (and still has it) would pool it together into some kind of fund for the little people at the bottom of his Ponzi pyramid. That's where the money came from in the first place.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:42 PM on 12/21/2008
- Sundialsvc4 I'm a Fan of Sundialsvc4 138 fans permalink

"Any civil officer" ... (including but not limited to the Pres and the Veep) ... "SHALL BE Impeached for" ... "high crimes" ... (including but not limited to) ... "Bribery."

-- Article 2, Section 4; The Supreme Law of the Land.

So tell me, "we the People," when have you had Enough? Do you now, at last, realize that "high crime" can aid-and-abet a Ponzi scheme lasting twenty years that steals an uncountable amount of money? Do you now, at last, realize that "high crime" can ruin the lives of 300 million people at the same time?

Do you realize the consequences of "oh, it's 'off the table?'"

The Constitution of the United States of America was written in long-hand, on just one piece of vellum. Every single word of it is pregnant with meaning. Every word was crafted by skilled statesmen. It only demands one thing, in order to fulfill the promises set forth in its Preamble: it must be Respected. It must BE what it claims to be: "The Supreme Law of the Land."

"High crime" is really "disgusting pond-scum crime." And the question I have for We the People now is... "have you finally had ENOUGH?"

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:14 PM on 12/15/2008
- whognu I'm a Fan of whognu 6 fans permalink

Every single cent should be returned.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:12 PM on 12/15/2008
- GeorgeP922 I'm a Fan of GeorgeP922 101 fans permalink
photo

Please return Evan Bayh while your at it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:02 PM on 12/15/2008
- Weldonn I'm a Fan of Weldonn 3 fans permalink

RETURN? DONATE THEM TO A PALESTINIAN CHARITY.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:54 PM on 12/15/2008
- Bystander I'm a Fan of Bystander 7 fans permalink

"Charity?' You mean like Hezbollah? I guess one terrorist organization is a good as another. Right?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:10 PM on 12/15/2008
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect