Georgetown Partners may have possibly violated bribery law, and supporting members of Congress may have performed ethics violations as well, according to a letter obtained by Orbitcast.
The letter - which was addressed to Sirius CEO Mel Karmazin and sent to Sirius Chairman Joseph Clayton, XM CEO Nate Davis and XM Chairman Gary Parsons - claims that Georgetown Partners may have violated U.S. Code and H.O.R. Code of Official Conduct by contributing money to three politicians, who in turn supported Georgetown in their recommendation to the FCC.
In question are Reps. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), Albert Wynn (D-MD) and Bennie Thompson (D-MS) who all received campaign contributions from executives of Georgetown Partners and subsequently supported Georgetown’s attempt to gain broadcast infrastructure of a combined Sirius-XM.
Georgetown has repeatedly urged the FCC, should the agency approve the Sirius-XM merger, to require that 20% of a combined Sirius-XM infrastructure be leased to a minority-controlled entity.
Rep. Gregory Meeks, in fact, originally supported the Sirius-XM merger, but changed his position to support Georgetown.
- Meeks received a $2,000 campaign donation from Chester Davenport, the managing director of Georgetown Partners on October 7th, 2005.
In a separate letter to Chairman Martin, six members of Congress also sided with Georgetown Partners' agenda, claiming they feel that "a minority-controlled entity should have rights to the broadcast infrastructure."
Of those six Congressmen, two received campaign contributions from executives of Georgetown, according to the letter:
- Rep. Albert R. Wynn received a total of $27,000 from executives of Georgetown between June 24, 1999 and September 6, 2006.
- Rep. Bennie G. Thompson received a $1,000 campaign contribution from Chester Davenport, just five months before supporting Georgetown in the letter to the FCC Chairman.
The letter obtained by Orbitcast claims that this activity raises the question of possible bribery law violations, citing Rule XXIII Clause 3 of the Code of Official Conduct for members of the U.S. House of Representatives:
A Member…of the House may not receive compensation and may not permit compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any source, the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly exerted from his position in Congress.
In addition, the letter points to other merger-related activities by Georgetown and the Rainbow-PUSH Coalition, who has supported Georgetown in their pursuit for Sirius-XM infrastructure. Particularly mergers like SBC-Ameritech and the CBS-Viacom merger, where Chester Davenport "[pressured] companies in merger regulatory reviews to sell a portion of the merged company to Georgetown," with the help of the Reverend Jesse Jackson.
While I am no lawyer and cannot attest to the legalese surrounding these claims, it all raises serious doubt over the motives of the parties involved.
[Read the full letter here (PDF)]
We will likely never know if any laws were broken or ethical violations occurred. But I think it would be important to point out that- THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. I mean, do we really believe its just happen stance when a bill is offered in congress that it is usually sponsored by a congressman who receives contributions by entities that benefit from the bill? It doesn't mean, however, that any ethical violations occurred or law were broken.
Having said that. Ryan, care to tell who gave you a copy of the letter? Was it the writer or someone from Sirius/XM? That would at least explain the PR behind the letter...
It doesn't mean, however, that any ethical violations occurred or law were broken********************************************************************************************
That is an opinion....my opinion is if it happend among congressmen and lobbyist there WERE laws broken .As far as ethics...I know of not one congressman that could stand on his on ethical history were it not for another comgressman defending him....The word CIRCUS comes to mind anytime I see Jesse Jackson involved in ANYTHING. Georgetown partners must be a really fine group of individuals. LMAO...Typical of Washington....and posessing the typical requirements desired by the NAB.
We have seen performances in all three rings of this big top....when does the show end.
My god. I cannot believe that a politician who received a campaign contribution might have actually been persuaded to support the contributor's cause!
"I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here...." - Captain Renault
"Your winnings, sir" -- Croupier
Why is Congress ratings even LOWER then the Presidents again?? Term limits looking even better after reading this
I submitted the letter to Sirius, XM and the news. I discovered links between congressman and Georgetown Partners, and I wanted people to know about it. I am a college student in New York, with absolutely no ties to Sirius or XM.
This whole thing stinks, and the stench grows day by day. It wouldn't surprise me if money changed hands to get the support of certain groups early on in this merger campaign. Why did they ever decide to get stuck in this quicksand?
Rainbow-PUSH Coalition,
PUSH YEA THAT FITS
Nothing will happen. It will not make a difference and it will receive no attention. Why even bother to raise the issue.
"Meeks received a $2,000 campaign donation from Chester Davenport, the managing director of Georgetown Partners on October 7th, 2005."
Not only is Congress a "Parliament of Whores" (to use P.J. O'Rouke's famous description), but they've become a parliament of CHEAP whores.
Mark i would like to know what sparked your interest in this.
I would also like to say Thanks,
>>> I discovered links between congressman and Georgetown Partners
The bribery allegation is hyperbole.
There is nothing new, illegal, or unusual about a representative receiving campaign contributions from some organization then representing that organization's "interests". If you think this is unusual or not contemplated by congressmen, I'm not sure how you could have missed it.
That the alleged campaign contributions occurred, ostensibly, before the merger was announced, pretty much kills the argument of undue influence.
More importantly, Georgetown's request, while "out there", are not unreasonable -- and in fact, are more reasonable than what XM and Sirius are trying to do (create an unregulated monopoly for the satellite radio service). When considered in the context of FCC's usual interests (in promoting diversity of ownership), there is no reason at all for them to NOT be given due consideration.
This doesn't surprise me; Not only this "Georgetown group", but others as well, have tried to stymie this merger through "dirty dealings"; I can see the merits of "concern" with this merger, but it should be plainly obvious that such organizations as The NAB, Clear-Channel, the Georgetown Group, among others, have a negative bias masking as "comsumer-interest" at work; I hope the DOJ chief can see-through these shenanigans, along with Kevin Martin at the FCC, and ultimately approve this deal; If not, this document, along with other material, will go a long way toward fighting this battle in court!
This doesn't surprise me; Not only this "Georgetown group", but others as well, have tried to stymie this merger through "dirty dealings"; I can see the merits of "concern" with this merger, but it should be plainly obvious that such organizations as The NAB, Clear-Channel, the Georgetown Group, among others, have a negative bias masking as "comsumer-interest" at work; I hope the DOJ chief can see-through these shenanigans, along with Kevin Martin at the FCC, and ultimately approve this deal; If not, this document, along with other material, will go a long way toward fighting this battle in court!
Ah HELLO kiddies...anyone remember all the Negro rural groups, Housewife Rural associations, Farm Rural Groups, etc, etc. that I'd bet were in Mel's back pocket to support this merger? Hate to break your bubble kiddos, the merger ain't gonn'a happen, and if it does big time concessions will be the rule...big enough for both companies to walk away.
I'm interested in going to law school, so campaign laws and unethical practices of members of Congress interests me.
Oops....I'll bet they feel like silly geese now.
Bye merger. We hardly knew ye.
Funny, all those Congressmen are Democrats.
Boardroom, you NAILED it. I'd bet that Karmazin was passing out cash and favors to various "minority" and special-interest groups in order to get them to sign on to the merger. I'd also be surprised if part of that poker game included the sudden presence of certain minority-positioned groups and/or personalities on one or both of the satellite services. Throughout this whole, long, tedious, gruesome campaign, there has been a remarkable amount of PR. I think we are just seeing a small portion of it come to light.
Before everyone gets up in arms about the Georgetown Partners issue, let's not forget that XM's own PAC gave close to $4,000 to Rep Frederick "RicK" Boucher of VA between 2006 and 2007. Here's the link: http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/expend.asp?strID=C00401992&Cycle=2008
Now, this was before during and after XM 'decided' to open a call center in Rep. Boucher's district, employing 255 people and taking up some 10K square feet of previously empty office/warehouse space in his district. Here's the link: http://www.boucher.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1044&Itemid=77
Rick Boucher then writes an 'unbiased' "Op-Ed" piece in Roll Call, which fails to mention these campaign contributuions and opening of the call center in his district. Here's the link as reported on, Orbitcast: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:LBtT5GipA1gJ:www.orbitcast.com/archives/rick-boucher-oped-on-siriusxm-merger-goes-unchallenged.html+rick+boucher+XM&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us
What's the difference between Georgetown Partners' actions and XM's? Each side has bought and paid for its voices. Welcome to the American way.
Albert Wynn is my representative. If it helps any, he is toast....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/12/AR2008021202882.html?tid=informbox
Here is a quote from the Post tree-killer edition today...
"Wynn angered progressives ...... and by accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in corporate donations including thousands in the days before the primaries."
page A21
Jeezaloo, this must be the stupidest Orbitcast thread ever. Whaddya think, Mel or Sirius never contributed to Rep. Weiner or any of the other NY Congressmen who've come out in favor of the merger? If this amounts to bribery, then Congress would just have to shut its doors. Mark, ever hear of the 1st Amendment, y'know, the one that allows individuals and companies to contribute money to political campaigns? Might want to take ConLaw one more time just in case its on the bar. Yikes.
Forgive me, but didn't every contribution happen prior to the announcement?
"While I'm not a lawyer..." let me go ahead and issue a legal opinion.
It's about as genuine as someone who starts a sentence with, "I don't mean to be racist, but..."
Georgetown Partners is requesting special treatment that absolutely should not be given. They are using the "diversity card".
Sirius has one of the most diversified formats possible and continuously adds more.
But that isn't enough Georgetown wants a portion of the merged company for their own private use without shareholder approval.
I voted for the merger and did not vote for Siri and XM to give away a portion of that merged company to Georgetown Partners or any company demanding special treatment..
And, yes contribtuions to the Congressman who supported Georgetown's demand is wrong. Note that some were made in the fall before Georgetown's request.
This is the old way that Washington works-------the new way is to not acquiesce to special interests influence such as Georgetown Partners.
Georgetown Partners is requesting special treatment that absolutely should not be given. They are using the "diversity card".
Sirius has one of the most diversified formats possible and continuously adds more.
But that isn't enough Georgetown wants a portion of the merged company for their own private use without shareholder approval.
I voted for the merger and did not vote for Siri and XM to give away a portion of that merged company to Georgetown Partners or any company demanding special treatment..
And, yes contribtuions to the Congressman who supported Georgetown's demand is wrong. Note that some were made in the fall before Georgetown's request.
This is the old way that Washington works-------the new way is to not acquiesce to special interests influence such as Georgetown Partners.
this has never happened before, has it?? ever??
Funny, all those Congressmen are Democrats.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The reason Sirius/XM wanted this to get this through asap, was because it is a Repugnican administration with a Repugnican FCC.
The Repugnicans are already bought and paid for...Sorry.The lobbyist who Screwed Us All was Jack Abramoff . The Family Values lobbyist ... we never seem to learn our lesson that the worst crooks are the moralists among us.
The Family Values lobbyist ... we never seem to learn our lesson that the worst crooks are the LIBERALS... among us
>>>Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY) originally supported the merger of XM-Sirius, and
on October 25, 2007 signed a letter to Chairman Martin expressing his support
along with nine other members of Congress.3 However, in November 2007 he
reversed his opinion and wrote letter to Chairman Martin, which was submitted to
the FCC by Georgetown’s Attorney David R. Siddall, with the sole signature of
Congressman Meeks. He stated that the merger should be denied unless
Georgetown is awarded a long-term or permanent lease of 20% channel capacity of
a combined XM-Sirius, just as Georgetown had requested the FCC to rule. His
reasoning was that, "by allowing a minority-controlled entity to be the lessee, the
Commission would serve the public interest by achieving diversity of ownership."4
• Rep. Meeks received a $2,000 campaign donation from Chester Davenport,
the managing director of Georgetown Partners LLC on October 7, 2005.
(See Exhibit A attached).
So he signs a letter supporting the merger only days after recieving a $2000 contribution... Then the following month, comes back and says "Oh wait, I forgot that with my support I want this group to get spectrum". This new letter of support was not SUBMITTED to the FCC by Meeks... It was submitted BY GEORGETOWN PARTNERS ATTORNEY!!
That doesnt seem strange to anyone?
I know that this kind of stuff happens all the time, but such a drastic flip-flop litterally within WEEKS of each other?
So, with all the rumblings that everybody is posting here, what would you want to happen? No merger? Merger? Why? I cannot seem to understand what your posts are for. What really are your motives? Nobody from this board has ever answered that question? Thanks for the posts but, are your just bashing so that the stock will go down and fuel your shorts? Or is just to make the hype to make more people interested ... what is then?
This article was mentioned on Howard Stern's Radio Show 2-14-08
Her is a URL to the clip.
http://www.rubinsworld.com/public/orbitcast/Howard%20Stern%202-14-08-orbitcastmention.mp3
This merger is in the best interest of the common man, and there should be no reason to think that this is actually a bad idea. If you want to talk about monopolies (which is what I think the issue is, if I'm wrong, please let me know) check out the cable companies. Comcast charges out the ass for terrible customer service and expensive tier packages. Maybe they should look into that.
Nice shoutout from Howard today. Congrats.
TY Howard
When its done, break out the champagne and HANDCUFFS (bribery is a better reason for court than playing footsie in the bathroom)
Bribery would explain why the seemingly simple merger has taken so long to rule on.