All Blog Posts from Couric & Co.

Sharyl Attkisson is investigative correspondent for CBS News.

---

In a news conference this morning, Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., laid down the gauntlet against the Washington Post – and, by proxy, other journalists who have reported on the wisdom of some of the choices he's made while holding a powerful position in Congress. Most recently, the Post printed a story and an editorial involving Rangel's use of his congressional stationery and other congressional perks to allegedly help in fundraising efforts for the "Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service" at New York City College.

In the news conference today, Rangel defended his actions, saying that in the letters he wrote on his congressional stationery, he never asked for money outright. He said repeatedly that he's violated no laws or ethics rules.

Read full post…

Sharyl Attkisson is an investigative correspondent for CBS News.

---

They're definitely having salmon troubles in California, Oregon and Washington State. No doubt about that.

The question many are asking, though, has to do with the massive relief plan that aims to help ... and the way it was snuck into the Farm Bill without congressional debate. The $170 million salmon bail-out was added to the Farm Bill by California's own congresswoman, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. That's on top of $60 million provided by Congress to the Pacific salmon industry last year. Consider that the "lost catch" for the $60 million in relief was $16 million.

This year, the "lost catch" is estimated at $22 million, but they'll be getting a whopping $170 million in relief. Some digging around revealed there aren't all that many folks who fish for salmon, even in a good year. So where is all that money going? It turns out it does a lot more than just put emergency food in the mouths of fishermen who are living on the edge.

There is no means test to receive the salmon relief. In other words, somebody could own a charter boat, be making a ton of money on other catches, yet still qualify for a check from the federal government. In some cases, a very big check ... for six figures.

Read full post…

Sharyl Attkisson is an investigative correspondent for CBS News.

---

Of all the companies that claim to sell terrific products, of all the groups that claim to do good works, how do certain ones get access to members of Congress? How do they convince those members of Congress to give them special tax dollars in the form of "earmarks"? The answer often lies in lobbyists and political connections. And, as it turns out, the company or group seeking favor often ends up making campaign contributions to the members of Congress who "help" them by giving them your tax dollars.

Critics say it's nothing more than members of Congress using your tax dollars to attract and reward campaign donors. If a direct quid pro quo can be proven, it can be a violation of federal law. But often, that direct connection is difficult to make. It's just the circumstances that are so suggestive and can look so ... bad.

Some think that's the case with Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., and the founder of a company that sells a reading program called "Voyager," Randy Best. There are hundreds of reading programs out there, but Sen. Landrieu favored Best's program, giving it a $2 million earmark of tax dollars to put it in Washington, D.C. public schools (which had not asked for the program in its budget). Best had gotten access to Landrieu while lobbying for Voyager on Capitol Hill. Landrieu doesn't claim to have done any comparative research to see how Randy Best's product stood up against others. She simply said she met him, he impressed her and his program impressed her. She made sure they got the money.

Read full post…

Sharyl Attkisson is investigative correspondent for CBS News.

---

What's in a name? Billions of dollars. At least when it comes to the name of Sen. Robert C. Byrd.

This November will mark the 50th anniversary of his first election to the Senate, where he's held office longer than anybody else in history. He's spent much of that time as head of the Senate's most powerful spending committee ... with extraordinary control over earmarks. Earmarks are Congressional grants of money without the normal public review.

With that power, Byrd has been able to bring a disproportionately large amount of "earmarked" tax dollars to projects in his home state. Many of them named ... after him. All that money has certainly made his supporters in West Virginia happy, and has helped keep him in office all these years.

Read full post…

Sharyl Attkisson is investigative correspondent for CBS News.

---

One of the maddening things about the system of Congressional earmarks, as it exists today, is how unfair the distribution of the wealth can be.

There are normal budgetary competitive and grant processes by which all types of worthy projects can receive federal funding: museums, art projects, scientific research, assistance for poor regions, and much more.

However, earmarks bypass the normal system and result in giving federal money to people or projects often handpicked by a single member of Congress.

In other words: it's who you know. It's the access you have. And how much you get depends on the power that your Senator or Representative has. If yours is a freshman member not serving in a leadership role on any important committees well, you're probably not gonna get a lot. If you're not someone who is seen as friendly to the Senator or Representative well, you're probably not gonna get a lot.

But if your Senator is like Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska, the leading Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee, who's been around Capitol Hill going on 40 years now, you stand to get a whole lot.

Thanks to Senator Stevens, research money has been given to Alaska researchers—whether or not they may be the best at what they're trying to do, and whether or not the research is a national priority. Stevens made it happen. Thanks to Senator Stevens, the Alaska salmon industry has received tens of millions of federal dollars. To be sure, the industry is grateful for the money and extra promotion, but there are plenty of ailing industries and regions in the nation equally as deserving or in need… but not getting the same money because they don't have as powerful a Senator scooping up federal money for them.

Of course, as one Stevens critic pointed out, the knife cuts both ways. Stevens is 83-years-old and won't be the senior Senator from Alaska forever. He'll eventually be replaced by someone who isn't head of a powerful spending committee and doesn't have the same clout. Suddenly, says the critic, millions upon millions that Alaska has been getting for years will disappear. They'll go instead to a more senior, powerful Senator from another state. Alaska will be left in the cold.

Tonight our story on the CBS Evening News highlights just how much sparsely populated Alaska is getting in earmark dollars, thanks in large part to one Senator.

Earmarks: not necessarily fair, but great for those who are getting them. While they last.

Sharyl Attkisson is investigative correspondent for CBS News.

---

The subject of my report tonight on the Evening News is a half million dollars earmark of federal tax money to help built a child's playpark for a private charity in Los Angeles: the Skirball Cultural Center. The playpark is called "Noah's Ark." What's the controversy? Some believe that federal tax dollars shouldn't be used for such earmarks, especially when it can be argued that many necessities are underfunded.

To do this story, I wanted to visit Noah's Ark myself and interview the head of Skirball: Uri Herscher. At first, Skirball said "no." I argued that public money had helped pay for the playpark, after all, and that the Skirball enjoyed non-profit (special tax-exempt) status courtesy of U.S. taxpayers. It just didn't seem right that the Center would try to lock out the press and refuse to do an interview. The Skirball eventually allowed the visit and interview to happen.

Noah's Ark is the kind of place most any kid would like to visit. In fact, the playpark has been pretty much sold out every day since it opened a few months back. In the eyes of some fiscal conservatives, that's part of the problem. When I asked just how much money Noah's Ark was bringing in from ticket sales, the Skirball said an average of $16,000 a week. With such success, will taxpayers be repaid on their investment? No. Earmarks don't require any such thing.

Here's another issue. I took some time and researched the financial health of the Skirball Cultural Center. It's incredibly wealthy, as far as charities go. It survives off a $100 million endowment. It lists $885 million in gross receipts for 2005 (its most recent tax return). The executives earn healthy six figure salaries and enjoy healthy annual raises. Few would begrudge them that. The question is: is this the type of project that really needs or deserves federal tax money...?

Read full post…

Sharyl Attkisson is investigative correspondent for CBS News.

---

My most recent "Eye on Your Money" story looks at a hefty earmark Congressman Charles Rangel of New York got for a project that will bear his name, a library that will house his "papers," the Charles B. Rangel Conference Center and more. Critics suggest it's a monument to Rangel's ego and an inappropriate use of federal tax dollars.

Our past "Eye on Your Money" reports have looked at earmarks by other members of Congress for items such as a Teapot Museum (that may never be built), upgrades to a trendy Washington DC neighborhood (where the earmarking member of Congress happens to own property… so does his friend who's running the neighborhood redevelopment project and spending the earmark money), and hundreds of millions of dollars for a military jet engine that the military doesn't want.

Of course not all earmarks are inherently questionable or inappropriate. Most members of Congress agree that earmarks (last minute add-ons to appropriations bills without the normal public review) for emergency unplanned spending are necessary and justifiable.

But among all the earmarks, an estimated $22 billion dollars a YEAR, according to one watchdog group, is considered questionable "pork." That means the earmark may go to entities that are undeserving or don't even exist...

Read full post…