Blackann admitted receiving gifts from three lobbyists in 2003, including a free trip to attend the first game of the 2003 World Series. That trip included airline travel to and from New York City, transportation around the city in a chauffeured sport utility vehicle, a ticket to the game, a souvenir baseball jersey, admission to and entertainment at a gentlemen's club following the game and free meals and drinks.

Here's the plea.

For a start, the Nixon, Haldeman, Erlichman model, which is the gold standard, the high-water mark for the Federal-Tribal relationship. Translated into Transition-Speak, coordinating Federal Indian policy stays "close" to the TT, not farmed out to some discrete hire/fires tagged for staffers for the eventual assistant secretary.

In the longer term, the transition could position FI policy as transitioning from Interior, where trees and bears and rocks live, to State, where Other Peoples live.

Next, the TT could spend some quality time with Eloise Cobell. There's a lot folks who haven't followed this for the past decade don't know, and recycled Clinton (Bill) people weren't particularly more clued in than the Bush/Cheney lot of political appointees.

Then there's the MMS. A wicked rich vein of corruption reaching many interesting places, almost all of which were protected by the DOJ in the Sansonetti and Wooldridge comedy of manors and revolving doors.

The TT could staff up the Hill policy desks with someone who owns the PL280 repeal task and get someone serious, Rob Williams comes to mind, to work on unraveling the Rehnquist nightmare that's created rape tourism in Indian Country.

And finally, there's Ross. A man in need of a vacation. Come to think of it Chad could do with one too. Club Fed or not, that's a never mind. But vacated. Gone. In TT speak that's a Special Trustee designated _now_, and the AUSA for the Eastern District of Oklahoma briefed that time on target (the CNO) is expected.

Many people are not all that familiar with the Office of Public Records Lobby Filing Disclosure Program. Essentially, anyone who wants to lobby any US government agency or office, including Congress or the Executive, has to register and then file semi-annual reports. For the recovering archaeologist like me, it is a treasure trove of information on some of the sleaziest creatures on earth: Lobbyists.

The database is a fairly powerful tool, once you get used to it. You can sort by registrant, client, lobbyist, issue code, lobbied agency, date, etc. In the past, I've generally used the one of the first three, but today, I branched out, sorting the data by issue code, IND, for Indian Affairs. It's important to note that there is in fact a separate issue code for gaming (GAM), which includes tribal gaming.

The vast majority of clients under this code for any given year are Indian tribes. But as I scanned the entries for 2002, I came across one that stood out: The "registrant" was Robertson Monagle and Eastaugh; the client, Greenberg Traurig (actually, misspelled "Trauig".) Robertson Monagle's headquarters were located in Anchorage, though the lobbyist named on the account, Steven Silver's offices were in Arlington, Virgina. A new sort brought up all the filings for Greenberg Traurig by Silver, just a handful, beginning with a registration in May, 2002. A quick check by client indicated that Greenberg had only hired their own lobbyists six times in the past eight years (when records became available online) all, with the exception of Silver, for tribal gaming issues.

The reason this registration (Page 1, Page 2) was so intriguing was information provided on the second page, under "Lobbying Issues". Silver indicated by the codes, "ENG", "IND", "NAT" and "ENV", that his lobbying issues were Energy, Indian Affairs, Natural Resources and Environment. In fact, on the next line indicating current and anticipated specific lobbying issues, Silver elaborated, "All issues relating to Indian Policy" and "Exploration for Oil and Gas".

None of Greenberg Traurig's tribal clients at the time had extensive holdings in oil and gas; they were gaming tribes, mostly from the Deep South or West Coast. Even more intriguing was that most of Silver's other clients (outside of a few municipalities in Alaska) had significant timber, oil & gas and/or mining interests, including Louisiana Pacific and BP America. Ironically, the primary lobbyist for BP America in 2002 was National Environmental Strategies, Steve Griles' former firm. In fact, BP was such a loyal client for Griles, it was one of his first he signed up when he left the Interior Department and formed Lundquist, Nethercutt and Griles in early 2004.

Silver only remained Greenberg Traurig's lobbyist for a few months. In Silver's only filing with actual lobbying activity, he claimed this lobbying on Indian Policy and oil and gas exploration was before the House and Senate solely on "ENG" (energy) issues (Page 1, Page 2.) Indian Trust Land leases would fall under "ENG"; tribal gaming would not.

Thereafter, Silver claimed no lobbying activities for Greenberg, and filed a "termination with no activity" in mid-year 2003. In May, 2004, Silver filed "registrant amendment', switching lobbying issue codes a simple GAM (gaming), and claiming work on a internet gaming bill. Greenberg terminated the contract in 2005, after the bill died in the Senate Banking Committee.

An unleashing of the Googling Monkeys brought up very little in regards to Steven Silver. A search on Opensecrets.org indicated a significant Republican donor, with $28,000 handed out since 2000. Robertson Monagle doesn't even have a website in either Anchorage or Arlington.

So why in mid-2002 did Greenberg Traurig, now firmly under the control of Jack Abramoff, hire a no-name natural resources lawyer-lobbyist to work on Indian policy and oil and gas exploration before Congress?

Update: I've been following up on some hunches, and I'm fairly sure one in particular will pan out: The connection between Greenberg Traurig and Steven Silver? Former Don Young (R-AK) staffer and lead counsel on the House Resources' committee (not to mention Team Abramoff heavy hitter) Duane Gibson.

Update2: : Another Alaska connection? Steven Griles former and present partner, Alaska native (no, not Native) Andrew Lundquist. As mentioned previously, Lundquist served as Executive Director of Cheney's Energy Task Force from Feb. 1, 2001, to Sept. 30, 2001, then remained as Cheney's Director of Energy Policy from Oct. 1, 2001, until the end of March, 2002.

‘‘(e) DEFINITIONS.—For the purposes of this chapter, the term ‘crime victim’ means a person directly and proximately harmed as a result of the commission of a Federal offense."

The Democrats unwillingness to lift the veil and go beyond deference to the "Senator from Indian Country" is why the efforts of the Congressional Black Caucus should interest, not simply alarm, Indians working towards reform, whether of tribal governments long captured by corporations and long abandoned by distant agency, or of basic economic means to improve the well-being of Indians.

Obviously, no one in Waxman's staff reads wampum, or has the smarts or the stamina to go after the issues, so they're just doing a round of, as Dan Burton correctly observes, pin the tail on the elephant.

Dan Burton , R-Ind., accused the committee’s chairman, Henry A. Waxman , D‑Calif., of trying to cause collateral damage and harm perceptions of both President Bush and presumed GOP presidential nominee Sen. John McCain of Arizona.

"Henry's on a mission," said Burton, a former chairman of that committee. "If the White House is bloodied up enough, they think that it will hurt McCain. They want to smack the White House again and again until it starts reflecting on Mr. McCain."

There was a reason Jack was present in a lot of places. Money. A lot of it.

1. The foxes in the MMS henhouse..., June 27, 2007
2. Blogger Ethics Pannel needed, June 10, 2006
3. Carbon tears, May 19, 2006 (with a nice bit on the windfarms off the Belgian and Dutch coasts -- I get to look at the latter every time I fly into AMS).
4. Koch's Brand of Bozos, May 16, 2006
5. Was Jack Abramoff really an "insider"?, April 18, 2006

One of the great things about this cycle is knowing in advance how many of the Abramoff fish are not going to be fried by either Obama or McCain, and how eager Dems are to look the other way when it comes to Interior, Indians, and Energy.

Steven Maviglio at the CMR is reporting (or posting or whatever) that Doolittle will announce that he will not seek re-election.

I'm wicked amused that Ted Gaines is messaging that environmentalists are to blame for last summer's Tahoe fires. Remember, its a 10+ red district, and even though Gaines' argument is wrong, it is likely to stick unless Charlie Brown knows his way around fine fuels and load and selective cut and bug kill and all the rest of the forestry management loopholes the corporate-to-peckerwood loggers have written into the Bush-era Dept. of Ag's Forestry management plans.

CA-04 enters the Doolittle Death Watch, July 24, 2007

CA-04 heats up in another dimension, June 28, 2007

Abramoff Figure Spared Prison

By MATT APUZZO - 8 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) - A Republican environmental activist who arranged lobbyist Jack Abramoff's entree into the Interior Department was sentenced Friday to two months in a halfway house and four years probation.

Italia Federici, who pleaded guilty in June to tax evasion and obstructing a Senate investigation, was spared prison only because she has become a key witness in the Justice Department's ongoing corruption investigation.

Federici has admitted acting as a link between Abramoff and J. Steven Griles, the former deputy Interior Department secretary who for five years was her boyfriend. Griles provided Abramoff with advice and internal agency information, sometimes directly and sometimes through Federici.

Federici was way more involved than this sentence indicates, so she better have some serious goods on a big fish. Norton, Sansonetti, Barbour? I'll have to think about this one.

Q. When you discussed, in response to the judge's question, how the unitization works, was allocation an important issue?

A. Allocation is extremely critical in unit allocation. It is the essence of getting payment correctly to individual Indian owners, tribes, states, federal programs, and private landowners. Without it, you cannot allocate monies properly.

Q. Could you explain how the allocation process works?

A. Allocation process goes all the way back to the lease instrument. In order to get money correctly to an individual, you have to understand every aspect of the lease instrument in terms of: Is it unitized, does it commingle, what is the size of the property, what type of production comes off that property; to, when it goes through the system, is it a correct royalty rate, is it going to the correct owners, is there probate backing up those owners? And when you do that, you have to look at source documents, and you have to do third party verification.

Q. What do you mean, first of all, by source documents?

A. Well, for example, if you look at an allocation to an individual Indian, in order to get to that allocation, I have to go all the way back to the unit agreement. And I have to look at an exhibit called Exhibit B within the unit agreement, that talks about the complete breakdown of every ownership type within that unit, because I may have 30 percent owned by federal, 20 percent by Navajo Tribal, 30 percent by Navajo allotted, and maybe 20 percent by private landowner. I have to go all the way back to that document as a primary source to get to the payment to the individual Indian. And then I have to go to the royalty rate, and then I have to go to the probates and look at probates, gift deeds, living wills, et cetera, in order to get to the complete payment out to the allottee.

1 Q. That sounds like a cumbersome process. Is it?

A. It's very complex. If you were to look at this type of system in a private landowner's case, oil and gas industry hires land people, they pay them very well, in the $200,000 range, to go back and do this title research to find out who gets paid, how much they get paid, how do you allocate, et cetera. It also requires, in the private sector, a legal
opinion from an attorney that's certified, that says that the title in the allocations are certified correct, and the division of interest will pay out correctly. It requires an extensive amount of work. It requires very high level land people and attorneys to do this type of work.

Q. Is that what you did at the FIMO office when you were running the FIMO office?

A. Repeat that.

Q. Is that what you did at the FIMO office when you were running the FIMO office?

A. Yes, that was part of what I did, and my staff did.

Q. Do you have any knowledge as to whether or not this was done by MMS or anyone else outside of the FIMO office with regard to individual Indian mineral or oil and gas lands?

A. No, I'm not. We were in a unique position. We had every agency within our office, so we looked at everything from the lease agreement itself, the BLM-approved communitization

A. We brought it to the attention of MMS many times, and asked that MMS make corrections on the reports, in which case often they did.

Q. If you didn't rely on the MMS database, what did you rely on?

A. We relied on our own internal databases that we developed with companies, and we relied on companies' reports directly going to us.

Q. So is it correct, then, that you relied on third party information?

A. We relied on third party and primary source data.

Q. Are third party documents important to determining accuracy with regard to mineral and oil and gas leases?

A. Absolutely.

THE COURT: Would you call that a leading question?

MR. GINGOLD: I apologize, Your Honor.

BY MR. GINGOLD:

Q. Why would you need to rely on third party data?

A. We rely on third party databases because we don't always trust what an operator tells us. We have companies that produce oil. They tell us one thing on their inventory and what they sold; and then we go to a transporter, and we find that the information is different, that they picked up more oil than the4 company reported. And so we do rely on run tickets from trucking transportation companies, and gas pipeline companies that transport gas, to verify production.

Q. What is a run ticket?

A. Run ticket?

Q. Yeah, what is it?

MR. KIRSCHMAN: Your Honor, objection. Outside the scope of this case. This is asset management. This is talking about what private companies do. This is not about a historical accounting.

THE COURT: Well --

MR. GINGOLD: Your Honor, may I?

THE COURT: No, we touched on this yesterday. I don't want to overdo this. I mean, you're right that this is, going forward, an asset management more than it is historical accounting, but frankly, it helps for me to kind of fill in the picture of what is known and what is not known, and what can be verified and what can't be verified. So a reasonable amount of this, I'm going to allow. Go ahead.

MR. KIRSCHMAN: Thank you, Your Honor.

BY MR. GINGOLD:
Q. What is a run ticket, Mr. Gambrell?

A. A run ticket is a statement that is often signed by a transporter and an operator when oil leaves a tank. What they do is, they measure the oil in the tank when it's full, and then it fills up the truck, and then they measure the tank when the truck is filled. And between the full measurement before the truck filled up and the truck measurement after the truck fills up is the quantity of oil that leaves the lease.

Q. And how is that related to the income produced from oil and gas or mineral leases?

A. Anything to do with income depends on the volumes that are sold off the lease. You cannot determine the monies going to individual Indians if you do not know what was sold.

An Interior Department attorney who has been locked out of his office at the Bureau of Indian Affairs accused the agency on Tuesday of failing to account for millions of dollars in trust funds.

After a stint in Oklahoma, field solicitor Robert McCarthy went to work for the BIA in Palm Springs, California, over three years ago. He said he quickly learned that the agency didn't have a way to track more than $30 million in annual lease payments owed to members of the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians.

"The agency had a very poor system of record-keeping and was grossly mismanaging the leases ... and was generally not enforcing the leases," testified McCarthy, one of the witnesses for the plaintiffs in the Cobell trust fund lawsuit.

Enforcement was so lax that it was impossible to tell whether Agua Caliente landowners received the right amount of money for the use of their land and whether they received it on time, McCarthy said. The BIA essentially relied on the word of developers, private parties and outsiders.

"I saw files that were years in default," McCarthy said of leases that weren't enforced.

Even when a payment was made, the BIA didn't always pass it on to the beneficiary, McCarthy testified. In one case, the BIA kept a trust payment of $130,000 in a "special deposit account" for over 25 years because the agency didn't know whose money it was.

...

Despite the apparent mismanagement, the BIA made money off of Agua Caliente landowners. "In virtually every case for virtually every type of administrative action," the agency charged a fee for its services, McCarthy said.

For example, a fee of 1 percent was applied to every single land sale, McCarthy said. In Palm Springs -- where real estate is big business -- this amounted to payments to the BIA that were as high as $60,000, according to one document entered into evidence.

But federal regulations limit fees for land sales to $22.50, McCarthy said. The regulations also cap fees for leases at $500, though that apparently wasn't followed in Palm Springs.

"Those fees are charged in Palm Springs on every lease," McCarthy told the court.

...

The situation prompted McCarthy to warn his superiors in the Solicitor's Office, the Inspector General and eventually Jim Cason -- the associate deputy secretary at DOI who was in charge of the BIA at the time -- about the problems in Palm Springs. "I was kicked out of my office after I made my disclosures," McCarthy told Judge James Robertson, who wondered why the solicitor was working from home -- with pay -- rather than at the BIA office.

"Everyone stopped talking to me," McCarthy added. "I was shunned."

And when McCarthy informed his superiors that he was going to testify in the Cobell trial, he was told he was going to be fired for allegedly disclosing confidential trust data to the media. The Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility group is defending McCarthy, who has filed appeals over his employment status.

...

After his direct testimony, McCarthy was treated in a hostile manner by Robert Kirschman, a DOJ attorney. Kirschman attempted to show that McCarthy tried to take sole credit for identifying the proper owner of the $130,000 trust payment, mischaracterized the way in which Agua Caliente leases are tracked and gave inaccurate information in the memo to Cason.

McCarthy appeared to withstand the scrutiny and Kirschman cut off his cross-examination after seeming to stumble on a question about fees. Kirschman also tried to make an issue out of a memo that he said McCarthy failed to provide to the court.

Next up for the Cobell plaintiffs was Albuquerque Bureau of Indian Affairs employee Mona Infield, whose responsibilities cover data recovery efforts:

Infield, a member of the Citizen Potawataomi Nation of Oklahoma, gave succinct but detailed testimony about trust accounting practices dating back to the 1980s. She spoke of outdated systems, missing computer records and a lack of enforcement.

"They were relying on an honor system to pay the royalties," she said of government agencies.

Infield concluded her testimony yesterday afternoon after DOJ attorneys declined to ask questions.

Up today is Kevin Gambrell, the former director of the Federal Indian Minerals Office in Farmington, New Mexico from 1996 to 2003. Gambrell testified before Congress regarding mismanagement of trust accounts, and was fired from his job for purportedly "destroying records." Gambrell maintains the documents were merely copies of originals properly recorded and stored by MMS.

PBS' Now recorded an interview with Gambrell in 2006. For a preview of what Gambrell might have to say today, read the transcript.

Correction: Gannett has also been following the story. In fact, Solicitor McCarthy faces dismissal for disclosing the extent of the mismanagement to Gannett earlier this year.

Update: I misread the original article in Indianz, and thus was a day off in my reporting. McCarthy and Infield testified on Tuesday, and Gambrell yesterday. I'm currently reading through the transcript.

In addition, Indianz.com is reporting both parties have rested their cases and have until Dec. 30th for closing arguments.

John Doolittle, nine-term incumbent and Abramoff prosecution target raised $50,000 in 3Q07, his primary opponent Maj. Eric Egland (R-Freeper), doing his first run at doors, raised $80,000, and Charlie Brown got a very respectable $212,000 for his second run at the 04 doors.

Remember, its a 10+ red district.

Marco Rubio, Republican from West Miami, and Speaker of the the Florida House, is leading the Republican House Caucus on the issue of gaming in Florida. Indian gaming in Florida. He's wicked opposed to it.

Now recalculate your odds. Did they change?

Interior attorney to testify at upcoming Cobell trial
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
Filed Under: Cobell

Robert McCarthy, a field solicitor for the Interior Department, will testify at the upcoming Cobell historical accounting trial.

McCarthy is listed as a witness for the Cobell plaintiffs. He is expected to provide information about the mismanagement of Indian trust accounts in southern California.

The department is trying to fire McCarthy, saying he allegedly released confidential trust data to the media. A final decision is being made by Solicitor David Bernhardt.

The Cobell trial will focus on the historical accounting of the trust. It starts October 10 at the federal courthouse in Washington, D.C.

I assume that Bernhardt is arguing that if McCarthy had issues with trust management, he should have gone to the Department of Justice and not the media. Anyone else find that suggestion downright laughable?

Court: Navajo Nation owed money for bungled lease
Friday, September 14, 2007
Filed Under: Law | Trust

The Interior Department breached its trust to the Navajo Nation and must pay damages for mishandling a coal mining lease, a federal appeals court ruled on Thursday.

In a unanimous decision, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals said the "undisputed facts" prove Interior breached its fiduciary duties to the largest tribe in the country. Swayed by a lobbyist, the Reagan administration approved a coal mining lease for a less than a "reasonable" royalty rate, the three-judge panel concluded.

...

"Accordingly, this court holds that the nation has a cognizable money-mandating claim against the United States for the alleged breaches of trust and that the government breached its trust duties," Judge Arthur J. Gajarsa, a Reagan nominee, wrote in the 39-page ruling.

Barring further appeals, the Court of Federal Claims will now determine the damages the government must pay for mishandling the lease. The tribe claims it lost out on at least $600 million in royalties for one of the most valuable coal deposits in the U.S.

The case is very complicated, and has already gone through a litany of decisions, some of which were very unfavorable to the Navajo; thus it will most likely be appealed to the SCOTUS. However, any victory for Indians in US courts is good, and this is a big one.

More from Indianz.com:

The Federal Circuit also said the government violated its "common law trust duties of care, candor, and loyalty" by approving a lease with a royalty rate that was more favorable to Peabody Coal than to the Navajo Nation. Peabody is the world's largest coal company and has been mining the reservation for decades.

When the Bureau of Indian Affairs recommended the tribe receive a 20 percent royalty rate on its coal, Peabody hired a lobbyist who was a "a former aide and friend" to then-Interior Secretary Don Hodel, the court said. After a meeting that was kept secret from the tribe, Hodel told the BIA to stand down from the higher rate and to urge the tribe to negotiate with Peabody.

"Facing severe economic pressure," the court said, the tribe was forced to agree to a lease with a 12.5 percent royalty rate. The difference cost the tribe at least $600 million in royalties, according to the lawsuit.

Although the actions at issue took place more than 20 years ago, they remain fresh in the minds of many Navajo leaders, who feel betrayed by their trustee. Their feelings worsened when Hodel's previously unknown dealings with the lobbyist came to light through the course of the lawsuit.

It's important to note, as I have time and time again, that many of the characters who ran the Reagan Interior Department, including specific departments which cover royalties and the Bureau of Indian Affairs, returned to Washington to work for the currently Bush Administration. Among them, Gale Norton, Tom Sansonetti, and J. Steven Griles, who, according to Indianz.com, was directly involved in the royalty fiasco (guess Abramoff wasn't the first lobbyist who had undue influence over Griles.) The former three have now left the Administration, but there are others who were involved who still hold positions of immense power at Interior, including direct oversight of the Trust responsibility.

The second official was Ross Swimmer, who currently serves as Special Trustee for American Indians and is responsible for ensuring the government meets its trust obligations. He approved the lease with the lower royalty rate without studying the effect it would have on the tribe.

Swimmer was also deposed for the case but failed to recall doing so when asked about it during his confirmation hearing before the Senate Indian Affairs Committee and during a federal court trial for the Cobell trust fund case. He also told Native reporter Jodi Rave that he couldn't remember whether he was deposed.

This ruling comes less than a month before the grandmother of all Indian Trust cases, Cobell v. Kempthorne, goes back to trial. It is not the precedent the Bush Administration wanted, of that, I'm quite sure.