journal" is live at 7:00 a.m. eastern. the way it should be, but just to talk it through, you find next, "q&a" with the view from that whether it be the campaign little center or the center for responsible politics, often the abroad -- with r. jeffrey smith. money comes from the same foundations. . there is a thread through all of them and that is the open society institute of george soros and everyone knows where his politics are. i just wondered, have you ever looked at them and why all of these folks are giving money to them because they are also giving money to the pacs, >> there was a center that died individually. in 1976, 64 years old. what do they want? >> i have not interviewed the he was labeled the conscience of donors that give money to these the senate. groups, so i do not know why i preface this because you did a they are giving money. story recently about the

george soros is committed to democratic club in michigan. transparency in politics and what is it about? >> it is one of the most unusual around the world. offall of the political action committees. that is a ideological the point. we try to take a close look at the way political action he thinks that the more committees were spending their money and this came on the radar transparency, the better. screen. it explains a lot about what he is about. that does not mean that he does not have legislative interests of his own or that he does not have -- does not make political they increase their revenues eight fold between 2007 and 2009 contributions of his own, he just thinks that it levels the and they are now one of the most profitable or lucrative political action committees around. playing field so that everyone knows what everyone else is doing. i am trying to take a look at it is a great benefit to have how they spend their money like this information in the public all the political action domain. >> on want to show you what a committees that we are looking at this year. they are spending theirs on been go games. it is quite bizarre. reporter had to say about this. >> why? >> i cannot say that i ever >> disclosure on capitol hill figured out exactly what is behind it because all of the key discloses too much information

to figure out. principles refused to talk to us about it at all. anyone can go to the website and the democratic party refused to talk to us. the state lottery bureau refused to talk to us. looked up someone's pac and see the treasurer of the committee would not talk to us and the how money is spent. spokesman for the committee would not talk to us. it raised a lot of red flags. it is a lot of them permission. another quick way of doing it when people will not talk about is to go to the opensecrets.org what they do,, we are more interested in learning about them than we would be otherwise. website. they are in non partisan it turns out that this political organization. action committee formed itself as a political action committee when they were about to go under i quote a woman a lot because in 2007 and they embraced been go games and a big way. she is a former prosecutor. they have at least two every week. people come in and they contribute money to the bingo she is on the left. and the money that is left over she is left of center. she is a democrat. goes towards funding democratic candidates, or at least it is but she is honest in criticizing supposed to. so far, they have raised nearly democrats as well. there is a lot of nonpartisan, or people that say that they are

non-partisan organizations, that $2 million but they have only are slanted to the right oo the given out $5,000 to one left. in washington, you can get candidate. a lot of the money is going to anyone to say anything. be go supply firms and a lot of when you are trying to find a it is going out in prices and some is going to the organizers of the club. source, someone to ", a good it is not clear why they are government watchdog group that doing what they're doing. when you get involved with is non-partisan, even though she politics and money, the money is to the left of center, she just washes everywhere and it is has always been right down the not clear where it is the way middle. and there is no regulation or when you are criticizing control over what happens to the something that the democrats money once it is donated. it could spill over into almost do, you would want someone that anything. is less likely to criticize them. >> do you want to put your own other political action committees could have other spin on all that? kinds of gambling. your own reaction to it? this was very odd. >> your story says that it is >> i think that all of these lake st. clair, mich.. do you know where that is? what's it is not very far from groups share the objective of ensuring that people know as detroit. >> the political action much about what is going on in committee is regulated by washington as possible. anybody? just as lobbyists in town shared >> @ well, you have to register

with the federal register a common desire to keep their commission. work out of the public eye. they are tax exempt. a lot of what "the post" won the there are supposed to spend their money on a electioneering and give their money to candidates. this one is not. it seems like nobody is pulitzer for was. interfering with that because behind the screens and veils of the surrender the links between the way that they spend their money is a lightly regulated if tom delay and jack abramoff and it is regulated at all. >> i got on the open secrets other lobbyists that surrounded tom delay. it is not easy to get behind the site and saw a lot of committees with money after scenes and learn what is really transpiring. them. is that their winnings? jack abramoff was a good how does the been the thing lobbyist, doing fairly work? what people come in and spend commonplace things in between $40.60 dollars apiece washington. those included creating shell per night and are trying to win prizes. corporations and other their prices range from $100 institutions, groups whose $2,000. i called some of the big

winners and asked if they really financial ties are obscure so contributed what they that he could play in washington contributed. and not leaving fingerprints and some people disputed the amounts that are listed in the records. traces. as i said, it was a trove of it is not possible, without an private e-mail that really made the difference, access to audit of this democratic club to private communications in his case, that helped us learn what know for sure if they are was going on. spending in collecting money the way that they should, because but what he did and did well was they are not even recording the names of most of the people who come and play been go. to try to hide the ways in the people that play beiningo which his money was producing what this letter results. and that is what we are all know where the money is going. most people who give money to about. the political system have to have their name attached to that money. there should be some way for people to check who is paying as advocates that share to desire to see this information into politics. splashed in the public domain, in this case, the players' names we are all trying to make sure the people know what is happening. >> let me defer for a moment on are not being recorded. >> how did you find out about

it? >> we were looking exhaustively through the records of political another subject. has to do with a journalist's action committees to figure out how they are spending their money and how they are role. you were a finalist for a conducting their work. >> what is your guess, one of pulitzer prize for the of the great stories. the three senate buildings is -- for the abu ghraib stories. named after philip a. hart from michigan. what would he think? >> we were looking at the events that led to abu ghraib. he was not called the cup -- but he was not officially the conscience of the senate, but >> were you there? that is what everyone called >> no, i wasn't. him. >> i cannot help but imagine we were trying to get information here in washington that he would think it was about the investigations that bizarre. were being conducted by the >> where did the idea come from? military and to learn whether >> there are all kinds of pacs. this was, as it was immediately per trade, an isolated incident there are corporate tapacs. or if it was part of a bigger problem. we all know that it was quite the law says that corporations

commonplace. cannot give money to politicians. it was part of a bigger set of so corporations decided to form groups of officials, officers events. >> columbia journalism school. >> yes. >> if you think back, what you and their corporations. were learning there, how did it they got money paid back into turnout? what did they not teach you that the political organization that you learned about washington, they formed and is directed by the corporation and that gives dealing with this kind of this money to these individuals information, the government and all? to help them get elected. >> i think at columbia i learned it is a way around of the rules. how to become a better writer. that is one category of there is nothing that you can political action committees. another category is a party substitute for on the ground experience in washington and affiliated committees. figuring out how the place these are entities created by works. the republicans, the democrats >> what would you tell those and other parties. students today about getting ready to come here. what have you learned about this they make their own donations. town and dealing with government? >> you have to be here and watch they collect money as the it happen for a while. republican party does on a national scale and then it pays i don't know how you can figure out from a distance or learn it some of that money to help elect in a classroom. republicans and democrats do the same. you have to be an on the street, on the ground reporter who is there is this third category

that we are looking at which is probing what is going on in different parts of washington to independent or in nine affiliated pac. figure out how things work. how different pieces connect to there are not affiliated with a party. each other. what influences what? they are mostly ideological and promote themselves by talking who is important and who is not important? who is telling the truth? who is lying? about a threat of some kind to you figure it out by walking around and reporting here. the way of life in america. i cannot think of another way to learn it. >> one of the things i noticed in your story that i have been they use start, very partisan reading is that almost at no language. point did you " somebody that was the principal, you always how do they spend the money? have to talk to the aid. a lot of the money is sticking the principal was not available. to the people that are is that the we should read it collecting it. what we found on the when we see the spokesman? >> is always better to talk to the principle, but they want international republican level their spokesman to get out front in a story that is going and the national democratic level and the lawmakers that form their own pacs, is that a to be controversial or provocative. >> here is a paragraph or you talk about the leaders. lot of the money sticks to them. >> you did not mention unions.

are those also a case where members of the union are given money to pay back or they just take it out of the union dues? >> all of the contributions are voluntary. if you are running a corporation or a union, you cannot demand that your employee or your union >> you talked about earlier member contribute so. it is all voluntary. where they write a law and in the get a round at him. you find that in certain the new talk about that they corporations, we have found, demanded that the leadership be through scandals, that corporations and unions have drawn nearly three what is your take on that? >> i cannot imagine the system would be allowed to persist for a long time. i think that eventually, people leaned on officials and officers will wake up and except -- and and told them that you are now accept that this is a way for vice-president and is expected that you will be kicking in money to have corrupting influence in washington. $5,000 or $10,000 a year to the corporate pac. for a moment, there is not

if it is our white -- if it is enough attention, not enough out rage, not enough of the momentum out right coercion, i think people get away with that. behind change. to many people benefit from it. >> let me get some of your background. where were you going? >> i was going in chicago, the people that can control the flow of legislation being influenced by the flow of money illinois. >> you right there? >> i grew up there. that they get from their >> what part of chicago? leadership pacs, and there is not much desire to make this >> of deerfield. change. >> explain that. >> where did you go to college? we talk a lot about this on this >> duke university and columbia program. university. >> your subject matter he we also have a lot of different kinds of people. majored in was what? >> political science. on monday morning, there are a lot of the mills if we have a guess that is very outspoken. i grew up in a time when politics was pretty much on on something that affects everybody's dinnertime everybody, almost nil. conversation. >> if we saw you at age 16 >> the series of stories that we sitting around the dinner table, have done this year have a

who would be there? what's my father and my sister pretty good of readership and my mother. >> what is your father do? what's my father was a salesman commentary. and my mother was a stay at home people get it. there is not much confusion. mom. there is not much partisanship my sister was a year older than behind it. me. this is not a partisan issue. >> who was the most political interesting? we find the same abuses occurring among the lawmakers in >> my parents were both politically interesting. both parties. they followed the news closely this is not republicans versus and we talked about the news. i was probably the most democrats, this is about whether people with money are the ones politically interested and active. i started my own little that have the biggest influence and have hidden influence or whether it is about average newspaper in elementary school and i was the editor of the high school paper and was president readers or citizens or viewers having an influence. of the student council and i was into this stuff. it mattered a great deal to me people get it. then as it does now. >> used in some time "science they know that this system is a magazine.". corrupting system. they know it. >> i read somewhere, maybe it >> i did. was you that said that these >i got tired and i wanted to leadership pacs do not have to

have a name that connects them to an individual. as a matter of fact, i looked up come to washington. a bunch of the senators leadership pacs and there was this is the place where politics is most exciting and i thought this would be fun. someone called freedom project, i came to "science magazine" and they said i could write alamo pac, country's first pac, about the regulatory system or anything i want as long as it had some elements of science in it. since i was interested in heartland values pac,. science, it was appealing to me. >> when did you go to the -"the is it true that you do not have washington post." to -- you can contribute to what they hired me as the space these pacs not even know who correspondent. they are contributing to? i wanted to write about national >> they know who they are security and i got hired to do contributing to. that after a little bit of a weight. >> your biography lists a lot of the congressman or that senator is going to be in a position to awards and nominations for do something nice for them later. awards including a pulitzer that

you wanted -- a that you won it is interesting, there was with a group. this investigation by the office >> it was susan schmidt and jim, of congressional ethics into the spending -- the orgy of spending surrounding a group called pma. i forget his last name. >> this is related to john >> the reason that you won the murtha? >> yes. award was for what? >> we were writing about tom he was the principal delay and sue schmidt and her beneficiary, but not the only one, by far. colleagues were writing about they were looking at a bunch of people. jack abramoff and of those two they went to interview the heads of the corporations that were threads nemet because there was getting in remarks after making contributions to these lawmakers through pma. some heavy-duty action between tom delay and jack abramoff. they would ask why they made that contribution. my interest in political action in every case, they said that committees stems from those they were not just giving this associations. money away. what i found as i look at tom they were getting something. delay very closely and the way that he collected money and my corporate board would look askance at my spending the pac

spent was that a lot of the money that he collected stuck to him and he had a very nice money without the expectation lifestyle using other people's money. that something good would come from it. >> what do you think the corporations are not charities. circumstances are today, in they make investments. 2010, compared to what they were when you were writing about tom they expect to get something for the money that they spend. delay and jack abramoff? that is true whether they are has anything changed? >> yes, some things have spending on leadership pacs -- changed. and it is the same for unions. the senate has passed some reform that has encouraged a they expect to get something for the money that they give. transparency and makes it a >> in your article, -- little bit easier for us to find out about the money. the house has also strengthened its campaign finance disclosure rules and requirements. some of the more outlandish things that were widespread and common place, at the time that i was writing about tom delay and jack abramoff in 2005 and 2006, some of those things have been

curtailed. you cannot come any longer, if your a politician or a lawmaker in congress, ride free on corporate jets. you have to pay the actual cost and nobody does it anymore. there are still some people who rent private jets with corporate money, but when they do it, it >> that is a pretty good return is very transparent. it is obvious where the money is on a small investment, don't you coming from. >> going back to june 2, you think? for the pma group , i tallied up have a story in "the washington post." i am just going to start reading all the money that they had given. they gave the seven members of it and asked to explain it. the headline on at is -- congress $834,000. that is not show change. that sounds like a pretty serious investment. but guess what they got. they got earmarked grants of the worth of $235 million. they spent $834,000 and they got to hundred $35 million. -- that $235 million.

>> in one organization gets $400 million a year from the united states taxpayers and spending that kind of money is to change. does it work? >> it works. this is something in that is different in the last couple of years. it used to be that your marks were given out -- that earmarks were given out by committees. >> you have democrats in your story for those that are there was no way to link up the listening. we will get to those in a donations to a specific member. minute. why did to lead with that? >> this is a classic case -- the proposed earmarke, money wet people who describe, but this is like water that finds a hole. in and money went out. it was always a good investment. in years past, it used to be he did not know how to connect commonplace for corporations to those two.

this is one of the key reforms basically finance vacations for that has taken place in the past lawmakers to fancy places. couple of years. it has curtailed -- it has put he used to be commonplace for all of their travel, their an atmosphere of shame around families travel, to be the year marking -- of the ea subsidized by it a corporation that is trying to get something from them, a law, a benefit, a rmarking process. ruling of some kind of the you can see that persons congressman can influence. campaign receipts and their and those stains, outright leadership pac receipts and you can see how much money they got payments for travel, have been and from whom. curtailed. instead, lawmakers formed >> you quoted tax payers for political action committees and they pretend that they are common sense, people pay their trying to raise this money so that they can help other lawmakers, their colleagues. they say the only collect this money so that they can give away to help others. they are kind of like bond lawyers -- bumblndlers. taxes every year. they think they have a government that is watching out for them. why is it that we need all of these independent foundations to you take a lot of money and you do the job that a lot of people

give it away to the right think government should do? places. >> well, governments everywhere if you invested in the right places so that the candidates that you want to win will win. o what is actually happening is need watchdogs of various kinds. that is what it is all about. that a lot of this money is that is what these groups are sticking to the lawmakers that all about. formed these pacs. they are just different kinds of watchdogs. is being used by them to finance the news media covers the broad surface. we are after the same gang. every government, no matter what fund-raising events. kind of government, is cora to these are not the hotels where need a watchdog of some kind. >> your the bureau chief for most people state. they are in five-star resorts. the -- for "the washington in the wintertime they are in post." warm places or at ski lodges, would you rather do that or and in the summertime, they are in more comfortable places. write this story? >> in rome, i was covering wars you find jon baker, who is from in the balkans and i felt like i ohio and has a great tan, he was writing about matters that needed to be brought to the visits florida more than one attention of policymakers in

dozen times in the past several washington who had a capacity to years. influence the outcome of those. >> what is hard to understand is a different between a pac and and the degree of u.s. petition leadership pacc. patient or not. -- u.s. participation or not. i am writing about money and politics now because this is an election year. these issues are on the table right now. >> this is a little bit out of >> what is the difference between name pac and leadership -- we have not been talking about anything like this. pac? he wrote a piece recently. this had to do with the state of >> a political action committee is formed either by a virginia. it was about a name from the corporation or an ideologically past. motivated group or it is formed this is a man by the name of by a union or it is formed by fred malek. can you tell us about this somebody who has an interest to story? >> is a quintessential promote, and add of -- an washington tale -- is a advocate. quintessential washington tale. a leadership pac is formed by a lot of people cycle through

washington. lawmakers. they have an impeccable record it got that term, leadership of service in washington and pac, because it was formed by people who wanted to elect they become washington sages. there are people that are people to leadership positions. regarded with great respect. 400 members of congress all have people from every political strife. leadership pacs. in the course of their careers, they can still have these maybe out of ambition and a leadership pacs and the leadership pacs are very lightly regulated. chemist take in the early part there is nothing that says that of their careers that is hard to they have to spend all the money. there is nothing that says that they have to spend any money. leave behind. some republicans and democrats have collected millions of fred malek was a senior aide to dollars and not spent a dime on other candidates, yet they claim that it is for other candidates. president nixon and he made what he described as the most serious mistake of his life. we tracked one congressman who when nixon decided that he was spent his money on mardi gras being blindsided by employees of balls. he wanted to go dancing with his friends and his family and some

of his owners, so he spent the the bureau of labor statistics who were undermining his money that way. positive messages about economics and economic growth, i have a nice example of how whether nixon's economic money is spent. policies were hoping, nixon was >> let me ask you, is there a an anti-semite. limit to how much anybody can give a leadership pac? he decided that it was a jewish like there is on a regular pac? call in the bureau of labor >> i think the duration limits statistics that was behind this are 2500 a cycle, $5,000 a year. >> so they bundle this and you effort. he asked the chief of staff at can go to one corporation or one union and pick up checks from everyone in the room at the same time or go to one fund-raiser in the white house to figure out naples at the ritz-carlton and do the same time? who these people were and fire >> yes. >> go ahead. them. >> the senate majority leader malek was doing personnel work lacks a certain steakhouse. at the white house and he helped in this current cycle, he spent collect the list of 13 people who he thought were jewish and

$40,000 at stake house, eating dinner with donors. he forwarded this list up the >> but that's the cows is about chain and said that we got a message back that we wanted to three blocks from here. -- that steak house is about get rid of these people. he was part of the effort to get three blocks from here. >> pete sessions is a republican rid of the people that were jewish in the bureau of labor from texas who likes disney statistics. for years, he maintained that he world. he spent about $9,000 at the had only peripheral involvement and all he did was basically disney grand for the and and he respond to an order from a superior, but that he did not spent another $6,800 at a have any heavy interaction. restaurant in las vegas. fred mallick left the white he likes to go to those places. house and he went to work for the marriott corp., which was a dennis cardozo is a democrat from california. big supporter nixon. course.s to go to the race%- bill marriott was the chair of he spent $47,000 at the race course in baltimore. the 1972 inaugural committee at this is a congressman from california. he is raising money, but he is a moment when nixon was having a lot of trouble and marriott was

doing it at a race course in there. baltimore. he is not raising money in he split off from that company california. he is raising at the race course intel -- in baltimore. >> did you see where they put a with some marriott family assistance and started his own bill in the hopper, knowing that a committee will do this, company and became even more wealthy then he was before he knowing that this would be a way started at the white house. to raise money? he is now one of the biggest republican donors and power >> if we have, we would have brokers in washington. >> a big ceremony palin support . >> a big supporter. written about it and put it on the front page. it is hard to prove that those kinds of things were going on. he has apologized for doing what it is hard to prove. he did in the past, but he has it is hard to prove that a also said that he did not have any heavy-duty involvement in specific donation was given to this. achieve a specific outcome. lo and behold, after a certain period of time, white house the thing about the abramoff case that was different from the papers were available to the public and in january, they released his personal papers and

garden variety flow of money in that did not go unnoticed. it was noticed by democrats in town. washington was that there was a fabulous e-mail trail involving they noticed there was new information in those papers and the cold to the attention -- and conversations, through e-mail, between abramoff and his colleagues about where they they called it to the attention spelled out what they were of others. buying and how and when. he is influential, but he has they said they would give this money for ttis result and then this grim episode in his past. they got that result and then they celebrated that result in a it is a lesson, in a way, for backslapping fashion over and people to come to washington, that if you make, out of over again. you were able to see and put them all in jail because of the ambition as a young worker, that payment of money to produce this outcome. without that kind of e-mail episode can follow you for a trail, it is hard to establish long time. >> what did the governor of the direct link. what we do, as reporters, virginia, bob macdonald, do? what's he appointed malek to without the ability to be work on a commission that was meant to examine ways to fix the present at conversation where deals like that are struck, is

we can look at associations and budget in virginia. we see that john maynard, when that was a function that malek he goes to florida, he is is great experience with. regularly playing golf with lobbyists and the lobbyists are with industries that all have he was involved with firing so legislative interests before many people. >> but that created an him that he can help influence opportunity for you to write a story because people were complaining about his past. as the senate majority leader. what is the moral of the story? john boehner has great influence what's the moral of the story is that if you make a serious mistake in washington, it will in the house. follow you around for a long time. >> will you continue pursuing he can influence the pace at these pac stories? which the legislation is >> sure. considered and he could rally the republicans to oppose house legislation. we will follow the money right+ he can try to get his committee up to the election this year. this is an important election. they aaways are. chairman to write -- to put inserts into a bill that affect who is spending? who is getting? corporations in a way that they those are big questions. would like. >> jeff smith, of the "the he is a good man to influence because he has influenced

himself. washington post." >> in your story that we were reading earlier, -- thank you for joining us. >> for a dvd copy of this program call 1-877-662-7726. for free transcripts or to give us your comments about this program, visit us at q&a.org. >> there is a lot more here and episodes are also available as we will read some more. what is it about people that podcasts. come to washington representing the public makes them think that they have to be in limousines, private jets and at resorts? >have you ever asked them? >> tonight, on "prime minister's >> a big reason is that when you questions," david cameron on the become a lawmaker, you have to government's plan to in the -- swim in a sea of money to become a lawmaker. after that, a look at the tariff

if you want to keep your job, threat from al qaeda and the you have to keep swimming in television. later, another chance to watch that same see. who has the money? "q&a" with jeffrey smit from people with very lavish lifestyles who can afford to pay "the washington post." for political campaigns. >> tomorrow, on "washington you hang along with those journal,"steve and rose, a look people long enough, and you begin to emulate their at trade with sen gilston. lifestyle. i think this is what is going on. a lot of lawmakers live large to their leadership pacs. following that, we will chat they go to campaign events. with fahey on new hampshire is a at the whole campaign of dance at translocations. balanced budget. that is here on c-span. john boehner to play golf. >> the c-span vidib city lawyer likes to ski. -- steny hoyer likes to ski and someone else is paying for it.

you see people going to these places is someone else picks up the tab. it is easy if your a lawmaker to get someone to pick up the tab. >> you mentioned john boehner and others, but unions give a mega millions of dollars. will their rank-and-file like it if any of these people that we mentioned were doing the limousine, a private jet, resort deal? >>or do they know? what is the lawmakers that are living high. they are emulating the donors. most of the wealthiest donors are corporations. unions to give a lot of money also. we have not seen the same low level of luxury surrounding union related events.

i think that there may be a cultural issue there, i am not sure why that is so. >> but they still give leadership pacs and once you have a leadership pac, you can spend the money anyway you want to. but you cannot spend the money on your campaign from a leadership pac. >> that is correct. the law only allows you to one official campaign committee. and so you are technically not allowed to spend any of the leadership pac money on your own reelection. but what happens is that a lot of money gets spent on consultants and who is to know if they are being consulted on your colleagues braces for your own race? there is no way to peer behind a screen and be sure that the money is being spent on someone else's election instead of your own. >> this is all perfectly legal.

when a guest was talking about something similar, he had three other colleagues with him and he is the only one doing this kind of thing . what of "the washington post?" >> we have a pretty robust group of reporters. this is a key part of the franchise to make sure that we are telling our leaders exactly what the flow of money is surrounding politics and how it is influencing political outcomes. we have a good team of about five or six people who regularly look at some aspect of money and politics. >> i know from talking to him, there are a lot of institutions

created in the last 10 years of that helped gather all this information and make it available. who do you rely on? >> you ask what was different from 2005 and 2006. a lot of the patterns surrounding the flow of money have changed but the flow of money is still the same. one of the things that has changed a lot between 2005 and the present is that there is a lot more information available. we weren't really looking into tom delay and jack abramoff, and i believe that those scandals helped awaken people that they need to pay attention to these matters. the open secrets website, the sun life foundation, there are a variety of places where you can go on line for information that is extremely helpful. you can figure out who got what

murray from where and what that person's interest was and what happened in the legislation that is related. >> i went on these different websites, and i do not have it