International Baccalaureate at Monument Academy (Colorado)

One positive thing that can be said about the International Baccalaureate Organization is that it is very good at marketing. Its students and supporters truly believe that the IB Program is superior to the Advanced Placement program and dual credit programs. Based on the college credit universities award to IB students, this puffed-up image is not warranted.

The IBO and its constituent schools are masters at public relations, too. Whenever a school applies to become a so-called "IB World School", numerous press releases are issued to herald the news. Schools do, however, drop out of the IB Program. These events don't receive nearly the attention.

Now I don't know if this will be a recurring feature of the ACR Blog, but I want to look at one of the schools that dropped out of the IB Program and the reasons behind that decision. Last week, without fanfare, Monument Academy in Colorado was removed from the IBO's list of schools offering the Diploma Program. Apparently, this decision was made two years ago, but Monument Academy's name has only recently been removed from the IBO's roster. (Monument Academy was a publicly funded charter school.)

Here are the minutes to the Board meeting (.pdf) where Monument Academy decided to withdraw from the IB Program. The relevant section is F-5 on page five of the .pdf. Here are some of the events that occurred at that meeting (names shortened to prevent Google searches on them).

D. Hawk, a parent, made the comment that IB was driven by C. Holt, but our students are not traveling to London to study.

OK first of all, I believe the comment about London to be a prime example of sarcasm. Nevertheless, some people seem to have the perception that the IB Program is exotic since it has the word "International" in its name. I sense that Mr. Hawk finds that position to be preposterous. More importantly in my opinion, is Mr. Hawk's assertion that IB was driven by Mr. Holt. Mr. Holt. was the principal at Monument Academy. It appears to me that Mr. Hawk does not have a high opinion of the International Baccalaureate Program or its chief champion, Mr. Holt. In fact, it is my opinion that Mr. Hawk feels that there was some sort of agency problem at Monument Academy -- that Mr. Holt was trying to implement the IB Program to enhance his career over the academic needs of the students at Monument Academy. Is this why administrators love the IB Program?

==

L. Gipson reported $50,000 is currently budgeted to support IB, but was not sure if that will be enough to carry the program through the upcoming school year...

Ms. Gipson said dual enrollment is not a monetary albatross. Also, dual enrollment guarantees college credits for participating students.

Ms. Gipson makes two charges in this comment. First, she says dual enrollment is not a monetary albatross. Based on earlier statements in the board minutes, it is clear that the IB Program was too expensive in the board's opinion. But "monetary albatross"? Methinks Ms. Gipson has strong feelings about the excessive cost of the IB Program. Secondly, Ms. Gipson favors a dual credit program because it "guarantees college credits for participating students". As I've observed before, nearly 90% of colleges give higher quality credits to the AP Program. I honestly believe that dual credit programs are accepted at nearly the same rate. And recall, Colorado, Colorado State, Colorado - Denver and Colorado School of Mines all gave IB students inferior credit.

==

J. Genz stated dual enrollment makes more sense monetarily and academically.

Emphasis added

Wow! Can you get any more explicit than that? Mr. Genz clearly thinks that IB was too expensive and academically inferior to dual credit!

==

The conclusions to be drawn from one example are far from dispositive. Also, Monument Academy has had a history of difficulties. An audit found sloppy documentation of school expenditures. A basketball coach there was convicted of assault for striking a player in the groin. About eight months after dropping the IB Program, Monument Academy eliminated grades 9-12 (.pdf) altogether. Monument Academy appears to have been troubled for some time, but I also believe that the failure of the IB Program help hasten the demise of its high school program.

AP vs. IB

***UPDATE***
December 20, 2009

Welcome to the College Confidential readers. When I originally researched the IB Program, I looked at it from the point of view of an aspiring engineering major. The first thing I noticed was that colleges gave inferior credit to the IB Program's math and science classes. Subsequent research shows that even for English and History, the AP Program is awarded superior college credit relative to the IB Program. See this post examining the credit policies at the University of Texas and Chapman University in California. This experience is repeated at Texas A&M University, the University of Houston and likely many more colleges.

Prior to enrolling in the IB Program, be sure to review the degree requirements for the major of your choice at several target universities -- even if your desired major does not require an in-depth command of math and science. Chances are that you will learn that the AP Program is a better choice than the IB Program.

==

-- Begin original post --


One of my most popular posts has been this one that evaluates how colleges treat AP and IB exams when awarding college credit. Apparently, this has been a contentious question: Which is better? AP or IB?

Judging by the quality of credits colleges award for the Advanced Placement exams and the International Baccalaureate exams, the answer is clear. AP is clearly the better choice over IB. International Baccalaureate is notoriously weak in math and science.

IB Mathematics HL students typically only earn one semester of calculus credit since IB Math HL is so weak. IB Physics HL usually earns credit only for non-science and non-engineering majors because it is not calculus-based.

The fact that IB students may take AP exams is of little consequence. Since IB Math HL teaches precious little integral calculus, IB Math HL students would have a difficult time passing the AP Calculus BC exam. Likewise, IB Physics HL isn't even calculus-based whereas AP Physics C is. IB Physics HL students would find the calculus-based curriculum of AP Physics C nearly insurmountable. In schools where IB and AP classes are one in the same, it would be a fortunate instance indeed if either could perform well on the AP Physics C exam. Calculus-based physics needs to be taught to learn calculus-physics. (I know that is tautological.)

Colleges reflect the reduced rigor of the International Baccalaureate Program in their credit schedules. I first noted this in the original post when I looked at how a prospective engineer at Texas A&M University would fare under AP and IB. The AP student could test out of all the technical courses required for freshmen engineering students, Math 151-152 and Physics 218, 208. IB students can earn credit only for Math 151. That revelation inspired me to evaluate the AP and IB credit schedules of over 100 colleges and universities. Of those, 80-90% give higher quality credit to AP students; I have only found one school that gives IB students better quality credit.

IB students still earn credit for IB Math HL and IB Physics HL, but this analysis shows that this credit is of less value (or no value) to scientists and engineers. IB Physics HL routinely earns credit for non-science, non-engineer majors while AP Physics C credit can be used by scientists and engineers.

Because the previous post was so popular, I wanted to present this information as a stand-alone thread. The intent of the first post was to analyze SAT scores in Houston-area school districts. So without further ado, here is the current list of colleges and how they treat AP and IB exams:

AP credit is superior to IB credit
Abilene Christian (Tex.)
Air Force
Alabama
Alabama - Birmingham
Albany (N.Y.)
American University (Wash DC)
Appalachian State (N.C.)
Arizona
Arizona State
Arizona Western
Arkansas
Arkansas - Little Rock
Armstrong Atlantic (Ga.)
Austin College (Tex.)
Austin Peay (Tenn.)
Babson (Mass.)
Ball State
Baylor
Boston University
Bradley (Ill.)
Brigham Young
Buffalo
Cal State - Long Beach
California (Berkeley)
California Polytechnic
Carnegie Mellon
Central Florida
Chapman (Calif.)
Chicago
Clemson
Colorado
Colorado - Denver
Colorado School of Mines
Colorado State
Columbia College
Cornell
Creighton (Neb.)
Dartmouth
Davidson College (N.C.)
Dayton
Delaware
DePaul (Ill)
Drury University (Mo.)
Evansville
Florida
Florida Atlantic
Florida State
George Mason (Va.)
George Washington (Wash DC)
Georgetown (Wash DC)
Georgia
Grand Valley State (Mich.)
Houston
Houston Baptist
IUPUI
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Iowa State
James Madison (Va.)
Kansas
Kansas State
Kent (Ohio)
Kentucky
Lehigh (Pa.)
Lewis & Clark (Ore.)
Louisiana State
Marshall (W. Va.)
Mary Washington (Va.)
Maryland
Maryland - Baltimore County
Miami (Fla.)
Miami (Ohio)
Michigan Tech
Middle Tennessee
Midwestern State (Tex.)
Minnesota State (Mankato)
Mississippi
Missouri
Missouri S&T
Montana State
Nebraska
Nevada
North Carolina - Greensboro
North Carolina State
North Texas
Northern Colorado
Northern Michigan
Northwestern
Ohio State
Oklahoma
Oklahoma State
Oregon
Oregon State
Penn State
Pennsylvania
Pittsburgh
Portland (Ore.) State
Puget Sound, University of (Wash.)
Purdue
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (N.Y.)
Rhodes College (Tenn.)
Rochester (N.Y.)
Rose-Hulman (Ind.)
SUNY - Oswego
Sacramento State
St. John Fisher (N.Y.)
St. Mary's College (Calif.)
St. Mary's College (Md.)
Sam Houston State (Tex.)
Samford (Ala.)
Seattle
South Alabama
South Carolina
South Florida
Southern Methodist
Southwest Minnesota
Stanford
Stephen F. Austin State (Tex.)
Swarthmore (Pa.)
Syracuse
Tennessee
Texas
Texas A&M
Texas Christian
Texas State
Texas Tech
Tulane
UC - Davis
UC - Irvine
UC - Merced
UC - Riverside
UC - San Diego
UC - Santa Barbara
UC - Santa Cruz
UCLA
UT - Dallas
UTEP
UTSA
Utah State
Vanderbilt
Villanova (Pa.)
Virginia
Wake Forest
Washington
Washington State
Washington University (St. Louis)
Wayne State (Mich.)
Wellesley (Mass.)
West Florida
West Virginia
William & Mary (Va.)
Winthrop (S.C.)
Wisconsin
Wyoming

=======

AP and IB credit equivalent
* Does not allow any credit by exam
Amherst*
Auburn
Boston College
California Institute of Technology*
Denver
Duke
Georgia Tech
MIT
Marquette (Wisc.)
Michigan
Michigan State
Minnesota
North Carolina
Northeastern
Notre Dame
Rice
Virginia Tech ¹
Wofford (S.C.)


=======

IB credit is superior to AP credit
Brown

156-1-18

As with the previous post, I will justify why schools are on each list upon request. I will also evaluate any schools not on the list upon request.

=======

¹ I assumed here that our candidate holds the IB Diploma. This is the only way to earn credit for IB HL Math at Virginia Tech. A IB Certificate holder earns absolutely no credit at VT for IB HL Math.

Safavian Convictions Overturned

From the New York Times:

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court on Tuesday overturned the conviction of a former Bush administration official caught up in a lobbying scandal, finding that part of the prosecution’s case was faulty and that the trial judge was wrong to exclude expert testimony for the defense.

The conviction of David H. Safavian, the head of procurement policies at the White House Office of Management and Budget until he became entangled in the affairs of the disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, was thrown out by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, two years after he was convicted of lying to government investigators.

For the record, this Scotland golfing trip was the one taken with convicted former Rep. Robert Ney (R-Ohio), not our former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Fort Bend County). I've only given a cursory look at the court's opinion (.pdf), but I gleaned at least three points the appeals court made:

1. Mr. Safavian was under no obligation to inform the ethics officials at the General Services Administration (GSA) that Mr. Abramoff had shown interest in acquiring some government owned property for an unspecified client.

2. Opinions by the ethics officials at GSA are not binding. So even if Mr. Safavian had informed his ethics officer of Mr. Abramoff's interest in acquiring the government property and the ethics official had denied Mr. Safavians request to accept air transportation for the golfing junket, Mr. Safavian was not bound by that advice. Mr. Safavian may still have accepted air transportation provided by Mr. Abramoff.

3. The trial court erred when it did not allow Mr. Safavian to present expert testimony that, in GSA jargon, Mr. Abramoff did not technically have business before the GSA because the issue of whether or not Mr. Abramoff had a specific client lined up to purchase the government property was murky.

Yada, yada, yada. I don't care.

The first point I'd like to make is that this episode is clearly a blow to the Justice Department. There is absolutely no way to spin overturned convictions to be a win for the DoJ.

That said, I don't think it is a significant blow. I haven't wasted a lot of pixels writing about Mr. Safavian, primarily because I've never understood the significance of his conviction. As early as the summer of 2006, I wrote:

Honestly, David Safavian is a little bit of a mystery to me. He worked in the administration and appears to have gotten caught up in this due to his own greed. Against whom can he testify? Remember that Safavian went on the St. Andrews junket. Bob Ney has already been caught lying about that trip. Maybe Safavian is supposed to testify against Ney. If so, the DoJ has a little work left. Safavian did not plead. He was convicted in a jury trial and is still appealing. But going to such lengths (jury trial) to nail little fish Safavian still doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me.

If my speculation was accurate, the value of convicting Mr. Safavian has passed. Former Rep. Ney has already pleaded guilty.

The most significant consequence of the overturned convictions is that Mr. Safavian was the only Abramoff scandal figure convicted at a jury trial. The Department of Justice no longer has that case to use to pressure other scandal participants.

No-Show Job

Michael Gormley of the Associated Press follows up on yesterday's story about an FBI raid on the former employer of the ex-wife of former Rep. John Sweeney (R-N.Y.)

The lobbying office of a former chairman of the New York Republican party was raided as part of an FBI investigation that appears to focus on a job provided by the lobbying firm to a congressman's wife, according to a person familiar with the case...

A person familiar with the search warrant said agents appeared focused on Gaia Sweeney, ex-wife of former U.S. Rep. John Sweeney who represented a district near Albany until he lost the seat in 2006. The person familiar with the warrant spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the continuing federal investigation.

FBI agents seized computers at the Albany lobbying firm of Powers & Co. including the computer used by Gaia Sweeney. She had a job at the firm for just over a year, ending in early 2007 when Sweeney returned from Washington.

The FBI appears interested in determining what she did in the job.

"There was a suggestion this was a no-show job and that is absolutely not true," said E. Stewart Jones, attorney for the former congressman...

The concern is similar to cases nationwide in which the FBI is looking at jobs provided to wives of congressmen in what might be an attempt by lobbyists to curry favor and land federal aid for clients.

[Emphasis added]

Well, it looks like my suspicion that prosecutors are going after Gaia Sweeney, Gayle Sweeney, Gaia Ford (or whatever her name is) is accurate. I don't mean to dismiss speculation by others that a junket to the Marianas Islands by Rep. Sweeney is a focus of investigators. That trip may very well be interesting to prosecutors, but I'm focused on this "no-show job".

Doesn't it remind you of this (link: Wall Street Journal)

The Justice Department's congressional lobbying-and-bribery investigation is looking into whether former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's wife received money from a lobbying firm for a no-show job, recent FBI interviews indicate.

[Emphasis added]

Or maybe it reminds you of the FBI raid seeking business records of Julie Doolittle, wife of Rep. John Doolittle (R-Calif.) to see if she truly earned payments from Abramoff associate Ed Buckham.

Also see: The Wives Club

Gayle Sweeney; Wives Club Member

Although I admit I haven't been following the links of former Rep. John Sweeney (R-N.Y.) to Jack Abramoff, I did mention them as early as 2006. Well, there appears to be movement on the John Sweeney front. From the New York Times:

Federal law enforcement agents have raided the offices of an influential lobbying firm in Albany as part of the latest investigation connected to the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal in Washington.

The raid was part of an investigation of former Congressman John Sweeney, an Albany-area Republican with ties to Mr. Abramoff. During the raid on Friday, about 10 F.B.I. agents spent several hours collecting computers and files from the office of Powers & Company, the lobbying firm.

The company is run by the former chairman of the state Republican Party, William D. Powers. Mr. Sweeney’s ex-wife, Gayle, worked for Powers & Company until early last year, and Mr. Powers was a longtime political patron of the congressman...

The issue of consulting fees paid to Gayle Sweeney has surfaced before. A Times Union report in 2006 said Mr. Sweeney’s campaign paid Creative Consulting, a business owned by Gayle Sweeney, a total of $42,570 in 2003 and 2004.

Hmm. The New York Times tells us that "consulting fees" paid to Gayle Sweeney may be of interest to the FBI. This may be an understatement, but this FBI raid doesn't augur well for former Rep. Sweeney and his ex-wife. Former Rep. Sweeney was allegedly involved in some sort of domestic violence incident with his ex-wife. Do you think she's talking? Anyway, this whole situation reminds me of the Wives' Club, a curious string of incidents where the FBI is investigating whether or not politicians' wives received what amounts to bribe money.

This is what I like about the New York Times article:

The question of consulting or lobbying fees paid to lawmakers’ wives has been a running topic in the Abramoff investigations. A federal investigation of Mr. Delay is said to have focused on consulting fees made to Mr. Delay’s wife, Christine, and whether she actually provided any service.

Investigators have also focused on the wife of Representative John T. Doolittle, a California Republican who announced this year he would retire.

Christine DeLay and Julie Doolittle. Uh-huh. I always like to see our former Congressman mentioned in the news.

Nick Lampson a-Calling

Shortly after the 2006 primary, I got a recorded call from Tom DeLay. At the time, I speculated that the strong primary showing of my favored candidate, Tom Campbell, had worried Mr. DeLay. This was evidence in my mind that Mr. DeLay knew he was in electoral trouble.

Tonight, I got a recorded call from my temporary Congressman, Nick Lampson (D-Beaumont Stafford). I guess he's feeling the electoral heat, too. Rep. Lampson wanted to invite me to a telephone town hall meeting. I wasn't here to take his call, but I still wonder how Rep. Lampson would have answered my question:

Rep. Lampson, how do you plan to reduce marginal tax rates across the board?

Yeah. That's what I thought. That's why Rep. Lampson can't earn my vote this fall.

Abramoff to be Sentenced in September

From Politico via CBSNews:

Imprisoned former GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who has been cooperating with a Justice Dept. criminal investigation for the last two-and-a-half years, will be finally sentenced in September 2008.

Who cares? That doesn't tell me anything interesting.

But this does:

"While the government anticipates that Mr. Abramoff’s cooperation in the form of possible testimony will continue for the foreseeable future, the parties believe that they are in a position to inform the court about the full scope of his misconduct and cooperation, and that, consistent with the commitments in the plea agreement with Mr. Abramoff, sentencing in the near future in this case is appropriate."

Emphasis added

I don't know exactly what this means, but I certainly would like to know the full scope of Mr. Abramoff's cooperation. Perhaps we'll have a better idea where this investigation is going by September.

Strange ...

I'm going through dozens of court documents from the Curious Case of Corwin Teltschik. Let's look at a really boring one. This is a Motion to Appear Pro Hoc Vice. Not being a lawyer, I'm only guessing at what this means. I think it means that one of Mr. Teltschik's lawyers has never been admitted to the bar for the District of Columbia. This motion is just a means to get credentialed to practice law in this court on a one-off basis.

Far too boring to pay attention to, right?

I just want to point out the list of defendants in this document. According to what I read, the case is Corwin Teltschik vs. Williams & Jensen, PLLC, Barbara Wixon Bonfiglio, John McGahns, Meredith Kelley, Robert J. Martinez, and James W. Ellis.

Huh?

Two of those names don't appear on the original lawsuit. Who is John McGahns? I'm guessing that John McGahns is some sort of corrupted version of Don McGahn, but Don McGahn had been dismissed from the suit by the time this motion was filed. Also, James W. Ellis wasn't a defendant in the original lawsuit. Mr. Ellis was the executive director of ARMPAC. Again, I'm guessing here, but I wonder if Mr. Teltschik thought about naming Mr. Ellis as a defendant at one time. According to what I've read, it was Mr. Ellis and/or Tom DeLay who hired Don McGahn to defend ARMPAC.

My tea leaves are awfully tiny here. I may be reading too much into them.

International Baccalaureate Harms Aspiring Engineer

I've mentioned Saginaw Twp., Mich. before. Combined, Saginaw Twp. and the city of Saginaw have about 100,000 people. Although I lived quite a distance north of Saginaw, I know Saginaw Twp. very well. When I was in high school, Saginaw Twp. schools had two Class B high schools (second highest classification in Michigan), Saginaw Eisenhower and Saginaw MacArthur. I competed against Sag Twp. schools in high school athletics. To me, kids in Sag Twp. were big city rich kids. Over the years, my perception of both "big city" and "rich" have changed.

[In elementary school, I couldn't believe how big Saginaw was. Next to the Saginaw Civic Center, there was (if you can believe this) a building, the sole purpose of which was to park cars inside of it. My 10-year-old eyes couldn't believe that such a building could exist. By the time I was in high school, Saginaw continued to inspire awe. The traffic lights there didn't even blink beginning at 11 p.m.]

This article in the Saginaw News tells me two things. First, the kids in Mid-Michigan still dream big. And second, my position that the International Baccalaureate Program harms aspiring engineers is accurate:

High school graduation is a year away, but James Shinners has his heart set on winning admission to the University of Michigan College of Engineering.

The 17-year-old Heritage High School junior had plans to stack his senior class schedule with tough courses: second-year Advanced Placement calculus. Human anatomy. Advanced Placement physics. Fifth-year Spanish.

There's one problem, the honor student says: He can't take them all.

I admire young Mr. Shinners. He knows what he wants and he is willing to work hard to achieve what he wants. So what problem is so big that it won't allow him to take the challenging courses he wants to take?

Four of the classes that Shinners wanted are offered twice a day at Heritage, meaning he'll have to pick two, then dual-enroll at Delta College to take the others.

The problem here isn't 100% clear to me, but there is some sort of scheduling problem. While I doubt that Calculus II will be too difficult for Mr. Shinners, apparently coming up with a schedule at Heritage High that includes Calc II is a bit more difficult. Mr. Shinners must travel to the local community college which is in a corn field in the middle of nowhere as I recall. Mr. Shinners shows that he is a problem-solver by finding this solution, but it shouldn't have to come to this. Why can't Heritage kids take Calc. II at their own high school?

Some students theorize that as International Baccalaureate course offerings expand at Heritage, Advanced Placement courses, and the students who take them, are getting the short shrift.

This problem is not isolated. As I've mentioned before, as IB expanded in Glen Cove, N.Y. and Painted Post, N.Y., AP classes "started to dissipate".

Why isn't Mr. Shinners content with the International Baccalaureate math offerings? Probably because Mr. Shinners knows that IB HL Math is not as rigorous as AP Calculus BC. Most colleges won't accept IB HL Math for credit in integral calculus. And since he aspires to be an engineer, integral calculus will be a necessity for Mr. Shinners. So young Mr. Shinners is a planner, too.

Like Sag Twp., my local school district is headed toward the direction of replacing the more rigorous Advanced Placement program with the less rigorous International Baccalaureate Program. It doesn't make sense to Mr. Shinner; it doesn't make sense to me. Schools should challenge their students to the students' ability. Unfortunately, that position doesn't seem universal.

In case Mr. Shinners comes across this post, I have some advice for him. After my junior year of high school, I was a young aspiring engineer just like you are now. My academic ability was my ticket out of Mid-Michigan. I couldn't wait to get that ticket punched, probably just like you feel now. For several years, I was out of Mid-Michigan and never thought twice about the place. Then I had kids. At that point, I realized what a great place Mid-Michigan is. Like you, I'm a problem-solver, but I have yet to figure out how to get back to the Saginaw Valley. I suspect you'll find yourself in that position someday. Hopefully, you'll be able to solve that problem that I can't seem to solve.

Who is Meredith Kelley?

Meredith G. Kelley

I've mentioned Meredith Kelley before. Ms. Kelley is an associate at the white shoe law/lobbying firm of Williams & Jensen. Ms. Kelley is currently a defendant in the Curious Case of Corwin Teltschik. Ms. Kelley is the person who signed the Conciliatory Agreement with the Federal Election Commission ending the inquiry into ARMPAC and Corwin Teltschik (in his official capacity of treasurer of ARMPAC).

Yeah, yeah. We knew that. What's new?

Ms. Kelley is treasurer to several PACs, just like her senior colleague, Barbara Bonfiglio was. In fact, some of Ms. Kelley's clients overlap with former clients of Ms. Bonfiglio. Let's look at a few of the PACs where Ms. Kelley serves as treasurer. This list is not intended to be exhaustive ... it is what I found in ten minutes of research.

==

Rich PAC
The delightfully named "Rich PAC" is the leadership PAC of Republican former California Rep. Richard Pombo. Former Rep. Pombo was quite close to Jack Abramoff. I attributed Rep. Pombo's general election loss in 2006 to the links to Mr. Abramoff. Specifically, Mr. Pombo was a little too interested in whether or not the federal government recognized the Mashpee Wampanoag, an Indian tribe client of Mr. Abramoff that was located in Massachusetts, several thousand miles from Mr. Pombo's district.

The Record (San Joaquin, Calif.) reports that Ms. Bonfiglio was the former treasurer of Rich PAC until she left Williams and Jensen in early 2006:

Until Tuesday, Pombo's Rich PAC was run by Barbara Bonfiglio of the mega-lobbying firm Williams & Jensen. Bonfiglio was a lobbyist until 2001 and is an authority on election law. She has managed 31 separate political action committees, according to the Center for Public Integrity. Federal records show Bonfiglio was also treasurer for former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's leadership PAC.

Bonfiglio could not be reached for comment.

Pombo spokesman Brian Kennedy said she was not fired. Bonfiglio quit Williams & Jensen to pursue other interests, Kennedy said.

"Bonfiglio quit Williams & Jensen to pursue other interests"? It appears to me that the Wall Street Journal is suggesting that lobbying reform may have influenced Ms. Bonfiglio to pursue those other interests. (Ms. Bonfiglio landed on her feet as counsel to drug maker Pfizer.)

==

Future Leaders PAC

I hate how PACs are named. What is the Future Leaders PAC? It is the leadership PAC for Rep. Jerry Lewis (R-Calif), and Ms. Kelley is treasurer.

Rep. Lewis has had his own brushes with scandal. This 2006 article from the San Bernardino (Calif.) Sun indicates that the FBI was interested in Rep. Lewis' contacts with a lobbying firm, Copeland Lowery Jacquez Denton & White. The allegation seems to center on Rep. Lewis' ability to direct hundreds of millions of dollars to clients of Copeland Lowery. As this matter is not related to Jack Abramoff, I haven't really followed it.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) links contributions from Copeland Lowery to Future Leaders PAC. Now I have an ambivalent* view of CREW, but in my opinon, CREW is able to draw a seemingly straight line between contributions from Copeland Lowery, through Future Leaders PAC, to earmarks to clients of Copeland Lowery.

* CREW needs to shake its image as a lefty organization. A good way to start is to look at Sen. Barack Obama's obvious links to convicted criminal Tony Rezko. Reprinting articles from the WaPo isn't sufficient. Where are the legal referrals CREW is so famous for?

==

Democracy Believers PAC

Another Orwellian-sounding PAC name. Is there anyone here doesn't believe in democracy? Anyone? (Oh, put down your hands. Who let the DNC Rules Committee members in here?)

The Democracy Believers PAC is the leadership PAC of Rep. Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-Fla.) if it wasn't obvious. And Ms. Kelley is treasurer

==

America's Foundation PAC

Given the name, I'm sure the politician behind this PAC is obvious. (/sarcasm). America's Foundation PAC is the leadership PAC of former Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Penn.). Ms. Kelley was treasurer of America's Foundation during the 2006 election cycle. However, someone else is listed as treasurer as of the 2008 cycle.

A couple of other facts about America's Foundation PAC. Ms. Kelley was preceded as treasurer by Ms. Bonfiglio in the 2004 cycle. Many lobbyists from Edwin Buckham's Alexander Strategy Group (including Ed Buckham himself and Tony Rudy) contributed literally thousands and thousands of dollars to America's Foundation in the 2004 cycle.

I have criticized Mr. Santorum's abuse of charities before. Guess who was treasurer of Santorum's Operation Good Neighbor charity? Why Barbara Bonfiglio of course!

==========================

Ms. Meredith Kelley is no stranger to campaign finance. In fact, the depth of her experience probably means she has quite a level of expertise. And remember, it was Ms. Kelley who signed the Conciliatory Agreement with the FEC on behalf of ARMPAC and Corwin Teltschik.

Anti-Corruption Candidate wins CA-04 Primary

From the Wall Street Journal's John Fund:

Mr. McClintock trounced former Congressman Doug Ose 54%-39%, winning all of the nine counties in the solidly GOP district. Mr. Ose spent nearly $3 million of his own money slamming Mr. McClintock as an "obstructionist" who rejected retiring GOP incumbent John Doolittle's success in bringing home earmarked federal dollars. Voters were given a clear contrast between Mr. Ose's "effectiveness" argument versus Mr. McClintock's pledge not to "fight for table scraps" from Washington. "Earmarks aren't only bankrupting our nation, they are corrupting our Congress," Mr. McClintock told voters. "An earmarked project winds up costing the community that gets it far more in taxes in the long run."

By mentioning Congressional corruption, Mr. McClintock was alluding to ethical problems that forced Rep. Doolittle's retirement this year. The FBI raided the congressman's home last year as part of a probe into allegations that his wife Julie received money from lobbyist-turned-felon Jack Abramoff in exchange for political favors for Abramoff's clients. Mr. Doolittle insists he and his wife will be cleared.

Mr. Doolittle had built a local political empire by excoriating liberals while bringing home federal bacon. He once told me that he marveled over how well Democrats and Republicans got along on the Appropriations Committee he sat on: "It's because we so often have the same priorities" – namely, spending other people's money.

"Spending other people's money"? I think that means spending my money. And the link between earmarks and corruption has been apparent to me since my beginning at the old place.

At any rate, I'm pleased to see the voters in CA-04 return to principle. Rep. Doolittle and what he represents has been in Congress too long.

Wrapping up with John Fund:

When it comes to federal spending, Republican grassroots voters may have given their Washington leaders a pass in previous years. That may be changing. They've nominated John McCain, who's pledged to veto all earmarks and called for repeal of the Medicare prescription drug entitlement. And this week in California, they've made their preference known for a candidate who campaigned explicitly on a no-pork federal diet.

June 4: Motion Filed to Include McGahn in Teltschik Lawsuit

Via ElectionLawBlog we learn of today's BNA Money & Politics Reporter (subscription reqd):

The disgruntled former treasurer of former Rep. Tom DeLay's (R-Texas) "leadership" political action committee is trying to again involve Donald McGahn in a lawsuit charging that the PAC's attorneys mishandled a Federal Election Commission enforcement case...

McGahn was dismissed from Teltschik's lawsuit last year after it was first filed in federal court in Texas. The court said it had no jurisdiction over McGahn, a resident of the Washington area.

However, the case was subsequently transferred to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia early this year. Attorneys for Teltschik filed a motion in that court June 4 to reconsider McGahn's dismissal from the case, arguing that the jurisdiction issue was resolved by the transfer of the case (Teltschik v. Williams & Jensen, D. D.C., Civil No. 08-89, motion filed 6/4/08).

(I like how the Money & Politics Reporter uses some of the same verbiage I did. Corwin Teltschik "disgruntled"?

... more to come with analysis ...

===

More from the Money & Politics Reporter:

McGahn's attorney, [Robert] Kelner, said the latest motion would be opposed and that he was "very confident" U.S. District Judge Henry Kennedy would not allow McGahn back into the case.

Kelner said that the judge in Texas who dismissed McGahn from the case had indicated that the claims against him were "weak." The attorney also noted that the judge in Texas, U.S. District Judge Melinda Harmon, refused to dismiss claims against Williams & Jensen, instead transferring the case to Washington.

My first thought when I read this statement from Robert Kelner was that Mr. Kelner was overstating how strong Judge Harmon's language was in the order to dismiss. After all, Judge Harmon dismissed Mr. McGahn from the case due to jurisdictional issues. And from Mr. McGahn's Motion to Dismiss (p. 9), it appears that he thinks this case should be adjudicated in Washington DC:

[V]enue is not proper in [the Southern] District [of Texas]. None of the defendants is a Texas resident. Moreover, none of the events or omissions giving rise to Teltschik's claims occurred in Texas. Instead, the events at issue in this case occurred in Washington, D.C., meaning that venue would be proper if the case were brought there. Thus, venue is improper here, and the Court should dismiss the case. Alternatively, the Court should transfer the case to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (the "D.C. District Court").

Sure Mr. McGahn made other arguments as to why he should be dismissed from the Texas lawsuit, but Judge Harmon only ruled on the issue of jurisdiction. Mr. McGahn, through his attorneys seems to suggest that the jurisdictional issue could be fixed by merely transferring the case to Washington, which Mr. Teltschik has successfully done. Since the issue of jurisdiction has been fixed, there is no reason to keep Mr. McGahn off the case, right?

Not so fast.

Even though Judge Harmon dismissed the case on jurisdictional grounds, it seems to this non-lawyer that she made a lot of conclusions regarding the substance of the case in her order granting dismissal:

Plaintiff states that the Defendants "accus[ed] him of criminal conduct and confess[ed] judgment -- without authorization -- against him." Plaintiff also states that Defendants misappropriated his name and reputation and caused a Conciliation Agreement to be entered into that subjects him to action by the State Bar of Texas. The court accepts as true, for the purposes of this Motion, Plaintiff's allegation that McGahn negotiated the Conciliation Agreement. However, the Conciliation Agreement was signed by Rhonda J. Vosdingh, Associate General Counsel for Enforcement at the FEC, and Defendant Kelley; it was not signed by McGahn, and his name appears nowhere on the document. The Conciliation Agreement was published by the FEC.

None of the Plaintiff's allegations concern publication of any defamatory statements by McGahn himself. Plaintiff alleges no facts supporting the theory that McGahn himself accused the Plaintiff of criminal conduct, confessed judgment on Plaintiff's behalf, agreed with the FEC that Plaintiff committed any crimes or was involved in criminal activity, caused the Conciliation Agreement to be entered, or directed Defendant Kelley to sign the Agreement. McGahn's negotiation of the Conciliation Agreement did not create a risk of publication of defamatory statements; the complaint against Plaintiff and ARMPAC and the FEC's subsequent investigation created the risk. Plaintiff has not alleged facts showing that McGahn directed anyone to publish defamatory statements about Plaintiff.

Citations omitted

Those two paragraphs are pretty powerful. Judge Harmon is basically saying that even if we accept everything that Mr. Teltschik alleges, it doesn't appear that Mr. McGahn has done anything to harm Mr. Teltschik.

Mr. McGahn may find himself added back as a defendant since even his lawyers argued this case should have been filed in Washington, DC all along. At the same time, due to Judge Harmon's discussion about the substance of this case, I think it is less likely that Mr. McGahn will be found liable in this case today than I thought yesterday. Judge Harmon seemed prepared to agree with Mr. McGahn that Mr. Teltschik's lawsuit failed to state a claim against Mr. McGahn. Interestingly, it also appears to me that Judge Harmon would not be so generous to Meredith Kelley (who signed the Conciliatory Agreement) or her employer, Williams and Jensen.

Although Mr. McGahn's Motion to Dismiss deftly avoided any direct suggestion that the real liability in this case rests on Williams & Jensen, this reader certainly came to the conclusion that W&J was more culpable than Mr. McGahn. Two days ago, I wondered if there was a divergence of interests between Mr. McGahn and the W&J defendants. Perhaps this is the potential fault line.

Enter: Tom DeLay ... plus ... More Don McGahn

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) helpfully posts the transfer order (.pdf) moving the Teltschik case from Galveston to Washington, DC. Here's what I found interesting:

==

DeLay Family as Witnesses

US District Judge Melinda Harmon explains why the Southern District of Texas is not the proper jurisdiction for this case. From pages 4-5:

The majority of records concerning this case are also likely to be in Washington, D.C., where W&J [Williams & Jensen] has its office and where the FEC is located. Although Plaintiff names members of the DeLay family as likely witnesses, other W&J attorneys and FEC employees, all located in Washington, are also likely witnesses.

Emphasis added

Oooh! Please tell me it is true! Tom DeLay under oath regarding ARMPAC activities. And who are the other "DeLay family" members who might be witnesses? Recall that Christine DeLay personally asked Corwin Teltschik to accept the position of treasurer at ARMPAC. She might need to testify. And we have those pesky "retroactive" "payroll" checks to Dani DeLay Ferro that ignited my interest in this case in the first place.

I have never so eagerly awaited discovery in my life. I assume that the DeLay family members' testimony is relevant even though Don McGahn is no longer a defendant. We also learn from the CREW documents that W&J, Barbara Bonfiglio, Robert Martinez and Meredith Kelley have an outstanding motion to dismiss from October 5, 2007 (page 11 of the CREW .pdf). Hopefully this case will go forward. Unfortunately, I have no clue when discovery may take place. For that matter, unless the MSM begins to show an interest in this case, I'm not sure how we'll learn anything from discovery even if it does take place.

==

Don McGahn and Alignment of Interests

On pages 8-10 of the CREW .pdf, we learn who is representing the defendants in this case.

Williams and Jensen, Barbara Wixon Bonfiglio, Robert J. Martinez and Meredith G. Kelley are all represented by a local Houston firm named Chamberlain Hrdlicka. Now recall that the proceedings documented in the CREW .pdf were taking place here in southeast Texas. It is not surprising that these defendants chose a local Houston firm. Although I have no evidence of it, I suspect these defendants have since retained Washington-based counsel now that the case is in the US District Court for the District of Columbia.

Mr. McGahn is different, though. He has retained DC-based attorneys from Covington Burling. I may be making a mountain out of a molehill here, but why does Mr. McGahn have different counsel from the rest of the defendants? Is it possible that the interests of Mr. McGahn are significantly different from the rest of the defendants? My speculation that there may not be an alignment of interests among all the defendants my be off base. Even if it is accurate, I can't paint a picture on how these diverging interests may play out, particularly since Mr. McGahn isn't even a defendant anymore.

The CREW documents provide evidence to what I already believed about how Mr. McGahn was removed as a defendant. On November 30, 2007, Mr. McGahn prevailed in a motion to dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction, Improper Venue and Failure to State a Claim. I don't have Judge Harmon's order on that motion, but based on what Judge Harmon wrote in the transfer order, I suspect that she found that Texas wasn't the proper place to file suit against Mr. McGahn. Judge Harmon's order to transfer the case to Washington, DC seems to indicate that Washington is the proper place for such a suit. Based on the CREW documents, it is clear to me that Mr. McGahn was dismissed without prejudice.

Representative #4: Rep. Ernest Istook (R-Okla.)

From the Associated Press:

A one-time top aide to former Oklahoma Rep. Ernest Istook pleaded guilty Monday to a conspiracy to defraud the House as part of the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal.

John Albaugh admitted in federal court in Washington that he accepted meals and sports and concert tickets, along with other perks, from lobbyists in exchange for official favors...

Referred to as "Representative 4" in court documents, Istook used the lobbyist's skybox tickets for concerts. He later donated the campaign money to charity and paid for the seats...

Istook was among 33 lawmakers who accepted Abramoff-related money and wrote letters urging the Bush administration to reject a casino proposal that Abramoff's clients opposed. He has said the letter was consistent with his position against gambling and unrelated to the campaign contributions.

Court documents depict Albaugh acting in close contact with "Lobbyist C," asking him for sports tickets, fundraisers for his boss and other favors. In return Lobbyist C, identified as a co-conspirator, gets help with money for transportation projects for his clients...

Lobbyist C is not identified by name, but details in the documents make clear that it is Kevin Ring, a one-time aide to Rep. John Doolittle, R-Calif., who later went to work for Abramoff...

The documents also allege that Istook called Abramoff in 2003 to thank him in advance for use of one of Abramoff's suites at FedEx Field in Landover, Md., for a fundraising event. During the call, the government alleges, Istook asked Abramoff which projects his clients wanted in the upcoming transportation bill.

The documents refer to an e-mail Abramoff sent to his lobby colleagues saying Istook "had basically asked what we want in the transportation bill," and instructing the lobbyists to "make sure we load up our entire Christmas list."

The documents allege that four of Lobbyist C's clients later received at least $1 million each in the transportation bill.

Things aren't looking good for Representative #4, Rep. Ernest Istook. Let's take the opportunity to review who the Justice Department has referred to as Representatives #1-3:

Representative #1: Former Rep. Bob Ney (R-Ohio) -- Pleaded Guilty
Representative #2: Former Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Fort Bend County) -- Not charged
Representative #3: Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) -- Not charged

Poor Rep. Istook. He's got the Justice Department hounding him and he didn't even get to play golf in Scotland like Representative #1-3.

The pincers of the Justice Department seem to be poised to clamp down on Kevin Ring (a.k.a Lobbyist C), too. Let's look at who Lobbyist A and Lobbyist B are, too:

Lobbyist A: Jack Abramoff -- Pleaded Guilty
Lobbyist B: Ed Buckham -- Not charged

More about this later...

Williams & Jensen, Don McGahn and Corwin Teltschik

Update June 3, 2008

Welcome ElectionLawBlog visitors. I often mention through the course of my blog that I am not a lawyer, so take my legal conclusions with a fistful of salt. Also, I want to make it clear that the lawsuit I reference here was the one filed in Galveston, Texas back in August 2007. Original lawsuit (.pdf) courtesy: CREW. Two months ago, I observed that this case had moved to Washington, DC. At that time, Don McGahn was no longer a defendant. As CREW noted, Mr. McGahn was removed as a defendant due to jurisdictional issues. Perhaps the reason the case was moved to DC was to remove those jurisdictional barriers.

I've placed two tags on this post. If you're only interested in what I have to say about Mr. McGahn's role in this matter, click "McGahn". For a wider discussion on the Corwin Teltschik case, click "W+J" for Williams and Jensen.

I have more to say about this case, so check back in a couple of days or so.

==

[Beginning of original post dated June 1, 2008]

I re-read the lawsuit filed in Galveston by Corwin Teltschik. I know that this lawsuit has been re-filed in Washington, DC, but to my knowledge, that version of the lawsuit has never appeared on the internet. So be aware that I'm looking at something that may be dated.

I have a few observations I'd like to make about this case:

==

Barbara Bonfiglio as Treasurer

According to paragraph 4 of the lawsuit, a woman named Mona Stevens was the original treasurer of ARMPAC. I've been able to determine that Ms. Stevens was a former staff member in Tom DeLay's Congressional office. On April 4, 1995, Ms. Stevens was removed as treasurer and replaced by Barbara Bonfiglio. Less than four weeks later, Christine DeLay was in Corwin Teltschik's office trying to convince Mr. Teltschik to become ARMPAC's treasurer. Ms. DeLay gave some lame inducements to Mr. Teltschik such as Mr. Teltschik could help raise money for ARMPAC from Sugar Land, but apparently this was enough for Mr. Teltschik to accept the job. On May 11, 1995, Mr. Teltschik became treasurer of ARMPAC and Ms. Bonfiglio became assistant treasurer.

I want to know why Ms. Bonfiglio couldn't remain as treasurer. According to this article, Ms. Bonfiglio was treasurer to no less than 31 political action committees. Campaign finance law was an area of particular expertise for Ms. Bonfiglio. So why couldn't Ms. Bonfiglio remain treasurer for ARMPAC?

I don't have an answer to that question. Out of dozens and dozens of political action committees, there was something unique about ARMPAC. ARMPAC needed a naive treasurer. And it got one. I'd like to know why ARMPAC needed a naive treasurer.

==

A Bank Associated with Jack Abramoff

I find paragraph 26 of the lawsuit to be somewhat odd:

On October 9, 2006, Williams & Jensen faxed to Plaintiff some of the requested formation documents and sample bank statements. Plaintiff learned for the first time that Bonfiglio had caused other bank accounts to be opened in ARMPAC's name at two different banks - one of which was associated in the press with Jack Abramoff...

OK, I get that Bonfiglio was essentially the de facto treasurer at ARMPAC. She opened bank accounts and such. But what is this reference to Jack Abramoff? Certainly not all accounts at banks associated with Jack Abramoff are suspect. What is the significance of this? On one hand, I'd suggest that the reference to Jack Abramoff was some sort of non-sequitur, but on the other hand, I doubt lawyers typically put non-sequiturs in the factual sections of their lawsuits.

Conclusion: I have no idea what the significance of ARMPAC having a bank account at a bank associated with Jack Abramoff is.

==

Who was Don McGahn's Client?

In paragraph 27 of the Teltschik lawsuit, Mr. Teltschik refers to the Conciliation Agreement and cover letter (.pdf) sent by the Federal Election Commission to Don McGahn. Mr. McGahn had been designated counsel to ARMPAC on September 30, 2005 in order to handle this crisis with the Federal Election Commission. Somewhere along the line, Mr. McGahn acquired authorization to represent Mr. Teltschik in this matter. Mr. Teltschik asserts that he never gave such authorization (paragraph 23). Nevertheless, it appears that the FEC thought that Mr. McGahn represented Mr. Teltschik. According to the cover letter, "[T]he Federal Election Commission accepted the signed conciliation agreement on [Mr. McGahn's] clients' behalf ..." That is "clients" plural. Two or more clients. Well, there were only two defendants in MUR 5675: ARMPAC and Mr. Teltschik. If Mr. McGahn had clients plural, he must have represented them both.

The really odd thing, though, is that in paragraph 28, Mr. Teltschik asserts that he received a draft response to the FEC from Robert Martinez, the managing director at Williams & Jensen. If the characterization in Mr. Teltschik's lawsuit is accurate, the draft response to the FEC defended only ARMPAC and not Mr. Teltschik. It is not clear to me who authored the draft response to the FEC. It could have been Mr. McGahn, but it could have been some lawyer at Williams & Jensen since it was Mr. Martinez who had a copy of the draft. At any rate, Mr. Teltschik claims he received an adverse judgment by default from the FEC because he was inappropriately defended. It is not clear to me how Mr. Teltschik knows that the final version of the response to the FEC did not defend him since Mr. Teltschik only seems to have seen an earlier draft of the response.

The bottom line is that Mr. McGahn seems to have accepted Mr. Teltschik as a client. Mr. Teltschik claims that he never authorized Mr. McGahn to represent him. Furthermore, Mr. Teltschik seems to claim that Mr. McGahn was far more interested in defending ARMPAC than defending Mr. Teltschik. We are a long way from settling all these facts, but if they are true, why did Mr. McGahn defend only ARMPAC?

==

Correction

Back on August 8, 2007, I wrote:

Also notice the timing of Mr. Teltschik's discovery of the check to Dani DeLay Ferro. It was November 2006, just nine months ago. The investigation into suspicious payments from ARMPAC to DeLay family members including Dani DeLay Ferro was well underway by then. I'm betting that Mr. Teltschik learned of the check to Dani DeLay Ferro when the Justice Department asked him about it. I don't think it is unreasonable to suggest that Mr. Teltschik is unhappy about that check. Mr. Teltschik is obviously disgruntled, and if he's telling the truth, his disgruntlement is justified. I just wonder how cooperative he's been with the Justice Department -- if he knows anything at all.

After reviewing the lawsuit once more, I know how Mr. Teltschik became aware of the "retroactive" "payroll" checks to Dani DeLay Ferro, James Ellis and Chris Perkins. It is clear to me from paragraph 29 that Mr. Teltschik learned of the checks when William & Jensen's Robert Martinez sent documents detailing the checks on November 7, 2006. I no longer think it is possible that Mr. Teltschik learned of the checks in question from the Justice Department.