The growing scandal centered on disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff has drawn in U.S. Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D.-R.I., who received large contributions from several Indian tribes represented by Abramoff and took money from a former member of Abramoff's lobbying team. But Kennedy has not been linked to the ongoing corruption probe, and his office denies any direct connection to Abramoff.
Abramoff, formerly a Republican lobbyist in Washington, pled guilty Jan. 3 to three felony counts related to his illegal lobbying activities. As part of his plea bargain, Abramoff agreed to help federal prosecutors uncover the extent of his influence on Capitol Hill. Several members of Congress may face indictments as a result, including U.S. Rep. Bob Ney, R.-Ohio.
Kennedy, whose district includes Brown's campus, and his political action committee, Rhode Island PAC, have received a total of $42,500 since 1998 from six tribes that were clients of Abramoff, according to the Center for Responsible Politics. Last December, the Washington Post put the total amount Kennedy had received from Abramoff-connected sources at $131,000, which would make him the second highest individual recipient - and the number-one Democratic recipient - of Abramoff-linked funds in Congress.
Kennedy received no money directly from Abramoff, according to Federal Electoral Commission records. But in September 2004 Kennedy received a $500 contribution from Edward Ayoob, who had previously worked for Abramoff at Greenberg Traurig, a Washington-based lobbying firm. Abramoff left the firm in March of that year.
Ayoob - a former aide to Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., who now works for another lobbying firm, Barnes and Thornburg - also contributed $250 to Kennedy's father, Sen. Edward Kennedy, D.-Mass., in July 2005.
Shaun Richardson, Patrick Kennedy's chief of staff, said Ayoob made the contribution while he was lobbying Kennedy over whether the National Labor Relations Board has jurisdiction on Indian reservations, and Kennedy voted against Ayoob's position despite the contribution. Richardson said there was no significance to the contribution, noting that Ayoob "had not been working for Abramoff at that point."
The donations to Kennedy's campaign and PAC from American Indian tribes reflect Kennedy's commitment to Indian issues in the House of Representatives, Richardson said.
"Congressman Kennedy has personal relationships with over 100 tribes across the country, and the contributions he received from these tribes are based on them wanting to support him in his re-election efforts," he said.
Kennedy co-founded the Native American Caucus in 1997 and has long been linked with American Indian issues, including support for casino gaming on tribal lands. Since 1999, Kennedy has sponsored or co-sponsored at least 24 bills dealing with Indian tribes, according to the Library of Congress.
Kennedy has long been vocal in his support for American Indians - on the floor of the House in July 1999, Kennedy asked, "How the hell do members (of Congress) think we got the country that we are living in? We struck agreements with Native American tribes to get the land. It was predicated based upon an agreement, and this country has never lived up to that agreement. It is why we have so much of Native American country living in destitute poverty," according to the Congressional Record.
Richardson said that Kennedy - a strong fundraiser and former chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee - has never had a relationship with Abramoff, and unlike several others members of Congress who have returned money from Abramoff or his clients, Kennedy will not return his tribal contributions.
"These contributions had absolutely nothing to do with Jack Abramoff. (Kennedy) has never met Jack Abramoff. (Abramoff) has never lobbied the Congressman or his office. There's absolutely no relationship between the two at all," Richardson said.
But some Republicans see a different story.
"If it walks like a duck and it quacks like a duck, what are we talking about here?" asked Chuck Newton, director of communications for the Rhode Island Republican Party.
"It seems pretty clear that Abramoff's contributions didn't necessarily come from his checkbook, but from his clients, to members on both sides of the aisle," he said. "And to say that Abramoff had no connection here is a bit of a stretch."
Chastising Kennedy for not returning the contributions, Newton speculated that the scandal might damage Kennedy's political fortunes in Rhode Island.
"Clearly, ranking as high as he does on every published list of people with ties to Abramoff, I don't see how he can remain credible to his constituents," he said.
But Richardson rejected the suggestion that Kennedy will be hurt by the Abramoff scandal.
"This is a Republican scan-dal," he said, noting the fact that Abramoff and most of those linked to him are Republicans. "I don't think because you take political contributions from Native American tribes that you should be thrown in with the Tom DeLays and Jack Abramoffs of the world," he added.
Darrell West, professor of political science and author of "Patrick Kennedy: The Rise to Power," agreed the scandal probably poses little threat to Kennedy.
"I don't think it poses a political problem for him," West said. "He's not directly involved. The members of Congress who have the greatest problems were accepting gifts and free trips from Abramoff, and Kennedy is not in that category."
Kennedy, first elected to the House in 1994, was re-elected in 2004 with 64 percent of the vote, defeating Republican and former Navy SEAL David Rogers. West said the scandal should have little effect on Kennedy's re-election campaign this November.
"It doesn't look like it's going be a big issue in Rhode Island, and so far Kennedy doesn't even have an announced opponent, so right now he has a free ride in the election," West said.
Ocean State Republicans, clearly, hope otherwise.
"I think Patrick Kennedy has to be careful about the arrogance of power," Newton said. "At some point in time, that will come back to bite you."
