the Democratic National Committee, traveled to Tokyo on behalfrnof one of his firm’s clients, hi December 1992, in a Centerrnfor Public Integrity study entitled “The Torturers’ Lobby:rnHow Human Rights-Abusing Nations Are Represented hirnWashington,” author Pamela Brogan revealed that one of thernmost repressive governments in the world todav, Cuateniala,rnpaid Brown’s firm—Patton, Boggs & Blow—$220,000 in 1991-rn92 at the same time hundreds of Guatemalans were beingrnexecuted for political reasons.rnBrown personally represented the notorious governmentrnof I laiti under “Baby Doe” Duvalier in the early 80’s, at thernsame time he was Deputy Chairman of the Democratic Party.rnWhen questioned about this by Jack Anderson in 1989,rnBrown replied that he did not work for Duvalier, but for therngovernment of Haiti. He made a similady obnoxious assertionrnabout the effects of his work, telling the Senate CommercernCommittee in January 1993 that changes in Haiti’s humanrnrights record occurred because of his representation: “I wantedrnto do all I could to improve the lives of the people.” Itrnshould be noted that this registered lobbvist was not nominatedrnfor the Nobel Peace Prize during the years povertystrickenrnHaiti was paying an annual fee of $ ISO,000 to Brownrnand his firm.rnMany governments that regulady mutilate or murder theirrnpeople reeeie American aid and other benefits, and they cmplovrnsome of Washington’s most-connected sehmoozers tornkeep that taxpaver aid flowing. In 1991-92, the firm thatrntook in tlie most “blood” money ($14 million) from humanrnrights-abusing countries was Hill & Knowlton. The head ofrnI lill &• Knowlton’s Washington office, I loward Paster, is nowrnthe Clinton administration’s chief lobbyist on Capitol Hill.rnThe firm’s vice-chairman, Thomas Iloog—vho was an unpaidrncampaign and transition advisor to Clinton—represented thernPeople’s Republic of China after the massacre at TiananmenrnSquare.rnIt would be difficult to overstate the pervasiveness todayrnof former I’nited States officials and campaign aides workingrnfor overseas governments and companies. The singlernmost dramatic look at this phenomenon was published in thernfall of 1990, in a book called Agents of Influence b economistrnand author Pat Choatc. What was striking were the namesrnand numbers, dollar amounts and anecdotes, revealing thernextent of Japan’s lobbying efforts. As Choate wrote in thernSeptember 1990 issue of Harvard Business Review, “TodayrnJapan controls the most sophisticated and successful politicaleconomicrnmachine in the United States . . . more extensivernand effective than either U.S. political party or any U.S. industry,rnunion or special interest group.”rnAround this time, the Center for Public Integrity releasedrn”America’s Frontline Trade Officials,” a detailed look at thernWhite House Office of the U.S. Trade Representative. Thernmajor finding: since 1974, 47 percent of all former seniorrnWhite House trade officials have registered, or worked forrnfirms that have registered, with the Justice Department asrnforeign agents representing foreign companies and foreignrngON’crnmcnts. What made this study unusual was, as RobertrnKuttner wrote in the American Prospect, “the documentationrnof a pattern that pervades the entire agency , , . this revolvingrndoor is virtually the normal career pattern.” The studyrnprompted a General Accounting Office investigation, and inrnMarch 1992 the GAO released a report which found thatrnfrom 1986 to 1991, 82 former American officials registered asrnforeign agents and represented foreign interests before thernUnited States goernnient.rnAnother outcome of “America’s Frontline Trade Officials”rnwas a Justice Department ruling that informed U.S.rnTrade Representative Carta Hills that a federal criminal statuternwas being violated by some of the Bush administration’s appointmentsrnto trade advisory committees. The study had revealedrnthat several members of the US’FR Advisory Committeernsystem, with access to sensitive negotiating strategiesrnand security clearances, were simultaneously registered as foreignrnagents at the Justice Department. For example, formerrnState Department official Richard Fairbanks, who with hisrnlaw firm reeeicd more than $300,000 from 19S6 to earlyrn1990 for representing the government of Iraq (even providingrnpublic relations advice after the Iraqi bombing of the V.S.S.rnStark, in which 37 American servicemen were killed), was alsornfound to be a member of the USTR Inestment PolicyrnAdvisor) Committee on Trade.rnFormer government officials working for overseas interestsrnare not limited to USTR, of course, but permeate other traderelatedrnagencies and departments as well, including Congress.rnUnfortunately, the pattern also pervades our presidential electionrnprocess. In February 1992, the Center for Public Integrityrnpublished “Under the Influence: Presidential Candidatesrnand Their Campaign Advisers.” This was the firstrnsystematic look at unpaid policy advisors to the presidentialrncandidates. The center found that, for example, the icechairmanrnof the Bush-Quavle campaign, James Lake, was alsorna registered “foreign agent” on behalf of the owners of thernBank of Credit and Commerce International (BCCl). Fourrnpresidential campaigns—those of Clinton, Harkin, Kerrey,rnand Bush—had 31 advisors who were personally registered asrnforeign agents or whose firms were registered as foreign agents.rnIn September 1992, the Center for Public Integrity publishedrn”Private Parties: Political Party Leadership in Washington’srnMercenary Culture.” Since 1977, half oi all nationalrnparty chairmen hae received outside income—despite partyrnrules stipulating that the chairman’s position is “full-time.”rnThe Center also found that, since 1977, half the partv chairmenrnhave been registered with the Justice Department as foreignrnagents, either before or after their party tenures.rnAll of these numbers illustrate the systemic nature of thisrnsituation. It is wholly reasonable to wonder about the dynamicrnthat fosters such a bi/arre, bazaar-like atmosphere inrnwhich access and influence to power in Washington are sornreadily bought and sold. All of the well-paid participants inrnWashington’s “insidc-the-Beltway” culture—comprised ofrnthousands of lawyer-lobbyists, public relations executives,rntrade associations, public affairs specialists, consultants, andrnothers—interact eery day with federal officials in every departmentrnand agene. Government employees, both politicalrnappointees and ei’il serxants, certainly understand that thererncan be a lucratie, almost Lotto-like landing for them in “thernprivate sector.” Public service, but also the dav-to-dav activitiesrnof establishment Washington, have lost their altruisticrnpolish and noble pretense and have instead become garishrnand comniereial. How pervasive has the influence of moneyrnbecome? Can you imagine former Secretary of State DeanrnAeheson doing aidine eommereials—as former Secretary ofrnState Alexander Haig and former House Speaker Tip O’Neillrnhave done? Can you imagine former President Dwight Eisen-rnMAY 1993/1 5rnrnrn