Living Well Off The Fat Of The Land : Indymedia Colombia

In the United States, at a news conference in the Arkansas state Capitol on Thursday, state Governor Huckabee said he wants "as aggressive a policy on [junk food in schools] as we can possibly implement." (France has banned vending machines in schools beginning in September 2005). But such a move, Huckabee explained, should only be based on "clear data" that are now unavailable. He said he wanted to study the problem. Last year Governor Huckabee said he knew of no studies linking a child’s weight with access to vending-machine junk food.

Huckabee’s press conference was held to discuss his reactions to a committee’s recommendations for improving food and physical education for schoolchildren in Arkansas public schools.

Governor Huckabee apparently was unmoved by the argument by Rep. Jay Bradford, D-White Hall, the chairman of the House’s Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee, who questioned the need for the Governor to study what he called an "elementary fact": "A soft drink that is 100 percent sugar certainly is a great deal more fattening than a soft drink that has no sugar in it."

The committee has already "studied it and studied it and studied it," Bradford said.

The Arkansas Governor had previously written in his news column that he wishes that Arkansas school districts would follow the example of the physical education teacher who taught aerobics to his middle school kids. After attending one of the teacher's seminars, another teacher, reports the Governor, convinced Coca-Cola to donate some "high-tech cardiovascular exercise equipment exercise equipment."

In its decision, an ethics panel ruled on the legality of Coca-Cola's donation of some low-tech cardiovascular exercise equipment -- to the Governor. In 2001, Coca-Cola gave Governor Huckabee a canoe valued $500 and the Governor did not report it.

A Coca-Cola executive named Steve Powell testified that the canoe had a Coca-Cola logo on it and the purpose of the gift was to get free publicity. In 2001 alone, Huckabee reportedly also took expensive watches from a grocery magnate.

"Arkansas governor fined $250 for accepting gift from Coca-Cola," The Post and Courier (Associated Press), January 18, 2003

http://www.charleston.net/stories/011803/wor_18ark.shtml

The Governor, through his Attorney Crass, sued the state ethics regulators to stop an investigation of a potential violation of gift rules and to overturn the ban on accepting gifts over $100. The Governor challenged the rules in Court and an appellate court ruled in his favor on the canoe -- finding that there was no proof that the gift of the canoe related to performance of his job. The Court found no evidence that it was a reward for how he did his job.

As a matter of sound policy, such gifts must be prohibited. The health of schoolchildren is related to a Governor's performance of his job. The Governor of Illinois, for example, took an initiative and led the charge toward a ban on soda in schools. It is not merely a matter of what a Governor has done. It is a matter of what the Governor of Arkansas has NOT done. Do you think Governor Huckabee spent much time paddling in his Coca-Cola canoe contemplating banning soda in Arkansas high schools?

What he has not done is stop Coca-Cola from promoting sugary syrup to our kids in schools. He instead has adopted the industry position and publicly urged that everyone should just get more exercise and that the association between empty calories and obesity should be further studied.

Coca-Cola has a long tradition of gift giving to high officials. For example, according to the Atlanta Journal Constitution, in 1994, Coca-Cola paid $1,200 to have Zel Miller, then Governor of Georgia, to listen to country music in Branson, Mo. Miller served as Chairman of Education Commission of the States. The next year, Coca-Cola paid $500 to treat the State Agricultural Commissioner Tommy Irvin four tickets to the Dayton 500, that then were reimbursed by Irvin following a reporter's inquiry.

Source: Mark Sherman, "...Special access for officials 'bad idea', attorney general says." The Atlanta Journal Constitution, May 12, 1995, p. 1A.

Last year, it was reported that in Tennessee, Coca-Cola gives legislators expensive tickets.

One television report explained:

"And what about expensive gifts like Super Bowl tickets? Listen to what state Sen. John Ford, D-Memphis, tells a group in a Capitol Hill bar.

"So how do you get all these tickets?" someone asks.

"He knows the right people," explains a nearby lobbyist.

"No, different times -- Coca-Cola most of the time," Ford responds.

"NewsChannel 5 Investigates: Perks of Power," December 10, 2003

http://www.newschannel5.com/content/investigates/1136.asp

In 2001, Super Bowl tickets with face values of hundreds of dollars were going for $2,000 or more outside the stadium, if at all. If someone treated us to Super Bowl tickets and gave us a canoe, we likely would not think to ban their flagship product from school property during the school day either.

Both Coca-Cola (the syrup maker) and Coca-Cola Enterprises (the bottler) have a number for feedback. The Coca-Cola number is 1 800-GET-COKE. Do you know of a local politician who got free tickets to an athletic event? Do as Coca-Cola has asked and call them to report it. This way, the next time a Coca-Cola CEO gives a university address on the importance of corporate ethics, he can be asked why he didn't take action about improper gift-giving to politiicians even though he was on notice of it.

Oh, and ask them if they reimburse the expense the cost of such tickets as a cost of doing business.

In March 1998, a Coca-Cola Enterprises Vice-President Robert Lanz took his long-time friend Carl McCall and his wife to the Knicks v. Bulls game on or about March 8, 1998. The same month, the Vice-President was negotiating the agreement that would launch "pouring rights" at our schools. The former Comptroller in October 2002, through a spokesman, said he did not report the gift because they were long-time friends.

The New York State Comptroller had concurrent jurisdiction over the lawfulness of "pouring rights" agreements -- for example, whether such an agreement could be 10 years and bind prevent future Board members from going soda-free; whether the contracts needed to be competitively bid; whether non-soda companies could be excluded from selling healthy beverages on campus; whether 6-foot high electronically backlit display panels could advertise to the captive audience of kids; whether price increases were limited to cost-of-living increases; and whether an exclusive license be granted that in the past had always been denied yearbook salesmen and class ring salesmen.

At the time, Mr. McCall was involved in an audit of a key "pouring rights" agreement at Stony Brook involving Coca-Cola and the irregular use of the money to fund sports scholarships (as well as such operations throughout SUNY). The audit report, Report 98-S-38, released the next year in 1999, found that at least $5.5 million resulting from ten-year pouring rights agreements bypassed Stony Brook and was treated contrary to financial accounting standards. The Comptroller found that the Foundation, which received the money, was not even a party to the agreement.

http://nysosc3.osc.state.ny.us/audits/allaudits/093000/98s38.htm

One commentator on the Coca-Cola/Huckabee case in Arkansas, insightfully asks: "Was the gift tax-deductible?"

Max Brantley, Arkansas Times, April 12, 2002, Huckabee's Lewinsky

http://www.arktimes.com/max/041202brantley.html

Relatedly, did Coca-Cola Enterprises reimburse Vice-President Lanz for the expense of the tickets for McCall and his wife? Why hasn't the present New York State Comptroller inquired as to this question of reimbursement? Why hasn't the Attorney General Eliot Spitzer?

But Coca-Cola was even more generous to his other long-time friend, powerful state majority leader Michael Bragman, with whom he was negotiating the key "pouring rights" agreement in New York State -- after which such agreements took off exponentially. A former Coca-Cola employee says that something known as the "Move Crew" would deliver equipment to his basement in the mid-1990s when it was taken "off the streets." According to the Syracuse Post-Standard, by the time Hilary Clinton visited the Bragman home in 1999, the family had two -- not just one -- Coke machines from which they could quench their thirst in the basement. A 1994 article titled "Who ever said there was no such thing as a free lunch" has a large photo of Bob Lanz and Michael Bragman and his wife coming out of a luxury hotel in Puerto Rico on their way to a tour. Who paid for the hotel? Who paid for the airfare? Who paid for the tour? Mr. Bragman's response was to belittle the question: what does it matter that they are receiving freebies in Puerto Rico -- they would be doing the same thing if back in Albany.

Who pays? I'll tell you. The kids and their health.

The General Counsel of Coca-Cola Enterprises, when I raised these issues with him, assures me that the company was scrupulous about ensuring the legality of the agreements and always seeks to act lawfully.

In connection with the pouring rights agreements, Coca-Cola Enterprises hired the real estate lawyer who represents Mr. Bragman in connection with the granting of exclusive rights to develop the Erie canal for $30,000. Mr. Bragman, long a powerful force on transportation matters in Albany, obtained sub-rights worth many tens of millions, by his own estimate. The current New York State Comptroller, Mr. Hevesi, voided the agreement. Mr. Bragman refused to disclose what he paid for the sub-rights. He says he first met the developer in Cooperstown only after the award of the exclusive rights.

Now did Mr. Bragman show Coca-Cola favoritism? Well, he certainly is a big collector of Coca-Cola memorabilia. A separate building needed to be built to house his various collections, to include baseball memorabilia and Coca-Cola memorabilia. In a television interview a couple years ago the camera panned around his office to show numerous expensive memorabilia.

According to former Coca-Cola employees, the cavernous room locally holding Coca-Cola premiums to give in the trade included snowblowers, television sets -- there were even blank American Express checks. Only the local manager had the key. For tickets to "Special Events", sales people had to go to the CCE VP of public relations.

By a letter produced through the Freedom of Information law, Mr. Bragman angrily demanded such agreements be allowed over the State Education Department's objections.

That's government for Coca-Cola, by Coca-Cola, and of Coca-Cola.

Mr. Bragman's real estate lawyer, working for Coca-Cola, provided a copy of the North Syracuse agreement to the State Education Department, whose counsel, after the lobbying by Bragman, then issued it as a "Model Agreement" and sent it out to Administrators throughout the state. The NYSED's counsel suggestion that school districts hire a lawyer to determine whether it was illegal was a bit gratuitous given that it was being circulated by Albany as a "Model Contract."

Under the pouring rights agreement, there was matching funds provided by Albany (in a ratio of nearly ten to one) that permitted a multimillion dollar stadium that was then named after Mr. Bragman. Nice work if you can get it.

The fact that Michael Bragman was Attorney General Eliot Spitzer's biggest fundraiser in Upstate New York must not be allowed stand in the way of enforcing the rule of law. Spitzer is appropriately recognized as an unprecedented champion of the public good, citizens and consumers. He recently used his bully pulpit to publicize the importance of avoiding lobbying on contracts by politicians and the importance of complying with the laws relating to gifts. But that's not enough.

The Philip Morris lobbyist was barred from lobbying in New York State for giving free tickets to athletic events. Coca-Cola should be too. At the very least, Coca-Cola's gift-giving practices should be the subject of discovery and not merely a polite phone call from the Lobby Commission's counsel. (Coca-Cola denies they still do it, though the gift to McCall has been admitted and established by documentary evidence).

The debate that the Governor Huckabee of Arkansas described in his press conference on Thursday about children and obesity has been focused on policy. But everyone has overlooked that the bad policy resulted in the failure to apply the rule of law and common-sense rules relating to good government. First, public officials should not be allowed to receive gifts from corporations that do business from the State in excess of the statutory amount. Second, companies that sell healthy beverages should not be required to sell soda to kids in order to compete to sell healthy beverages on school property. Under the present scheme orchestrated by Coca-Cola through its manipulation of the political and administrative process, that's the case. Third, corporations that give gifts to public officials in violation of the controlling state rule should be barred from lobbying officials in the state.

The public is not going to have sound policy -- and be able to safeguard the health of our kids -- until it at stops politicians from living off the fat of the land at the expense of our kids' health.

If Eliot wants to be Governor, he might start by protecting the health of our schoolchildren in our State.

Call 1-800-GET-COKE and put Coca-Cola on notice of what you know. If they fail to do anything, those officials may very well be the next out the door. (And that door has been swinging mighty fast). But at the same time, report such gift-giving to your state ethics commission, your state lobbying commission, the State Comptroller, and the State Attorney General. Enforcing the rule of law and safeguarding the health of your children begins with you. There simply is nothing more important than your child's health and well-being. You don't have to be a former employee to know which officials attended athletic events.

The new Georgia Governor, who appointed a new State ethics commission, reportedly accepts free Coca-Cola for his staff.

"Shipp: Perdue not practicing what he's preaching," November 29, 2003

http://www.onlineathens.com/stories/113003/opi_20031130005.shtml

Last year the Tennessee State Comptroller criticized the Tennessee University President for lying about having accepted Super Bowl tickets from a food service vendor and recommended that the Board of Regents impose discipline. But last I looked no one had been disciplined in Tennessee from accepting Super Bowl or other expensive tickets from Coca-Cola. Rep. Ulysses Jones, D-Memphis, called for an audit of other university programs in Tennessee. But maybe he should start with his colleagues who have even greater control over state institutions. The State audit cited violations in the university Code of Ethic and found that TSU President had Hefner lied when talking to state auditors about the Super Bowl tickets he received from Aramark, a food vendor that holds a university contract worth $3 million a year.

African-American Leaders Rally Around TSU President, Tennessean, April 18, 2004

http://www.tennessean.com/education/archives/04/04/50072572.shtml?Element_ID=50072572

One former Coca-Cola employee reports that when folks in Albany wanted a gift, they would "reverse engineer" it -- instructing how it could be given to a family member. Eliot, that's simply not something you can overlook.

Warren Buffet, of the Coca-Cola board of directors, is an icon relating to protection of shareholders from the excesses of corporate management and has come out against excessive compensation for senior executives and in favor of the expensing of options. But what has he done to demand an audit of the practice, described in the December 2003 Tennessee news report, that Coca-Cola gives free expensive tickets to politicians?

Before the Coca-Cola General Counsel Deval Patrick left at the end of the year -- announcing his departure on Easter Sunday -- perhaps he required an audit. His suggestion of an independent probe on alleged human rights abuses at the Coca-Cola bottling plant in Colombia ultlimately was rejected. A former Assistant Attorney General at the Department of Justice, he was widely known for his integrity. Perhaps he took steps to ensure that the laws relating to such gifts be followed and that corporate guidelines be followed (and that violators were disciplined).

Or perhaps the departing CEO Daft, who lectured regularly on corporate ethics, made sure an audit was done. From the vantage point of Coca-Cola's continued defense of the legality of the launching of the "pouring rights" contracts in March 1998, nothing appears to have been done. Did the General Counsel of Coca-Cola Enterprises, the bottler, request such an investigation before leaving earlier last Spring? Is his successor going to do so?

All of these senior officials have been on notice of the issue since at least October 2002, when a letter from Carl McCall to a Coca-Cola Enterprises Vice-President thanking him for his hospitality was disclosed in the New York City papers. That came out only because thousands of documents from McCall's office had been shipped off to state archives. If Coca-Cola and Coca-Cola Enterprises failed to take action on its own, then the State Comptrollers, lobbying commissions, and state ethics commissions, need to do so. The United States Department of Agriculture and others also have jurisdiction over unlawful gratuities given in connection with a contract relating to food or beverages.

The world is not going to be a better place unless and until we all do our part.