Yet another indictment in the Jack Abramoff case...

The Justice Department has announced that Fraser Verrusio, the other Hill staffer who went on that 2003 Team-Abramoff-funded trip to the World Series -- including a trip to a strip club and a chauffeur-driven limousine -- has been charged with accepting an illegal gift, and failing to report it on his financial disclosure form.

Last November, Trevor Blackann, an aide to Sen. Kit Bond, pleaded guilty to failing to report that same trip.

Verusio was at the time a policy director on the House Transportation committee. According to the indictment, he accepted the trip in exchange for inserting into the Federal Highway bill amendments favorable to an equipment rental company, which had hired Abramoff's firm to lobby for it.

Todd Boulanger and James Hirni, two members of Abramoff's team, have already pleaded guilty in connection with the scheme.

The Transportation committee was at the time chaired by Alaska GOPer Don Young. So today's news may bring federal prosecutors closer to Young himself, whose ties to Abramoff and his firm have been amply documented.

We're guessing it won't be long before prosecutors announce a plea deal with Verrusio, in which he agrees to cooperate fully. Hope those strippers were worth it.

So what did James Hirni and Todd Boulanger -- the former Team Abramoff lobbyists now in hot water for plying congressional staffers with undisclosed gifts -- want in return?

Both men were working for Abramoff at the law and lobbying firm Greenberg Traurig, on behalf of United Rentals, an equipment rental company. Court documents filed by prosecutors allege that in 2003, they wanted action on an amendment to a federal highway reauthorization bill that would have encouraged state public works agencies to rent, rather than buy, construction equipment. That would clearly have benefited United Rentals.

The documents further allege that immediately after they had paid for Blackann and another staffer (identified as Staffer D) to attend the World Series (and a "Gentleman's Club" in New York), Boulanger and Hinri sent drafts of the specific measure they wanted to Trevor Blackann, the staffer who just pleaded in connection with the scheme, and Staffer D.

Staffer D at the time worked for the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which was then chaired by Rep. Don Young (R-AK). That committee was overseeing the larger highway reauthorization bill to which Boulanger and Hirni were seeking to attach their measure.

In November of that year, say the documents, Boulanger and Hirni prevailed on a Senate staffer to offer the amendment they wanted to the Senate version of the bill.

United Rentals hardly has a squeaky clean reputation. This September, it agreed to pay the SEC $14 million, ending a four-year probe into claims that the company fraudulently inflated its earnings and made fraudulent leasing transactions with suppliers, between 1997 and 2002. It did not admit or deny the charges.

It looks like Sarah Palin's claim to represent a cleaner brand of politics could be about to take a bruising.

The Washington Post reports today that, while Mayor of Wasilla, Palin oversaw the hiring of a lobbyist, Steven Silver -- a former chief of staff to now-indicted GOP senator Ted Stevens -- to help win federal earmarks for the city.

But Silver appears to have additional ties that could further undercut Palin's image as a squeaky-clean reformer. According to Senate lobbying disclosure reports examined by TPMmuckraker, from 2002 to 2004 Silver listed as a client Jack Abramoff's lobbying firm, Greenberg Traurig. On Greenberg's behalf, Silver lobbied the federal government on "issues relating to Indian/Native American policy," "exploration for oil and gas" and "legislation relating to gaming issues" -- the very issues that Abramoff headed up for Greenberg at the time. In other words, Silver appears to have been a part of "Team Abramoff."

Indeed, one specific bill that Silver lobbied on for Greenberg, according to the forms, was S.627, also known as the Internet Gambling Funding Prohibition Act. A former Greenberg lobbyist confirmed to TPMmuckraker that Silver would have been working to oppose the bill. And it was an earlier version of this very bill that Abramoff famously worked to spike, with the support of Christian conservative leaders Lou Sheldon and Ralph Reed.

There's additional evidence of ties between Silver and Abramoff. Emails released by a House committee in 2006 as part of a probe of Abramoff show the now-disgraced lobbyist scheduling a meeting with Silver in 2001.

Silver is a member of the Anchorage-based law firm of Robertson, Monacle, and Eastaugh, which the Post describes as having "close ties" to Stevens, and Alaska Congressman Don Young, who's under federal investigation for allegedly taking bribes. Since 2005, Silver has contributed $3500 each to Stevens and Young, according to campaign contributions records posted at CampaignMoney.com.

This is far from the first time that Abramoff's trail of corruption has led to Alaska. Last year, Mark Zachares, a former aide to Young, pleaded guilty to accepting tens of thousands of dollars in gifts from Abramoff in return for using his position to advance Abramoff's goals.

Silver did not immediately return a call requesting comment.

Someone is finally going directly after GOP Congressman Don Young over his suspicious earmark for the Coconut Road interchange in Florida -- but they're just skimming the surface.

The Club For Growth, which is backing Young's GOP primary challenger Sean Parnell, is airing this new ad attacking Young for putting a $10 million earmark for Florida in the budget in order to benefit a contributor:

Unfortunately, the ad doesn't mention the really juicy part -- that Young's staff inserted the earmark in after the whole budget had passed in Congress, making the whole thing almost certainly unconstitutional as well as ethically questionable.

If this whole blogging thing doesn't work out, maybe we'll go into the ad-writing business.

We reported earlier that Rep. Don Young (R-AK) falsely claimed that he was named "Hero of the Taxpayer" by the non-partisan reform group, Taxpayers for Commonsense.

But Taxpayers for Commonsense denies even having such an award, yet alone awarding it to Young, a long-time target of the political watchdog.

As it turns out, Young was named "Hero of the Taxpayer", by the conservative group Americans for Tax Reform, founded and run by Republican lobbyist Grover Norquist.

But now even Norquist is throwing Young under the bus, issuing a press release late this afternoon slamming the Congressman and claiming he "betrays taxpayers."

"Republicans that vote for tax increases are like rat heads in Coke bottles,"Norquist said. "They ruin the Republican brand for all members. It should be readily apparent to a former 'Hero of the Taxpayer Award' recipient that you don't vote for tax hikes."

According to the press release, Young voted for H.R. 2642, the Blue Dog Tax Hike-- a move that makes him ineligible to receive ATR's "Hero of the Taxpayer Award" in 2008.

We called Young's campaign press contact for comment, Mike Anderson, who told us that the bill was a lot more complicated than it looked.

"If you vote for the bill you vote for veterans and Alaska has 75,000 veterans, but you're also colored as pro-increasing taxes, but if he voted against the bill, he's anti-raising taxes but anti-veteran," Anderson told TPMmuckraker. "Young said that he had to take care of the veterans. Veterans have always been very important."

As we earlier reported, Rep. Don Young (R-AK) has been running a radio ad laying claim to a fictitious award from Taxpayers for Commonsense.

In a statement released this morning, the Young camp responded with an apology in this brief press release:

In recent radio ads, we mistakenly credited the wrong organization with giving Congressman Young the Hero of the Taxpayer Award. We apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused. Please be assured that the ads are being corrected to reflect that Americans for Tax Reform awarded the Congressman with this award for his commitment to the American taxpayer and his support of legislation to decrease taxes.

The troubling text of the radio ad is transcribed below:

Now that Parnell is in the "Club for No Growth" they're running false ads accusing Don Young of pushing higher taxes on Alaskans when the opposite is true. Don Young was even presented the 'Hero of the Taxpayer Award' by Taxpayers for Common Sense. Sean Parnell ought to be ashamed, Don Young ought to be re-elected.

In our humble opinion, Don Young ought to get a fact-checker.

Rep. Don Young (R-AK) has been called many things in his day, but we're pretty sure a "Hero of the Taxpayer" isn't one of them.

But according to a new radio campaign ad being run by Young, he was given just such a title in an award given to him by the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense.

This seemed a little odd to us, as we're pretty familiar with Taxpayers for Common Sense, and pretty sure Don Young is probably the last person to receive such a dubious honor.

And sure enough according to the group named in the ad, Young's claim is patently false.

"I wish people would let us know when we give them awards," Steve Ellis, Vice President for Taxpayers for Common Sense told TPMmuckraker. "We don't even have a 'Hero of the Taxpayer' award to start out. But we did scrub through our records and we found out that we had given him an award-- the 'Golden Fleece' award in 2003 for the Bridge to Nowhere."

According to Ellis, "The Golden Fleece Award" is given for "extreme cases of wasteful government spending."

But as it turns out, Young's claim isn't completely without merit. He was in fact named a "Hero of the Taxpayer," a few weeks ago, but not by Taxpayer for Commonsense. Americans for Tax Reform, an interest group founded by Republican lobbyist Grover Norquist, honored Young with that distinction in late June.

We've captured the radio audio for the ad. Note that Don Young "approves this message."

Click To Play

The relevant portion starts at about 33 seconds. The transcript is here:

Now that Parnell is in the "Club for No Growth" they're running false ads accusing Don Young of pushing higher taxes on Alaskans when the opposite is true. Don Young was even presented the 'Hero of the Taxpayer Award' by Taxpayers for Common Sense. Sean Parnell ought to be ashamed, Don Young ought to be re-elected.

We'll call the Young camp as soon as it's morning in Alaska.

Late update: The Young campaign released a statement that apologized for the mix-up in the attribution of the award and said they would duly revise it.

There are only two elected officials left standing in the musical chairs among those publicly tied to the state's massive political corruption scandal: current U.S. Sen. Ted Stevens (R) and his son, former State Sen. Ben Stevens (R).

The indictment of Alaska State Sen. John Cowdery (R) last Thursday, means all of the state legislators whose offices were raided in August of 2006 (except Stevens) -- Cowdery, Vic Kohring (R), Bruce Weyhrauch (R), Pete Kott (R) and Don Olson (D) -- are now either cooperating with federal investigations, convicted or indicted. The FBI warrant allowing the search named former VECO executives Bill Allen and Rick Smith.

Allen and Smith were indicted and pleaded guilty. Their testimony at the trials of Kott, Kohring and Weyhrauch helped convict the three indicted state representatives. While Kott and Weyhrauch's convictions are pending appeal, Kohring recently began his 3.5 year prison sentence. Cowdery's recent indictment on two counts of bribery and conspiracy named an anonymous "Senator A" who was later revealed by Cowdery's lawyer as Olson. Olson followed with a statement that he has been cooperating with the U.S. attorney's office for over a year, and is unlikely to be indicted.

That leaves just the Stevens boys without a fall out. Both are under federal investigation for their ties to VECO, but the investigation of Uncle Ted also stretches to his suspicious pet projects.

As one juror at Kohring's trial observed after his conviction, "they didn't get the sharks. They got the minnow." Cowdery appears to be the last of the "minnows," but does that mean federal prosecutors will be going after bigger game in the near future?

And don't forget the other big fish: Seemingly more tenuous, but still present is the ongoing federal investigation into U.S. Rep. Don Young (R), for his own ties to VECO.

Rep. Don Young (R-AK) and his staff were quick to issue a denial last month of anything more than "friendly" ties between the Alaskan Representative and the group of nine federal lobbyists who, according to the "Intern Survival Guide," were given preferential treatment when calling the office. But now his fiscal relationship to the "A Team," as they were called, has become less tenuous.

Mike Anderson, Young's Chief of Staff, solicited campaign donations in June 2007 from 27 individuals -- 23 of whom were lobbyists -- and which included all of the "A Team," the Anchorage Daily News reported. Raising the specter of a Young defeat, Anderson wrote: "[Y]ou and your clients will be impacted by these elections."

The group, dubbed the "AK Wolfpack" by Anderson in the email, includes Rick Alcalde of the Coconut Road earmark and Randy Delay, brother of former House majority leader Tom Delay.

The email, who's subject is "How Can I Help?," was sent on June 8, 2007 from Anderson's personal Yahoo address. Citing the case of defeated Rep. Richard Pombo, a close Republican ally of Young's in the House, Anderson outlined the Democratic threat as a "call to action". . . check-writing action:

For those of you who volunteered and served and watched November's elections, many of you observed or even worked former Congressman Richard Pombo's race. While each of you may have different opinions as to what may have contributed to to the election results, at the strategic level, we will all agree it is a textbook case in how Outsiders can reach into a district with money, volunteers, and a well coordinated attack defeat an incumbent not necessarily on his/her record, but on innuendo and perception.

If you think that Young's article in the NY Times being released the same day as Steven's article in the Wash Post was a coincidence, then I have a beluga whale in the Potomac to show you. If you think that the DNC or DCCC is not interested in turning Alaska blue, then you must have an unlisted phone number to your telephone booth.

You must believe that these forces, when combined, will have a major play and impact on Senator Ted Stevens or Congressman Don Young's election! And if that is the case, then much, much closer to home --- you probably understand that you and your clients will be impacted by these elections.

To some, this may be a scary proposition -- an opportunity to wring our hands and speculate. To others, it becomes a call to action -- to develop and execute a plan. I know into which of these two groups I fall into -- and where you AK Wolfpack members fall into, too.

Since the email was sent, over $90,000 has been contributed to Young's campaign either from the individuals on the list, their firms, or their firm's clients.

Besides those previously known to have ties to Young, through the "A Team," the remaining members of the "Wolfpack" are comprised of many former staffers for Young and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK). For all those named to the "AK Wolfack," see the ADN.

Rep. Don Young (R-AK) has been fighting corruption charges for awhile. He even tried a legal defense fund to help him through hard times, but now it looks like he's started to pay his own million-dollar legal tab from his campaign funds, but also that of Steven Dougherty, his campaign manager who is under FBI scrutiny.

According to the AP:

Young has spent more than $1 million in campaign contributions on legal fees. He is represented by the Washington law firm of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer and Feld. His campaign finance reports also show $35,020 in fees to John W. Wolfe, a prominent Seattle white-collar defense attorney who represents Dougherty as well as Stevens' son, Ben. The campaign has also paid about $196,000 since October to Tobin, O'Connor and Ewing, a Washington law firm, though it's unclear whom the firm represents.

Just who makes up Rep. Don Young's "A Team," the nine transportation lobbyists listed in Young's "Intern Survival Guide" who "can talk to whoever they want" when they call his congressional office?

We've put together a snapshot of each "team" member. Pictures, mysterious silhouettes and more after the jump.

Read more »

Rep. Don Young (R-AK) has had his share of federal investigations, scandal and legal bills, but he may now have a new problem: "The A Team."

In a document obtained today by TPMmuckraker.com, entitled 'An Intern's Survival Guide,' new interns in Young's office are given various instructions on how to thrive and excel working in Young's office. The document was distributed to new interns by a paid member of Young's staff.

The advice and rules range from the jocular to the mundane. But the most striking is the section on phone duty. The 'Guide' refers to an "A-Team" of nine lobbyists who should immediately be connected to any member of the staff they ask to speak with.

The A Team: Rick Alcade [sic], Colin Chapman, Randy DeLay, Billy Lee Evans, Jack Ferguson, Mike Henry, Ducan Smith [sic], CJ Zane or Jay Dickey. These people can talk to whomever they want, normally Mike or Sara. Tell them who it is and transfer over unless they say otherwise. I recommend looking up who they are.

Most notable on the list is Rick Alcalde, the lobbyist at the center of the "Coconut Road" earmark scandal, which the Senate, in an unprecedented move, has formally asked the Justice Department to investigate.

For readers (and interns who may have fallen behind on their duties), we've done the work for you. What do these nine all have in common besides being the perfect number for a baseball team? They're all transportation lobbyists.

Young was Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee from 2000 to 2006.

As we mentioned, there's Rick Alcalde who besides organizing the Coconut Road earmark debacle for Young, is a lobbyist for wealthy Florida developer Daniel Aronoff.

Jack Ferguson, is the former Chief of Staff for Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), another of Alaska's scandal ridden representatives, and an Administrator for Midnight Sun PAC.

Randy DeLay, lobbyist brother of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay.

Billy Lee Evans, the former Georgia congressman turned lobbyist.

Mike Henry, a former Young legislative assistant turned lobbyist.

Jay Dickey, a former Arkansas congressman turned lobbyist.

Duncan Smith, a former Young staffer and Alaska Fisheries Marketing Board member turned lobbyist.

CJ Zane, a former Young Chief of Staff, turned lobbyist.

and Colin Chapman, another former Young Chief of Staff, turned lobbyist.

At first glance, seems like an All-Star lineup.

A statement release late this afternoon by Young's congressional office claims that 'Guide' was unofficial and "outdated":

"Rep. Young has welcomed dozens of interns into his office over the years and finds their assistance in the office invaluable. But interns are not staff. This incredibly outdated "survival guide" was pieced together by several former interns and not by staff. This "guide" in no way reflects the official policies of Rep. Young's office.

"It's always interesting to see how students view their intern experience. It appears that some of what they have written is tongue in cheek, some to help relieve the daily stresses of working on Capitol Hill. At the end of the day, our goal is to ensure that all interns have the best experience possible.

"As for those listed, they include either former staffers (who represent Alaskans) or close friends and former colleagues of Rep. Young, whom he has known for many years."

Contrary to this account, TPMmuckraker.com has learned that the 'Guide' and other initiation materials were distributed by a paid member of Young's staff.

When you've got lawyers gobbling up $1 million plus in fees, you need all the help you can get. And in January, Rep. Don Young (R-AK) opened up a legal defense fund to help stop the bleeding. He was forced to pay out more in legal fees from his campaign account than he was able to raise in the first quarter of this year.

But through March of this year, a disclosure report for the fund shows, no one had contributed to the fund.

It's been a pretty dismal year for Young so far -- what with drawing a surprise primary challenge from the lieutenant governor and the drumbeat of bad press. The only bright spot has been Democrat Jake Metcalfe's ("Jake the Snake," Young calls him) departure from the race due to his aide's alleged role in rigging up fake websites to ridicule fellow Dem candidate Ethan Berkowitz.

Usually you can pretty much take it for granted that Rep. Don Young (R-AK) is the most outspoken lawmaker around. After all, it's not every congressman who threatens to bite a member of his own party like a mink.

But perhaps Young has met his match. During his speech on the House floor Wednesday, Young did his best to distance himself from his infamous Coconut Road earmark in every way he could. He didn't make the change after the bill passed both houses of Congress -- somebody in some secluded office did. And he he'd only supported the earmark, he said, because the community and its representative had supported it. Young even devoted a page of his official web site to back up his story.

Well, that lawmaker is Rep. Connie Mack (R-FL). And Mack was none too happy and approached Young after the speech to tell him as much. Mack says that he did not initially support the earmark and only supported it after he discovered that the money could not be redirected. Or as Mack put it to Young on the floor, Young is a "liar." Young professed confusion as to how he could think such a thing: "I don't understand because I've got all the letters. Pull them up on the Web site. He's running away from an issue because he's got political heat."

Mack's chief of staff was no more restrained in his criticism:

Jeff Cohen, Mack's chief of staff, said Thursday that it was clear his boss was being singled out.

Young's speech to the House was "absurd" and "inaccurate," Cohen said. "Perhaps we don't just need a committee on ethical standards, but one on psychological standards as well," he added.

In the clearest language he's used yet, Rep. Don Young (R-AK) disclaimed responsibility for changing the language of the Coconut Road earmark after it had cleared both houses of Congress on the House floor today. He also repeated his earlier criticism of the Senate's vote to require a Justice Department investigation, calling it a "slippery, slippery road." You can see his comments here:

All this notwithstanding, Young supported the overall bill, which contained a fix to change the earmark's language back to the way it was before the infamous change. The bill passed easily today.

Young's spokeswoman had earlier called the change a "correction" by staff, but Young was more specific on that point today. Young said that the "enrollment" process, where technical changes are made by the House clerk to tidy up the bill that Congress passed, "is not a process I own or control." He added: "I have never been in an enrollment office." The ambiguity remains, however, of whether anyone on Young's staff urged the change.

And he went on to say that it was nothing remarkable that there had been a change. For instance, he said, there had been an earmark for a Jacksonville in the bill, but that the enrollment clerks had changed the language to specify for which of the six U.S. Jacksonvilles it was intended.

As we explained at length in this post, minor changes are regularly made to bills in the enrollment process. But Young's earmark was unique of the 6,371 earmarks in that underwent such a substantive change. It was originally for the widening of I-75 in Collier and Lee counties in Florida, and it was changed to concern only the Coconut Road interchange in Lee County. So he's being more than a little slippery here.

Don't worry, America! Rep. Don Young (R-AK) will ensure that the blessed integrity of our nation's Constitution is upheld.

Last week, the Senate voted to require the Justice Department to open an investigation into how the language of Young's Coconut Road earmark was modified after it cleared both houses of Congress, but before it was signed by the President. Young, of course, welcomes scrutiny of any and all of his beloved earmarks. But it's the law of the thing that's got him upset:

"What the Senate did was unconstitutional," the Alaska Republican said Wednesday. "No other body can request an investigation on another body."

Now, while there are a host of touchy Constitutional issues surrounding the Senate's measure, this, to my understanding, isn't one of them. Democrats objected to Sen. Tom Coburn's (R-OK) measure to create a bicameral committee because it would have involved one chamber investigating another (that measure failed). And there are legitimate concerns that any DoJ investigation would clash with Congress' Speech or Debate Clause protections. But no one else has put it quite the way Young has put it -- that the Senate's request for an investigation by the DoJ was unconstitutional.

Of course, just to underscore the circularity of all this, the Justice Department is already investigating Young's Coconut Road earmark, along with his ties to Veco and who knows what else. So if the Senate's possibly unconstitutional measure to force the DoJ to investigate Young's unconstitutional earmark fails, the DoJ will investigate it anyway.

Somehow I think that the Constitution will survive all this. As for Don Young...

All that bother today will amount to a whole lot of nothing, says Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington's Executive Director Melanie Sloan:

"Clearly, something went seriously awry before the 2005 highway funding bill was sent to the president. The question now is the best way to find out how and why this occurred. It certainly appears as if Don Young (R-AK) snuck in the earmark in exchange for campaign contributions from Florida developer Daniel Aronoff. Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) is to be commended for insisting that the Senate address this matter. Nevertheless, in sending the matter over to the Department of Justice, the Senate has ignored the Speech or Debate clause, which prevents law enforcement from introducing legislative material (such as an earmark in a bill) as evidence against a lawmaker.

Read more »

So the Senate has voted to require the Justice Department to investigate how Rep. Don Young's (R-AK) earmark came to be changed after the bill passed both houses of Congress. Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), who was pushing a competing solution (an eight-member bicameral committee), says that sets "the troubling and bizarre precedent of turning the Attorney General into the de facto Senate and House Parliamentarian."

And indeed, it does seem to be a first. Associate Senate Historian Donald A. Ritchie said that he couldn't think of a prior occasion when the Senate had asked the Department to investigate a member of the House.

And Coburn's solution didn't have a clear precedent either, he said: while the Senate and the House have formed bicameral committees numerous times in the past to investigate scandals involving lawmakers from both houses, he couldn't think of an instance where one house formed a committee to investigate a member solely of another house. "For the most part, most of the time, each house takes care of its own."

This tutorial on Congressional history has been brought to you by Don Young.

So now the Senate has agreed on an amendment that will require the Justice Department to investigate Rep. Don Young's (R-AK) Coconut Road earmark.

But House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) speaking earlier today said that she thinks the House ethics committee ought to get on the case. She also objected to Sen. Tom Coburn's (R-OK) solution of a bicameral panel, saying "We have an ethics committee. I don't see why that would be necessary."

Yeah, why would that be necessary?

If only a nonpartisan watchdog had filed an ethics committee complaint back in September, then maybe all this noise and Constitutional debate wouldn't be necessary in the Senate. Oh, wait. Taxpayers for Common Sense did file a complaint. And nothing has happened. Because that's what the House ethics committee is best at.

"A lot of air in the Senate has been wasted today because the ethics committee isn't doing its job," Taxpayers for Common Sense's Keith Ashdown told me. "We'll hear the announcement of the ethics committee investiagation as soon as the Justice Department announces that they're indicting Don Young."

The House ethics committee does indeed have a knack for opening investigations of members who are already under investigation by the Justice Department. It's a neat trick, because after opening the investigation they declare that they can't investigate because it would interfere with the Department's investigation.

As expected, Democrats, with few exceptions, just united to defeat Sen. Tom Coburn's (R-OK) solution of creating a bicameral panel to investigate Rep. Don Young's (R-AK) Coconut Road earmark.

The final vote was 49 for and 43 against. That's far short of the 60 votes needed to pass.

Update: Here's the roll call for that vote.

Sen. Barbara Boxer's (D-CA) amendment just passed by a margin of 63 to 29. Virtually all Senate Democrats supported the measure, helped by a good number of Republicans.

The amendment requires a review by the Department of Justice into the allegations of impropriety regarding Rep. Don Young's (R-AK) Coconut Road earmark and an investigation into whether the change broke the law.

Immediately after the vote, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK), who voted against the amendment, called the vote an "amazing precedent" set to invite the "Justice Department to investigate a House rules violation."

The Senate is now moving on to Coburn's solution -- a joint House-Senate investigation. Sen. Boxer declared that such an investigation would "bring the whole bill down" because of Constitutional objections by Democrats in both the House and the Senate.

Update: Here's the roll call for that.

In just a couple minutes, the Senate will hold votes on how Rep. Don Young's (R-AK) extra-Constitutional earmark ought to be investigated.

The two options, both offered as amendments to a highway technical corrections bill, are the ones I laid out yesterday.

Sen. Tom Coburn's (R-OK) preferred solution is an investigation by a joint committee of both House and Senate lawmakers with subpoena power.

Sen. Barbara Boxer's (D-CA) amendment would direct the Justice Department to review the earmark and investigate whether Young's extra-Constitutional earmark broke the law.

Both will need 60 votes in order to pass according to the deal struck between the parties. Why the high vote threshold?

The Democrats have come hard down on Boxer's side of the discussion, saying that Coburn's solution would result in the unconstitutional situation of members of the Senate investigating the House. Speaking on the floor just now, Sen. Boxer said that the House leadership has made it known that they have strong objections to the measure that might prevent the bill from passing.

Meanwhile, the House Republicans have let it be known that they really don't like the idea of asking the Justice Department to investigate.

So we'll see what happens with the voting. The high threshold could very well mean that neither amendment passes.

If neither of these measures pass, Boxer says that she favors sending a strongly worded letter to the Justice Department as a consolation measure.

Relax, defenders of the Constitution! They were only fixing a mistake.

Since last August, we've been trying to figure out how Rep. Don Young (R-AK) managed to change the language in a bill after it cleared both houses of Congress. Now we've finally got a little bit of clarity -- Young's staff has finally fessed up to making the change. What remains unclear, however, is whether Young told them to do it.

It was no mystery that Young himself was responsible for the earmark, which provided $10 million to build an I-75 interchange at Coconut Road in Lee County, Florida. Local officials had sought money for a more general project to widen the highway, but real estate developer Daniel Aronoff knew the way to get things done. He held a $40,000 fundraiser for Young in Florida.

Why Young? He was the chairman of the House transportation committee back in 2005 and so the man to go to for an earmark that hadn't managed the support of local officials or lawmakers. It didn't really matter that Florida was about as far from Alaska in the United States that you can get.

So while it's been no mystery that Young was responsible for the earmark, just how he managed to buck the constitutional process for lawmaking hasn't been clear. Back in August, we plowed into the 800-page 2005 bill to see whether there had been any other substantial changes. We found that out of approximately 6,370 earmarks, Young's had been the only to undergo such a change.

But Young refused to discuss it. Taxpayers for Common Sense filed a complaint with the House ethics committee, and still he remained mum.

Finally, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK) was successful in pushing for an investigation of the earmark. The Senate is likely to vote today and pass a measure by Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) that will refer the matter to the Justice Department for investigation.

And today, after debate raged for hours in the Senate on the best way to investigate Don Young, he's finally fessing up - sort of.

Young himself didn't make the change, his staff tells The Washington Post:

Young's staff acknowledged yesterday that aides "corrected" the earmark just before it went to the White House for President Bush's signature, specifying that the money would go to a proposed highway interchange project on Interstate 75 near Naples, Fla. Young says the project was entirely worthy of an earmark and he welcomes any inquiry, a spokeswoman said....

Young's office accepted responsibility yesterday for the change, insisting that campaign contributions were not the motive. Rather, presentations made by Florida Gulf Coast University officials and the developers proved the case for the project, aides said.

[Meredith] Kenny, Young's spokeswoman, said the lawmaker always intended for the earmark to designate money to the interchange project, not generic highway improvements. So committee aides altered the bill to reflect that after the House and Senate had approved it.

"There was an error in the bill and so it was corrected," she said.

Now, in our pass through the earmark-laden transportation bill, we did find that plenty of "errors" in the bill had indeed been corrected -- by which I mean misplaced commas, typos, etc. But none of those "corrections" changed the projects themselves.

And of course this statement doesn't answer the big question: whether one of Young's staffers might have made such a change to the bill without asking the boss. Because (hopefully) it's not every day at the office that a staffer changes the language of legislation after it passes Congress.