Quiet Justice on Coconut Road Earmark

| | Comments (1)

In early 2008, Congress instructed the Justice Department to investigate whether any crimes were committed in the earmarking of $10 million for a proposed Florida interchange known as the "Coconut Road" project in the 2005 highway law.

But despite the congressional mandate for an investigation, which was included in a measure making technical corrections to the highway law, neither the Justice Department nor Alaska Republican Don Young, the 36-year House veteran at the center of the controversy, will say whether the probe is under way. The senator whose interest sparked Congress to act, Republican Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, wants answers.

Chief among his questions is who covertly funneled money to the Coconut Road project by rewriting an earmark in the highway bill after both chambers had passed it but before the president signed it into law.

"Dr. Coburn believes those who inserted the $10 million Coconut Road earmark into a bill that had already passed both houses of Congress acted outside the bounds of the law and Constitution. The Coconut Road episode was about more than earmarking; it was about the integrity of the democratic process," Coburn spokesman John Hart said. "As Congress once again takes up transportation funding, DOJ should complete its assignment and fully investigate this matter in order to restore and safeguard the integrity of the legislative process."

Young, an Alaska Republican who was the chief author of the legislation, has been accused of having a hand in redirecting the money to Coconut Road, in part because of his authority over the legislation and in part because a big-dollar Young fundraiser owned property near the Coconut Road site.

The language requiring the Coconut Road investigation is clear: "Consistent with applicable standards and procedures, the Department of Justice shall review allegations of impropriety regarding item 462 in section 1934(c) of Public Law 109-59 to ascertain if a violation of Federal criminal law has occurred."

The Justice Department won't say whether an investigation is under way, but officials know they are supposed to be looking into the earmark.

"We are aware of this statutory language," Justice spokeswoman Melissa Schwartz said.

Young's spokeswoman, Meredith Kenny, said she didn't know if Young had been contacted by investigators.

"The Congressman is at his home in Fort Yukon, Alaska, and unavailable. Unfortunately you will have to write your story without our input," Kenny wrote in an e-mail on Tuesday.

The House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, which Young ran at the time of the 2005 highway law, has provided information to the Justice Department since Congress called for the investigation. But because at least one former committee aide has pleaded guilty and is cooperating with prosecutors in the Jack Abramoff corruption scandal, it is not clear whether the information transmitted is related to the Coconut Road investigation, the Abramoff investigation, both or neither.

Initially, Coburn had wanted to create a special bipartisan, bicameral panel to investigate the matter. But it was an amendment by Senate Ethics Chairwoman Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., involving the Justice Department that won Senate adoption. The House went along, and it was included in the technical corrections law.

In the past, Young has said accusations against him are off-base.

"I have been the subject of much innuendo concerning my intent of this project," he said last April. "These accusations have little if any connection with what occurred."

    Comments

  1. If I understand this correctly, this provision was "inserted" into an already passed by both houses conference report before it went to the President for signature? This is absolutely outrageous. Don Young and all the staffers who were involved in this should be hung in the public square. This is the problem with "thousands of page" bills that no one reads before voting on.

    Posted by: NObama Author Profile Page | September 9, 2009 10:25 AM

Post A Comment


(for verification only; will not be published with your comment)