Bush not connected to collapse of Enron, contrary to liberal opinion
By Daily Bruin Staff
Jan. 21, 2002 9:00 p.m.
 Ben Shapiro Shapiro is a second-year
political science student bringing reason to the
masses. E-mail him at [email protected].
Click
Here for more articles by Ben Shapiro
Tom Daschle can’t stop smiling. Henry Waxman is unable to
conceal his glee. The McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform
backers are jumping around and screaming “See!
See!”
Unfortunately, there’s nothing to see. The Democratic
eagerness to jump on the “Enron and Bush Sitting in a
Tree” bandwagon completely ignores the facts. Wild, unfounded
accusations of governmental corruption are flying like lingerie at
a Bill Clinton birthday bash, but any credible illicit connection
between Enron and the Bush administration has yet to be shown.
The zeal with which liberals are attacking Bush is
understandable. Normally, Democrats and scandal go together like
bread and mold: leave the former alone long enough, and the latter
is sure to develop. Over time, the Democrats have developed a
serious case of “cleanness envy” ““ they
can’t deal with the squeaky clean image projected by
conservatives. So any hint of impropriety amongst the right-wing
ranks is as appealing to them as a young, scantily-clad intern.
Unlike a scantily-clad intern, however, this story doesn’t
have legs. Enron is bad news, all right, but leave Bush out of
it.
Enron is an energy company that buys energy from generators and
sells it to homes around the country. The company inflated its
earnings estimates by about half a billion dollars, which sent the
stock of the company skyrocketing. Soon, however, the
company’s overestimation was revealed and the actual income
of the company spiraled downward.
Knowing this beforehand, Chairman Kenneth Lay and other company
honchos sold their stock without telling investors the company was
in serious trouble. Meanwhile, Enron officials forbade company
employees from switching their stocks to savings accounts. When
last-ditch attempts to save the company fell through, the stock
dropped precipitously, leaving many investors nearly broke
(“Shell Game,” Fortune.com Jan. 7 and “Q&A:
What Happened to Enron?” The Associated Press, Jan. 10)
All of which goes to show Enron officials were probably crooks.
But none of this has any connection to the Bush administration.
Lay never spoke with President Bush, but he did speak to
Commerce Secretary Don Evans and Secretary of Treasury Paul
O’Neill in the weeks preceding Enron’s collapse, as
well as Vice President Dick Cheney. None of these conversations
involved any soul-purging on Lay’s part. And none of these
conversations resulted in any action by the Bush administration.
But even this is enough for the Democrats to cry foul.
 Illustration by JARRETT QUON/Daily Bruin Lay called
O’Neill to inform him Enron “was headed for
bankruptcy,” (“White House: Enron Official
Phoned,” AP, Jan. 10) and he called Evans to tell him
“he would appreciate any help the administration could
give” (“White House Reviews Enron’s
Impact,” Washington Post, Jan. 16).
The amount of help was zip.
If Lay’s strategy was to “buy Bush” during the
2000 election campaign, as so many Democrats are whining, he got
the short end of the stick. Bush is not a man to be bought or sold
““ in the past, Bush has repeatedly turned down requests by
Enron on energy policy. Enron backed several environmental
restrictions (for business reasons), including the Kyoto Treaty and
a limit on carbon dioxide emissions, both of which Bush rejected
(“Enron’s Washington Clout Before Collapse Draws
Scrutiny,” Wall Street Journal, Jan. 15).
Furthermore, Enron has donated large sums to Democrats as well
as Republicans, including two $50,000 donations to the Democratic
Party just a week before Enron’s collapse. (“Enron
Shifts Cash to Democrats,” Forbes.com, Dec. 27, 2001).
The liberals on Capitol Hill continue to cry about Enron’s
“top-shelf access” to the Bush administration. Rep.
Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) has made several statements concerning
Enron’s contact with the Bush administration. Even liberal
Democrats like Waxman are not so ignorant. Does Waxman really
expect the Bush administration to turn down a call from the largest
energy producer in the country? Or does he expect them to take
calls from all energy producers, even the guy who is stealing
batteries from the 7-11?
The Bush administration is handling this with the grace and
courage Americans have come to know and admire. Instead of
attempting to redefine what “is” means, Bush has set up
a large federal investigation of the Enron matter. Attorney General
John Ashcroft has recused himself from the prosecution to avoid any
possible conflict of interest. Other Bush officials are
stepping away from the investigation. This is what people call, in
colloquial terms, honesty.
Coming from the Democrats, this manufactured “Enron
scandal” makes sense. If you can’t stop your own party
from disgracing itself, look to deflect attention elsewhere.
There’s only one problem with the strategy. There’s
nothing to find. When this is all done, Bush will be able to lean
back in his chair, smile and smoke a good, Republican-clean cigar,
knowing that he and his administration are not to be bought or
sold. And the Democrats can return to their scantily-clad interns
““ and their cigars.
