On the site http://removerinos.com Rep. Mike Castle of DE is listed as the "ace-of-spades," removerino's designation for the worst R-I-N-O in Congress. There's one blogger out there, Frank Knotts of Delaware, who has turned up the rocks around Castle's fundraising, and, as you see below, many creepy-crawlies have appeared. As Frank demonstrates, Castle is to political integrity as Hugh Hefner is to chastity. Frank shows how career politicians sell out to special interests in order to keep themselves in office forever. Mike Castle first got elected in 1966, several years before his Senate race opponent (and my friend) Christine O'Donnell was born.
What Frank Knotts describes below is not technically illegal, only unethical. Castle is receiving huge campaign contributions, mega-millions, from industries he's supposed to monitor and oversee. It stinks. I hope you'll link to Frank's pieces on your own blogs -- and forward it on to your political allies.
Rep. Mike Castle’s Conflict of Interest
March 28, 2010 by frankknotts
Now that we have learned that Christine O’Donnell intends to primary long time Washington insider Rep. Mike Castle (RINO-De) for the Senate seat, formerly held by even longer Washington insider Joe Biden(unfortunately currently our vice president), there have been questions raised of Ms. O’Donnell’s ability to run a campaign, let alone to make financial decisions on the national scale.
So, I believe since Mr. Castle’s supporters think it right to bring up past deeds of Ms. O’Donnell, then I would say that Mr. Castle should clean his closet as well.
Let us start by looking at the 2007-2008 election cycle shall we.
Here is a link that show contributions to Mr. Castle for that cycle.
s you will see, the number one contributor, amounting to 10% of his campaign contributions is the law firm of Young, Conaway. This is a [Wilmington, DE] law firm that deals primarily with bankruptcy and corporate restructuring. They contributed $146,915. [Note they're also the biggest contributor this year, up near $30,000 already]
You will also see that Mr. Castle’s next two largest contributors were Bank of America at number two with $27,950 and coming in at #3 was Morgan Stanley with a paltry $14,850. [Note, both recipients of bailout money]
Now those last two sound very familiar and may explain Mr. Castle’s yes vote on the TARP legislation. Of course this is exactly the type of voting you would expect from someone whose supporters describe him as a fiscal conservative, right?
Oh and by the way , for those who don’t know it, Mr. Castle sits on the House Financial Services Committee, you know the one that oversees and regulates banks and the financial sector. But of course I’m sure that Mr. Castle’s supporters will see absolutely no conflict of interest there.
In the eyes of Mr. Castle’s supporters, this is exactly the kind of experience that we need to send back to Washington in the Senate, to continue the good work that he has been doing in the House for oh so many years. While those who feel as I do , believe that this is exactly why he must be defeated.
And one last note to those of you out there still clinging to the idea that Mr. Castle is any kind of conservative, in 2009 while serving on the House Financial Services Committee . In a Vote of 39-29 on legislation to create yet another government bureaucracy that would be known as The Consumer Financial Protection Agency, Mike Castle was the only, as in no other, as in single Republican vote, to vote with, that’s right you guessed it, he voted with the Democrats against all of his so-called fellow Republicans in favor of growing government once again.
So to all of you out there that are ready to condemn Christine O’Donnell for her mistakes, you may want to consider the fact that Mr. Castle’s actions were conscious decisions.
Rep. Mike Castle’s Conflict of Interest Pt. II
April 4, 2010 The following is a press release from March 12, 2010.
” Title: Castle Supports Bringing More Bankruptcy Judges To Delaware
Location: Washington, DC
Today, Delaware Congressman Mike Castle voted in favor of H.R. 4506, the Bankruptcy Judgeships Act, legislation aimed at authorizing additional federal bankruptcy judgeships. Delaware, which currently has one permanent and five temporary judgeships, would now have six permanent positions
.“With the financial crisis and economic downturn resulting in an increase in the amount of both corporate and personal bankruptcies, Delaware’s bankruptcy courts have experienced rising caseload,” said Rep. Castle.
“With the temporary positions set to expire soon, this bill makes the five temporary slots permanent. In addition to reflecting the seriousness of the economic challenges that we face, the rising bankruptcy rates are reminders that this Congress and Administration must focus on economic growth with policies that expand innovation and protect, instead of spend, taxpayer dollars.”
In 2009, the United States saw 1.47 million bankruptcy filings, up 32 percent from the year before. Currently, there are 352 bankruptcy judges in the federal system, of which 36 are temporary positions. H.R. 4506 would make the five judgeships permanent in Delaware that were created through the Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act and the Bankruptcy Judgeship Act.
The Bankruptcy Judgeships Act is based on recommendations of the U.S. Judicial Conference, a body of 30 federal judges, including the chief justice of the United States, which makes recommendations to Congress on the federal judiciary.”
I especially like the this part, “In addition to reflecting the seriousness of the economic challenges that we face, the rising bankruptcy rates are reminders that this Congress and Administration must focus on economic growth with policies that expand innovation and protect, instead of spend, taxpayer dollars.”
So what does he vote for ? Increasing the number of government employees on a permanent basis. And how does having more judges help to expand innovation? It is also a good thing that we will have more bankruptcy judges, since so many of the things that Mr. Castle votes for will lead to more bankruptcies.
It is also notable once again that Mr. Castle’s number one contributor to his campaign is the law firm of Young & Conaway, this is a law firm that deals primarily in corporate restructuring and, that’s right bankruptcies. But I am sure that having more judges and bankruptcies in the state of Delaware will not in any way benefit Young & Conaway and has nothing to do with the way that Mr. Castle voted.
Frank Knotts' blog is: http://politicallyfrank.wordpress.com
Michael Castle, Christine O'Donnell, Delaware, US Senate, Young, Conaway, et al, Morgan Stanley, Hugh Hefner, Bank of America, TARP, Frank Knotts