SCOTT SIMON, Host:
John Carlisle joins us in the studios. Thanks so much for being with us.
SIMON: Thank you. Glad to be here.
SIMON: You cite a specific example and that's the criminal case against Congressman Alan Mollohan of West Virginia, Democrat who's in the House of Appropriations Committee. Tell us about that case and how you came to it.
SIMON: Well, every May when congressmen file their financial disclosure forms, we make it a point of reviewing the forms of all members of House Appropriations Committees.
SIMON: Republicans and Democrats?
SIMON: Republicans and Democrats.
SIMON: Yeah.
SIMON: We look for discrepancies. And then, like, what happened, our chairman, Ken Boehm, found that of a four-year period, between roughly 2000 to 2004, Representative Alan Mollohan's wealth suddenly went from fairly modest assets of just $30,000 to as much as six to $12 million. So Ken Boehm initiated - linked the investigation that amounted in about 10 months, and he found several dozen felonies where he was earmarking funds to friends and business associates who then cut him in a lucrative business deals. That's when we approached the media, in this case, the Wall Street Journal to give them the scoop.
SIMON: Now, the National Legal and Policy Center has a conservative agenda.
SIMON: Sure.
SIMON: I think that's safe to say.
SIMON: Sure.
SIMON: Do your investigations, therefore, have that same agenda?
SIMON: Well it turns out, she paid only about $180,000 for this property, and most real estate insiders stated that this should have cost at least 250 to as much as $350,000. Within 24 to 48 hours that we filed our complaint with the committee, she agreed to sell back the property for what she purchased it back to Mr. Penny. And to be good investigator means you fill, you follow trail of facts.
SIMON: There are other nonprofit groups that have begun funds for investigative journalism.
SIMON: Mm-hmm.
SIMON: I think probably the most prominent recently is a group called ProPublica.
SIMON: Right.
SIMON: And that's being headed up now by Paul Steiger, former head of the Wall Street Journal, being funded by people like Herbert and Marion Sandler, George Soros' Open Society Institute. Do you trust them to do honest investigation? [POST-BROADCAST CORRECTION: As reported on 1/26/08 Weekend Edition Saturday, there is no connection between either Mr. Soros or his Open Society Institute and Pro Publica.]
SIMON: Well, they have said that their mission sounds certainly appropriate and nonpartisan enough to expose corruption in incorporations and government. Now, I have no doubt - to doubt the sincerity of that statement. But that being said, I mean, the Sandlers are devoting up to $10 million per year on this entity and they have made it quite well known - and as is their prerogative that they will, too - they have a certain agenda that they're pushing to what they would call as counter-the-vast right-wing conspiracy, just like George Soros, linking that to prerogative. So I find it hard to believe that we're not, at least, have a liberal-leaning orientation.
SIMON: One of the reasons that the Wall Street Journal is so respected, the newspaper that Mr. Steiger used to head, is they have a very strong line that separates the editorial page from the news page.
SIMON: Mm-hmm.
SIMON: Are you trying to blur that line?
SIMON: No. Not at all. I mean, ultimately, you know, we don't force it down the throats. We uncover what we think are scandals and we present it to them, and it's up to them to make the decision. It doesn't give any blur line of editorialism and better reporting, that's their decision to make. We can't draw the line for them.
SIMON: Thanks very much for being with us.
SIMON: Glad to be here.