The Forked-Tongue Awards

Melanie Sloan

March 17, 2005

You might remember Sen. Joe Lieberman's "silver sewer" awards to those who he felt were helping along the "coarsening" of our society. Turns out Joe and some of his colleagues might be eligible for a similar accolade— how about a Forked-Tongue Award? Melanie Sloan of watchdog group CREW explains how a new report found that some of the loudest opponents of pornography in Congress are the same folks accepting big contributions from the porn industry.

Melanie Sloan is executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW).

Members of Congress and the companies that profit from pornography share one important trait: Both want to benefit from the lucrative profits derived from pornography while keeping information about their involvement hidden from the public.

A difference between these companies and members of Congress, however, is that while we expect corporations to be driven by profits, we expect Congress members to be driven by ideology.  Namely, if a member of Congress makes opposition to pornography one of his or her central issues, we expect that he or she would reject any contribution—no matter the dollar amount—from corporations or executives who profit from pornography.  Alas, as is so often the case when confronted with the actions of our elected officials, we expected too much.

Last week, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a non-profit, progressive legal watchdog group dedicated to holding public officials accountable for their actions released a report entitled Addicted to Porn: Members of Congress Accept Political Contributions from Porn Purveyors . The report details how 15 members of Congress, including 11 representatives and four senators—all of whom say they revile pornography—have accepted campaign contributions from corporations and executives who derive substantial profits from selling pornography.

CREW’s report includes four sections: 1) How companies make money from pornography; 2) Which companies have PACs that make campaign contributions; 3) Which members of Congress have received such contributions; and 4) The statements on pornography made by the members of Congress named in the report.

Some of the findings surprised us. For instance, the Mormon-owned Marriott and Holiday Inn hotel chains generate substantial income selling in-room adult films, and AT&T makes a lot of money through phone sex lines. This is interesting but, in and of itself, not so newsworthy.

What is newsworthy, though, is some of the members of Congress to whom these companies make political contributions are among pornography’s greatest congressional critics. For example:

• Who would have thought that Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan.,—who equates pornography with crack cocaine—would accept $17,000 from porn peddlers?
  
  
• Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., who has long campaigned against the growing coarseness of our culture —and who, along with renown gambling addict William Bennet handed out “silver sewer” awards  to those who made immoral videos—accepted more than $16,000 from porn purveyors.
  
  
• Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., a leader in the fight against indecency, probably spends most days thinking up new ways to protect Americans from sex and profanity. So who would have imagined that he accepted more than $56,000 from porn profits?
  
  
• Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., wanted to be known as the anti-porn presidential candidate, or so he said in campaign ads that ran in South Carolina when he ran for president in 2000.  He probably didn’t focus on those ads when he pocketed $46,000 from corporations and executives who profit from porn.
  
  
• Majority Leader DeLay—who often speaks of the need for virtue but whose own conduct is more akin to that of a mob boss—took in $24,0000.

But the award for biggest hypocrite of all must surely go to Rep. Heather Wilson, R-N.M., who signed a letter sent to then-presidential candidate Al Gore in 2000 demanding that he publicly disavow the support of and return the campaign contributions from an Internet adult entertainment trade association and a Chicago strip-club owner.  In addition, Rep. Wilson had a public meltdown during a congressional hearing regarding the exposure of Janet Jackson’s breast, where she charged Viacom with caring more about profits than morality. Apparently failing to recognize the irony, Rep. Wilson has accepted a whopping $47,000 from the corporations that sell porn for profit.

Since Sen. Lieberman has his award, perhaps we ought to introduce our own version, highlighting the hypocrisy of the ‘skin caucus.’  How about the ‘Forked Tongue Award’? This could be bestowed upon members of Congress who speak out of both sides of their mouths by crusading against pornography one minute and thanking contributors for donations derived from pornography profits the next.  

The next time you see one of these members stand up and rant about how pornography is destroying the moral fabric of our society, look closer. You may see that the only fabric that these folks really care about is the type on which United States currency is printed.