Dempsey's Bagman Smith Perfects the Art of the Self-Deal
Last week, the First
Capitol News of St. Charles kicked over some rocks to take a closer look at the
intricate system of money-shuffling and pocket-lining going on in St. Charles
GOP circles. The First Capitol piece draws a bead on Republican
House floor leader Tom Dempsey's aide Thomas Smith, who also serves as
treasurer for quite a few St. Charles area legislative district and campaign finance
committees. In relevant part, the News writes:
To circumvent political contribution limits, Legislative
Party Committees have been formed. Unlimited contributions are given to these
Legislative District Committees and are then funneled through backdoors making
it almost impossible for the public to know who is giving and who is receiving.
...
The First Capitol News has discovered TEN of those back door funding
Legislative Committees being operated out of a home at 320 Monroe Street in St.
Charles with the only treasurer for each committee listed as Thomas W. Smith,
Jr. We have also discovered several fictitious registered companies, apparently
unlicensed, owned and operated by Smith, receiving funds from these same
committees.
While the story does well to point out the fact that Smith draws an annual salary of more than $53,000 from the public till as legislative aide to Dempsey, it's possible that the piece actually understates the financial benefit to Smith of the current arrangement.
An independent review of campaign finance filings with the Missouri Ethics Commission reveals that since February of 2003, companies owned by Tom Smith have been the recipient of more than $94,000 in "fees" paid by campaign finance committees controlled by Smith.
Over that period, outfits called Advisors in Finance, Survey Saint Louis and Gateway to Victory LLC --all fictitious names registered to Smith's Display Stuff LLC-- were the recipient of "fees" from 12 different Smith-led committees (most prominently the 2nd Senatorial, 16th and 18th Republican Legislative District Committees) totaling $94,257.71.
In other words, over the last three years Smith has skimmed an average of more than $30,000 annually off the tops of the committees he controls. Good work, if you can get it --without too many people noticing.
And Smith isn't just profiting from his own committees. In fact, over a period of fewer than two months in spring of 2005, Smith's outfits (listed as "SSL, 320 Monroe St." on the reports) took a sum of $25,000 in three separate payments from a prominent GOP committee called the Senate Majority Fund. One can easily imagine the brand of malfeasance that could be stoked when Senate leaders are paying "consulting fees" to individuals whose official posts on the staff of House leaders put them in the position to affect what happens to legislation from the other chamber.
Perhaps next week Dempsey will issue an ethics manual that sets forth for his staff the limits for acceptable levels of graft. Until then, we have no choice but to assume that Dempsey's silence represents tacit approval or ownership of his aide's business activities and possible sale of his office's influence.
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
| Smith_Committees_to_Firms.xls | 17.5 KB |
- Howard Beale's blog
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer friendly version









I don't think you understand, Porter.
No one, not least of all me, disputes that Democrats and Republican both use legislative district committees to pass through contributions in excess of campaign committee limits into their committees. That's not at issue. But you'd have to be obtuse not to recognize the difference between using a district committee to pass a big contribution from one committee to another and a treasurer using his legislative district committee to route money into businesses he owns.
Does the treasurer of Jay Nixon's committee write checks out of that committee to bogus "consulting" businesses that he owns? The answer, of course, is 'no'. I know it's just your desire to muddy things rather than clarify, but you really should try comparing apples to apples so your argument isn't so transparently disingenuous.
So, Democrats are proposing what exactly?
The Democrats' solution is...
...that we not have state employees engage in blatant self-dealing and selling influence to entities who have interests before them. It's really pretty simple.
If there are Dems who also control 12 different party and campaign committees and are taking tens of thousands out of those committees into their own "consulting" businesses, you should feel free to post evidence of such on this site. I won't hold my breath. It's much easier to just imply that Democrats are "doing these things" than to actually dig into the Ethics filings and get real proof, isn't it Kevin?