Dubya's Funeralgate

[The Evil Genius]

Well, since we are slinging mud these days...here's my mudpie for you guys...

Here's a new chapter in an old scandal involving a Bush contributor and longtime family friend, Robert Waltrip. This time it's the desecration of dead bodies, and George W. Bush is directly linked to this scandal (as is FEMA director Joe Allbaugh, GW's Chief of Staff while governor of Texas). According to Fox News, Waltrip's company, a cemetery company called Service Corporation International (also known as Dignity Memorial) was "recycling" graves, removing the bodies that were there originally and throwing them in the woods to use the space to house new customers at two Jewish cemeteries in Florida.

Bush's connection to the story is that he was subpoenaed in 1999 but refused to testify in a lawsuit by an ousted Texas state employee as to what his involvement was in halting an investigation into SCI's embalming practices, among other things.

This was a big Texas scandal for our president at the time, but as you will learn from this Washington Post article dated August 31, 1999, a Texas judge put everything right for then-governor Bush, just in time to campaign for the Presidency.

Taxpayers of the state of Texas and SCI settled the lawsuit for $210,000 on November 9, 2001, weeks before the gruesome discovery made at two cemeteries in Florida caught the brief attention of the media.

http://www.austinchronicle.com/issues/vol18/issue45/pols.sci.html

Funeralgate Hits Texas

by Robert Bryce

Led by Governor Bush, the Funeralgate cast includes Sen. John Whitmire, SCI CEO Robert Waltrip (in hat), Bush aide Joe Allbaugh, Rep. Kyle Janek, Sen. Kenneth Armbrister, and Attorney General John Cornyn.

On April 15, 1998, funeral magnate Robert Waltrip talked with Gov. George W. Bush in the Texas Capitol. That much is not in dispute. However, the content of their discussion is the subject of considerable dispute. And the actions taken by the governor's staff members, a half-dozen legislators, and Texas Attorney General John Cornyn after that April 15 meeting are part of what may be the biggest influence-buying scandal in recent memory.

The politicos and the funeral company are at the heart of a whistleblower lawsuit filed March 23 against the state, funeral home giant Service Corporation International (SCI), and Waltrip, the company's chairman and CEO. The suit alleges that Bush and other politicos worked to thwart an investigation by the Texas Funeral Service Commission (TFSC) into improperly licensed embalmers working out of SCI funeral homes in Dallas.

What began as a citizen's complaint against SCI in January 1998 has since grown into a scandal revolving around campaign contributions, and the influence they may buy. All of the politicos who intervened on SCI's behalf received major contributions from SCI's political action committee, or PAC. Did that money convince them to help SCI -- the world's largest death care company -- and to punish the agency that investigated SCI? Whether that was the reason or not, the state officials took positions that may hurt consumers. SCI's prices are routinely among the highest in the funeral business. One consumer advocate, Lamar Hankins, the president of the Funeral & Memorial Societies of America, says the company routinely engages in "price gouging." But campaign cash, not consumers, is at the heart of this scandal. And the scandal promises to grow as the lawsuit -- filed by former TFSC director Eliza May -- works through the discovery process. The suit alleges that May was fired because she "repeatedly and in good faith reported violations of the law and conduct that she reasonably believed to constitute violations of the law."

As May's suit goes forward, Bush and the other politicos who helped SCI are scrambling for cover. May's lawyers want to depose Bush. But the governor missed a requested July 1 deposition date because he was busy campaigning for the presidency in California. Sen. John Whitmire, a Houston Democrat who appears to have gone out of his way to help SCI in its battle with the TFSC, is ducking May's deposition request by claiming legislative privilege, a law that protects legislators from revealing communications they have had with citizens.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Did Bush Know?

Waltrip has given two different versions of what happened during his visit to Bush's office on Tax Day 1998. Both are documented in the whistleblower lawsuit. In one document, issued on June 11, Waltrip's lawyers said Waltrip talked with Bush on April 15, 1998 about a letter he had written that day. The six-page letter complains vociferously about a surprise inspection that TFSC employees made on April 10, 1998, at two SCI funeral homes.

Five days after issuing the document stating that Waltrip talked to the governor about the letter, Waltrip's lawyers changed their story. In a second, "supplemental" response to interrogatories, filed on June 16, the lawyers said that Waltrip did not talk to Bush about his problems with the TFSC. The supplemental document says that while Waltrip was in Bush's office waiting to talk with Joe Allbaugh, Bush's chief of staff, the governor "passed by on the way to a press conference or other appointment," and although Bush "exchanged pleasantries" with Waltrip, their discussion was "not substantive; they did not discuss the content" of Waltrip's letter complaining about the TFSC. The document adds that Waltrip "has never discussed" with Bush his complaints about the TFSC. Perhaps Waltrip or his lawyers realized that implicating the governor in the dispute would damage Bush's presidential campaign.

Whether Waltrip talked to Bush about his problems with the TFSC or not, the governor's office got the message that Waltrip wanted delivered. So did a half-dozen legislators. Within days of Waltrip's visit to Austin, the legislators, the governor's office, and others began applying pressure on SCI's behalf. Consider these facts:

The day after Waltrip's visit to Bush's office, Rep. Kyle Janek, a Houston Republican who owns stock in SCI, called May, the TFSC's executive director, to ask her about her agency's investigation of SCI.

Within the next week, four legislators -- each of whom got substantial campaign contributions from SCI's PAC, wrote nearly identical letters to the TFSC board chairman, Dick McNeil, inquiring about the investigation.

Within a month, TFSC director May says, she was called into the office of Sen. John Whitmire, a Houston Democrat who has received more campaign money from SCI than has any other member of the Senate. There, May says, he "brow-beat" her about the SCI investigation and told her he was going to have another meeting to try to "put an end to the matter."

A few days later, May alleges, she was called into Allbaugh's office where -- with Waltrip sitting in the same room -- Whitmire interrogated her about the TFSC's investigation into SCI and demanded that she answer his questions about the investigation.

Within 10 months, May was fired by the TFSC. And within a year, SCI had hired a lobbyist who helped pass a bill through the Texas Legislature overhauling the TFSC and ousting board chair McNeil.

Within 14 months of Waltrip's visit to Bush's office, Texas Attorney General John Cornyn, who got $2,000 in political contributions from SCI, had issued an opinion backing SCI in its dispute with the TFSC.

Perhaps all of these incidents are coincidental. Or perhaps they show how big money donors, through campaign contributions, buy influence at the highest levels of state government.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Deadly Details

On the face of it, the underlying issues are simple. Waltrip wants state regulators to interpret the law in a way that allows SCI to continue making huge profits on its embalmings, even though its prices are already among the highest in the industry. At issue are regulations governing commercial embalming facilities. SCI contends that it may allow commercial embalming companies to operate inside its existing funeral homes, and that it doesn't have to tell its customers when it uses third-party contractors (see "Embalming for Dollars,").

The TFSC contends that state law prohibits such practice, and that SCI must notify consumers when it uses third-party contractors to do embalmings, including how much such services cost. Tens of millions of dollars in revenue are at stake, particularly for SCI, the biggest player in the Texas funeral business. The company owns about 150 of the 1,261 funeral homes in the state.

As a major player in the funeral business, SCI is accustomed to doling out cash in the form of perfectly legal campaign contributions. From 1996 through the 1998 election, SCI's PAC contributed about $113,000 to the campaigns of dozens of politicians. Bush received $35,000 from SCI. Cornyn got $2,000. Moreover, there appears to be a connection between SCI's political giving and actions taken by elected officials.

In Cornyn's case, his office reversed field 180 degrees in order to aid SCI.

SCI CEO Robert Waltrip

is the world's highest paid undertaker.

photograph by F. Carter Smith

In March, the opinion committee at the attorney general's office said it would not issue an opinion on the TFSC's investigation into SCI's embalming operations. But on June 2 -- just 26 days after meeting with SCI's lawyers -- Cornyn's office issued a 17-page opinion that appears to support SCI's position on the embalming regulations. In addition, documents obtained by the Chronicle under the Texas Public Information Act show that officials from Cornyn's office also met with SCI's lawyers in January to discuss the company's problems with the TFSC.

In addition to Bush and Cornyn, the other politicians who received political contributions between 1996 and 1998, and then wrote letters or interceded on SCI's behalf include:

Whitmire, who got $5,000 from SCI's PAC.

Janek, who owns between 1,000 and 5,000 shares of SCI stock worth at least $18,750, and got $4,355 in contributions from the SCI PAC.

Former state Sen. Michael Galloway, a Republican from the Woodlands, who received $4,847.

Sen. Ken Armbrister, a Victoria Democrat who got $1,500.

Sen. John Carona, a Dallas Republican who got $500.

The late Rep. Dan Kubiak, a Democrat from Rockdale, who got $500 from the SCI PAC.

Within days of the TFSC's unannounced April 10, 1998 visit to two of SCI's Dallas-area funeral homes, each of the six legislators had weighed in on SCI's behalf. Janek and Whitmire went to May; the other four wrote nearly identical letters to TFSC chairman McNeil. Each of the letters refers to a "formal complaint" -- presumably Waltrip's April 15, 1998 letter -- and they all urge McNeil to respond in a "prompt and decisive manner" and to "hold a hearing on this complaint" as soon as possible. More on the legislators in a moment.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dismantling TFSC

The political pressure applied on SCI's behalf appears to have worked. After the letters were sent, and after May's meeting in the governor's office, the TFSC's investigation into SCI ground to a halt. The TFSC did not request any more documents from SCI, no more subpoenas were issued, and no more surprise investigations were done. And although the TFSC recommended last August that SCI be fined $445,000 for violating state embalming laws, the company hasn't yet been required to pay a dime.

Meanwhile, however, the TFSC -- the primary agency responsible for protecting Texas consumers from unscrupulous funeral practices -- has been disemboweled. May says that SCI's pressure led to her dismissal, a move that further weakened the tiny agency. The agency is authorized to have 10 employees. It currently has just five. Over the past five years, the TFSC has had five executive directors, and five general counsels over the past two and a half years.

On June 25, another employee, Michelle Dobbins, the employee with the longest tenure at the agency, quit. At present, the longest-serving employee at the TFSC has been there just two and a half years. Critics claim that weakening the TFSC benefits SCI because the company can operate with less oversight.

"They've dismantled the agency so that there's no one competent enough" to enforce the law, says one former TFSC staffer.

More changes are coming. As of Sept. 1, the agency will be reorganized. During the last legislative session, SCI hired a lobbyist to write, and then convinced legislators to pass, a bill that strips the agency of its general counsel and forces chairman McNeil to retire from the TFSC. The new law requires industry members to be licensed embalmers, a requirement that effectively forces McNeil off the board. It was McNeil who approved the investigation into SCI's embalming practices. Last fall, he said he wanted SCI "to understand that the law is to be applied to everybody equally. Everybody has to meet the same standards."

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mixed Messages

Clearly, the politico with the most to lose in Funeralgate is Bush. And he's staying as far from the scandal as he can. But so far, Waltrip has done the governor few favors. By issuing conflicting interrogatory answers, Waltrip appears to have impugned his own credibility as well as the governor's.

So which is it? Did Waltrip talk to Bush about SCI's complaints or not? Either way, the manner in which Bush's office handled this case does not bode well for the governor.

Two weeks ago, Johnnie B. Rogers, SCI's Austin-based lawyer, repeated the claim that Waltrip "never talked to the governor" about the TFSC investigation. Why, then, did SCI's in-house lawyer, Daniel Reat, swear that Waltrip talked to Bush? In a notarized court document, Reat said that the answers in the first interrogatory "are either within his personal knowledge or based on information obtained from other persons, and are true and correct."

And why did Allbaugh get involved? Did he, as Bush's chief of staff, simply make his own decision to intervene on behalf of SCI? Could Allbaugh have been persuaded by a $35,000 political contribution? Allbaugh, who left the governor's office on July 1 to work full time as campaign manager for Bush's presidential campaign, hasn't been deposed yet, but he will be soon. And he will be a key witness when May's case goes to trial, as will Bush's legal counsel, Margaret Wilson.

"Gov. Bush was not involved in this case and has no personal knowledge of the facts in this case," says his spokesperson, Linda Edwards. Perhaps that's the case. But why, then, is Bush fighting the deposition? Neither Edwards nor the AG's office have provided any legal reason why Bush should be allowed to duck the deposition. It is possible Bush will claim executive privilege -- a move that would certainly add intrigue to Bush's political aspirations.

Apart from Bush, the Cornyn connection to the case may be the stinkiest part of Funeralgate. By getting involved, the attorney general has implicated himself and one of his chief assistants, Andy Taylor, in a series of ethical questions. He has also raised serious questions about the influence exerted by Locke Liddell & Sapp, the law firm that represents SCI. Documents obtained by the Chronicle show that Taylor, who was a partner at Locke Liddell before going to work for Cornyn, initially wanted to avoid the SCI matter. On January 20 of this year, Taylor sent an e-mail to the AG's general counsel, Clark Ervin, asking Ervin to "screen" him "from SCI matters and please do not copy me on anything related to SCI." Taylor told Ervin he wanted to "comply with all of the ethics laws to the fullest."

Fired TFSC director Eliza May has filed a whistleblower lawsuit against the state, SCI, and Robert Waltrip.

photograph by John Anderson

But a memo obtained by the Chronicle under the Texas Public Information Act lists Taylor as attending a May 7 meeting between Cornyn and SCI's lawyers. In addition, Taylor's name is the first one listed after Cornyn's on the June 2 opinion concerning SCI and the TFSC.

Heather Browne, a spokesperson for Cornyn, said that despite the memo, Taylor did not attend the May 7 meeting. "It's a clerical error," she said. "He wasn't even in the building." With regard to the opinion, she said that Taylor's name appears on all of the AG's opinions, and that Taylor "completely recused himself on the SCI opinion."

Browne added, "The meeting and the opinion aren't necessarily related. In order to be a hands-on attorney general, he should be able to meet with people who request meetings with him. And that's what he did with the SCI representatives. There was no correlation between the meeting and the issuance of an opinion."

So who attended the May 7 meeting? Documents obtained under the Public Information Act show that SCI's general counsel, James Shelger, along with two Locke Liddell attorneys, co-managing partner Bruce LaBoon and James Essig, met with Cornyn. However, during an interview last week, SCI attorney Johnnie B. Rogers told the Chronicle that he, too, was at the meeting with Cornyn. Asked who else attended, Rogers replied, "Are you quoting me on this? If so, I am not telling you a thing."

Perhaps Rogers is confused. Documents show that on January 19, Rogers and two other SCI attorneys, Shelger and Daniel Reat, met with Clark Ervin at the AG's office, to, in Shelger's words, discuss "SCI's relationship with the Texas Funeral Service Commission."

In a January 28 letter, Shelger told Ervin that "SCI appreciates that the Office of the Attorney General has agreed to remain involved in the investigation and resolution of these issues and to ensure that they are handled appropriately."

That leads to the obvious question: Why did Cornyn decide in June to get involved in a dispute that was pending before a state agency? After all, Cornyn's office had made its position clear in a March 4 letter written by Elizabeth Robinson, the chair of the Attorney General's Opinion Committee.

Last year, Sen. Whitmire wrote the attorney general's office asking for an opinion on a series of questions relating to the TFSC and its authority to regulate embalming. In her letter responding to the request, Robinson said that the AG was not going to answer the questions because the TFSC was involved in a contested case with SCI and that "our understanding is that this controversy is set for mediation before the State Office of Administrative Hearings. "Given these circumstances," Robinson wrote, "it would not be appropriate for the Office of the Attorney General to interpose itself in this matter." And she added, "we respectfully decline to issue an opinion at this time and are closing our file on this matter."

One month later, on April 8, Cornyn sent Robinson a memo indicating his desire to get involved in the SCI case. Although he doesn't mention the case by name, Cornyn writes that he "would like to review all instances in which the Opinion Committee believes we should decline an opinion request." Cornyn then repeats his instructions, saying "ALL instances," and instructs Robinson that "at the very least, I want to be informed about these instances before the letter goes out."

Perhaps it's a coincidence, but the very next day after Cornyn sent this memo, which was also sent to Andy Taylor, Cornyn's office got a new request from Sen. Armbrister, which asked all of the same questions that Whitmire had asked in the initial request for an opinion, nearly a year earlier. Armbrister's letter asked the AG to rule on regulations governing commercial embalming establishments, third-party embalming, and other issues.

And once again, there's a case of nearly identical letters. Armbrister asked the exact same 11 questions that Whitmire had asked. In fact, Armbrister's letter is almost identical -- down to the period and comma -- to the one Whitmire had sent to Cornyn on June 15, 1998.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Compromising Positions

Gov. Bush's role in the SCI scandal

is being called into question.

photograph by Jana Birchum

Given Armbrister's new request, Cornyn decided to issue an opinion. But by doing so, Cornyn put his office in an odd position and he may earn himself an appearance before the State Bar of Texas for misconduct. By siding with SCI in their dispute with the TFSC, Cornyn appears to have bowed to political pressure. And by issuing the opinion, he may help the agency in the whistleblower suit filed by May, by concurring that her complaints about SCI were unfounded. However, Cornyn may also have hurt the state in its dispute with SCI. That's because the TFSC's dispute with SCI has not been resolved, and the TFSC's fine against the company still hasn't been paid. Thus, Cornyn has taken a position that is adverse to his own client, the TFSC. And State Bar rules prohibit lawyers from taking actions that are adverse to their clients' interests.

Sen. John Whitmire,

a Houston Democrat who appears

to have gone out of his way to help SCI in its battle with the TFSC.

photograph by Jana Birchum

May has asked the State Bar to investigate Cornyn's actions. Although the Bar's inquiries are kept secret unless and until it decides if a lawyer should be punished, the complaint could be nettlesome for Cornyn because May is represented by Charles Herring Jr., an Austin attorney who is well versed in legal ethics. In fact, Herring has authored a textbook called Texas Legal Malpractice and Lawyer Discipline.

And there's more to the Locke Liddell connection, as well. Whitmire is of counsel at Locke Liddell. And Whitmire may have done more than any other legislator to aid Waltrip's assault on the TFSC. It was Whitmire who demanded that May appear in Allbaugh's office to be interrogated in front of Waltrip regarding her agency's investigation. It was Whitmire who first asked the AG to get involved in the case. Perhaps it's coincidence, but Whitmire's district contains the Heights, where Waltrip's first funeral home is located. And maybe the $5,000 that SCI has given to Whitmire didn't influence his actions.

In March, Whitmire told the Chronicle he got involved after SCI contacted him, "because I was concerned about the press and the activities of the commission with constituents of mine." He added that he was trying to be a mediator in the dispute between SCI and the TFSC. But Whitmire stumbled when asked about the TFSC's investigation into SCI. He initially said, "I don't know much about what investigation you are talking about. We were not dealing with the investigation." But he later contradicted his claim of ignorance about the TFSC's investigation, when he said he knew about the April 10, Good Friday, visit to the two SCI funeral homes. "I don't think you ought to be making Good Friday raids at seven o'clock in the morning and intimidating citizens of Texas," he said.

While Whitmire went out of his way to help SCI, he is doing all he can to avoid testifying about his role in the scandal. In a June 30 motion for a protective order issued by the attorney general's office, which is representing Whitmire, assistant attorney general Dona G. Hamilton argues that Whitmire doesn't have to disclose any of the discussions he held with SCI about the TFSC investigation because such communications are protected by law. The law, known as legislative privilege, says that public disclosure of communications from "a citizen of this state received by a member [of the Legislature] or the lieutenant governor in his official capacity is prohibited."

However, the statute goes on to say that an official may disclose the information if he "determines that the disclosure does not constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy of the communicator."

Would SCI and Waltrip have their privacy violated if Whitmire agreed to disclose the details of his conversations with them? Or would it just be embarrassing, to them and perhaps others? If Whitmire's effort to quash the subpoena succeeds, citizens will never be given a chance to find out.

What is most ironic about Cornyn's position in Funeralgate is that he ran against, and beat, Jim Mattox by attacking Mattox on ethics issues. Cornyn ran TV ads slamming Mattox for associating with Dallas businessman Danny Faulkner, who was later convicted of fraud. But now Cornyn appears to be actively siding with the world's largest funeral home after he took a campaign contribution from them. In addition, it appears that he's taking that position even though it may harm consumers. And by allowing his first assistant, a lawyer formerly tied to SCI's law firm, to appear to be involved in the case, Cornyn raises questions not only about his ethics, but about his judgment.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Buying Power?

SCI-owned Cook-Walden is Austin's largest funeral provider.

photograph by John Anderson

There may be no way to prove that the six legislators named above did anything illegal when they tried to help SCI in its battle with the TFSC. But the actions of Rep. Kyle Janek are the ones most likely to raise eyebrows. According to a disclosure statement filed with the Ethics Commission, Janek, a physician, owns SCI stock worth a minimum of $18,750 (based on stock prices as of June 25). On April 23, 1998, he wrote a letter to Eliza May asking questions about the TFSC's investigation into SCI's operations. Twenty-two days later, Janek got a check from SCI PAC for a $1,000 campaign contribution. Then, a week later, SCI PAC sent him another $1,855.

Janek acknowledged in a phone interview on Monday that he has been friends with members of Waltrip's family for many years. He also said that three years ago, he lived in a house owned by Waltrip's daughter and her husband for several months, while his own home was being built. Janek said he got involved in the TFSC dispute after getting a call from an SCI employee, whom he declined to name. The legislator defended his actions on behalf of SCI, though, saying, "I never intervened in the merits of the complaint that was being investigated. I only intervened to learn more about the way that investigation was conducted." When asked if the campaign contributions and his friendship with Waltrip's family gives the appearance of influence buying, Janek replied, "I can't disregard a constituent complaint because it comes from somebody who is a friend of mine. I can't do that. I won't do that."

While the letters written by Janek and the others put pressure on the commission, SCI used its clout most successfully when it convinced Rep. Kenny Marchant, a Republican from Carrollton, to carry a bill overhauling the TFSC. The initial bill, which was written by a lobbyist hired by SCI, included a casket-load of bad provisions. In its initial form, Marchant's bill would have precluded the TFSC executive director from issuing subpoenas unless ordered to do so by the TFSC board -- thus removing the agency's ability to issue unannounced subpoenas. When the bill got to the floor, many of the bad provisions were removed. But SCI succeeded in passing legislation that removes the TFSC's general counsel and gets rid of McNeil, the man who authorized the initial investigation into its activities.

Marchant's bill, which Bush signed into law on June 19, becomes law in two months. Perhaps it's just another coincidence, but last October, Marchant got $5,000 from SCI, more than any other member of the Texas House.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Unfinished Business

While SCI is fighting the TFSC on the embalming issue, other questions also loom. Agency insiders insist the company is in violation of state law when it comes to licenses. State regulations require that when funeral homes are sold, the new owner must contact the TFSC within 30 days so that the name on the funeral home's license can be changed to reflect the new ownership. But SCI has not changed the names on licenses for more than 60 Texas funeral homes that SCI acquired when it bought Equity Corporation International (ECI) in January. Not changing the licenses saves the company about $10,000 in fees.

Attorney General John Cornyn

SCI lawyer Daniel Reat acknowledged last week that the company has not changed the names on the licenses. But he argues that the company is not required to do so. "The legal entity owning the funeral home hasn't changed," said Reat, explaining that the same corporation, ECI, still owns the funeral homes even after it was bought by SCI. "So there's no legal requirement for the license to be transferred to a new name," Reat said.

Lamar Hankins disagrees. Hankins, a San Marcos resident and president of the Funeral and Memorial Societies of America, a consumer group, says the law is unequivocal on the license issue and that SCI "needs to apply for new licenses. The ownership has clearly changed."

The licensing issue is one of many lingering issues regarding SCI. And Tom "Smitty" Smith, the state director of Texas Public Citizen, says the TFSC isn't the agency to resolve them. "This has all the trappings of a major scandal with politicians taking actions to stop investigations after contributions have been made," Smith said. "The governor should ask a special court of inquiry to look into this or have the state auditor initiate an investigation, because everyone from his office to the AG seems to have their fingerprints on this."

Proving wrongdoing in Funeralgate will be difficult because prosecutors or plaintiffs' lawyers will be hard-pressed to prove that the politicians involved were motivated by money. SCI's lawyers will likely argue that many of the events that occurred were coincidence or that Waltrip was simply asking some of his friends to inquire into TFSC activities that Waltrip believed were improper.

Whatever happens, Evelyn Collins, a former commissioner at the TFSC, is certain that her motives were pure. Collins was a member of the three-member complaint review committee that recommended the $445,000 fine against SCI last year. Collins, who was appointed to the commission by Bush, lives in Texarkana. She says she and her fellow commission members did what they were supposed to do. "We were given a charge by the laws of the state of Texas and we upheld the law," she said.

Collins, 78, says she is sorry that her work has caused such a furor. But she adds, "I feel good about what we did. It was an honest action according to the information we had been given." And despite the current mess, she believes the TFSC is doing an important job. "This is an agency that's needed to protect consumers. I'm a consumer and I protected the consumer."

While Collins says she was interested in protecting consumers, it appears that Bush, Cornyn and the other elected officials were more interested in protecting the world's largest funeral company.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,41298,00.html

Gruesome Photos, Video Show Bodies Discarded in Woods Behind Cemetery

Thursday, December 20, 2001

FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — Attorneys suing a cemetery company accused of recycling graves showed grisly photos and video footage Thursday of crushed burial vaults and human remains discarded in the woods.

They also presented internal documents they say show Menorah Gardens & Funeral Chapels in West Palm Beach and its owner, Houston-based Service Corporation International, were aware of the grave desecrations. SCI is the world's largest cemetery company.

The attorneys represent 10 families who say their loved ones were dug up and dumped in the woods, buried in the wrong graves or buried in vaults on top of each other instead of side by side as the families had paid for. More than 1,000 people could become part of the class-action lawsuit, they said.

"That body that is placed to rest for eternity is now destroyed, maligned, abused," said attorney Ervin A. Gonzalez.

SCI officials did not immediately return a call Thursday but said Wednesday that they had no knowledge of any wrongdoing.

The state attorney general's office is investigating Menorah Gardens and four other South Florida cemeteries owned by SCI.

A videotape and photos taken by private investigators showed a leg bone beside chunks of a concrete vault, in which coffins are placed. They also show Jewish burial shrouds, and a Star of David next to finger bones.

A former cemetery worker led investigators to the remains, attorneys said.

Remarks in the burial book, obtained from former employees, included "no room for spouse," "move Mrs. Kolin" and "dig this grave double deep." Another handwritten note said: "Where are Lippitis and who are Haskells and are they both deceased? Move Haskell marker."

The pages show "there are several hundred people who have purchased graves, premium contracts purchased years ago, that do not have a place to be laid to rest," said co-counsel Neal Hirschfeld.

Myra Stone of Lake Worth said her parents bought side-by-side graves in 1982. Her father died in 1994, but another man allegedly was buried next to him in her mother's grave. When her mother died last year, the cemetery's operators dug up the man's vault and threw most of his remains in the woods, according to a former employee.

"I understand that some of his remains are still in her grave," Stone said. "I am just horrified."

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday, seeks unspecified damages.

"We've investigated allegations that we thought too heinous to be accurate, too horrible to be true, over the last several years," Hirschfeld said.

[gbear]

sounds about on a par with the Clinton realestate stuff. It's more complex than can be covered in a 30second news report. Since there is no sex, nobody is going to care. It's only an issue for those who think it's possible to rise in politics without any shady contributions. Sad

[@DCGoldPants]

I think its pretty obvious that this whole Funeralgate thing is clearly Clinton's fault. :laugh:

[Kilmer17]

You dont honestly think this equates to Whitewater do you?

[@DCGoldPants]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

You dont honestly think this equates to Whitewater do you?

ask the people who's family members were dug up.

Personally I think the story is dumb and I was just joking....but apple and oranges here.

[Kilmer17]

I would equate it if Bush actually owned the funeral company.

[gbear]

Both would be ethics violations.

In both case a politican used his job to make money outside of salary. One put the money into elections the other in his pocket. sorry, there's not much difference.

If the accusations above are true, are you saying you see no problem with it?

[Burgold]

Of course there's no problem with this. Bush is as pure as the exhumed, driven-over snow. :doh:

[Kilmer17]

Im still trying to figure out how Whitewater and this are even remotely similar. In one case, Bush received legal campaign contributions. In the other the Clintons committed a crime.

[The Evil Genius]

Some more mudslingin' fun

Its old news..

Contempt charges sought against Bush

Did the Republican front-runner lie in his sworn affidavit? It all depends on what the meaning of a conversation is.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

By Robert Bryce

August 18, 1999 | AUSTIN, Texas -- Gov. George W. Bush isn't whistling past the graveyard anymore.

Attorneys for Eliza May, the former executive director of the Texas Funeral Service Commission, filed a motion Wednesday morning asking the court to find the front-runner for the Republican presidential nomination in contempt for not telling the truth in a sworn deposition, part of a case involving a possible funeral-home oversight scandal.

May says that the Service Corporation International, the world's largest funeral company, got her driven out of state government after her commission recommended last August that the company be fined $445,000 for violating a casketload of state regulations. She was fired by the commission in February. May filed a whistle-blower lawsuit against the state, the company and CEO Robert Waltrip in March, claiming that the company and state officials worked together to thwart her agency's investigation into the company.

The contempt motion puts the spotlight on Bush's sworn affidavit, filed on Aug. 5, in which he said that he has "had no conversations with SCI officials, agents or representatives" about the state's investigation. The affidavit was filed by Texas Attorney General John Cornyn along with a motion to quash a subpoena issued to Bush by May's attorneys.

Since the affidavit was filed, Bush's flat denial has been contradicted several times, even by Bush himself. According to reporters who were with Bush in Iowa last week, when Bush was asked if he talked to Waltrip about the investigation, Bush responded, "I did not. I had only a brief exchange with him that lasted only a few seconds." Bush's press secretary, Linda Edwards, has also described their meeting as an "exchange."

The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word "conversation" thusly: "an informal spoken exchange."

In their 16-page motion, May's attorneys point out that in the Aug. 16 Newsweek, Johnnie B. Rogers, Waltrip's attorney, discusses an April 15, 1998, meeting in the office of Joe Allbaugh, Bush's chief of staff. According to Rogers, while he and Waltrip were in Allbaugh's office, Bush stuck his head into the room. "Hey, Bobby, are those people still messing with you?" Bush asked Waltrip. When Waltrip indicated that they were, Bush asked Rogers, "Hey, Johnnie B. Are you taking care of him?" Rogers replied, "I'm doing my best, governor."

May's attorneys are claiming that Rogers' statement, combined with statements made by Edwards, and a sworn interrogatory issued on June 11 by Waltrip's attorneys, show that "the governor had what was undeniably a conversation about the dispute arising from the Texas Funeral Service Commission investigation of SCI." They add that Bush gave "testimony that was deliberately misleading and deceptive."

In a prepared statement Wednesday, Bush spokeswoman Edwards called the motion for contempt "nothing more than a publicity stunt and an example of the frivolous misuse of the civil justice system. This is clearly an attempt to draw Gov. Bush into something he has not been involved in. Gov. Bush stands by what he said in his affidavit, which is what he has said all along -- that he was not involved in the case and has no personal knowledge of the facts of the case."

The court filing is the latest development in the influence-buying scandal whirling around SCI that is now being referred to as "Formaldegate." On Monday, the Texas comptroller of public accounts, Carole Keeton Rylander, a Republican, announced that her agency was taking over the day-to-day operations of the TFSC, which has been foundering ever since May was dismissed from the agency on Feb. 8. Rylander was asked by Bush to intervene at the tiny agency, which is supposed to have 10 employees. Just four employees are currently working at the TFSC, which regulates 1,200 funeral homes in Texas. Three employees from the comptroller's office are expected to stay at the TFSC for several weeks.

The comptroller's move was applauded by SCI spokesman Bill Miller, who said the company is eager to resolve the fines that have been levied against it. "All we've ever said is we want our case processed," Miller said.

In her lawsuit against the state, May blames her dismissal on SCI, which has given tens of thousands of dollars to various state politicians who allegedly intervened on the company's behalf. Since 1996, Bush's gubernatorial campaign has received $35,000 from SCI's political action committee. In 1994, when Bush was running for governor, Waltrip gave him $10,000. In addition, Waltrip is a close friend of Bush's father, former President George Bush.

In their motion seeking a contempt sanction, May's lawyers claim Bush made false statements in his affidavit to avoid being deposed. "Plainly, such egregiously improper conduct subverts the judicial process and undermines our system of justice," says the motion, which asks the court to find Bush in contempt, order him to appear for deposition within 21 days and impose a fine against him.

A hearing on the motion to quash the subpoena is scheduled in Travis County District Court on Aug. 30.

[The Evil Genius]

Did Bush lie under oath in funeral home case?

An SCI attorney says the Texas governor talked to him about a state agency investigation, contradicting Bush's affidavit in the case.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

By Robert Bryce and Anthony York

Aug. 9, 1999 | A sworn affidavit by Texas Gov. George W. Bush insisting he had no discussions about a state investigation into a political contributor's funeral home business has been contradicted by the company's own lawyer.

Bush had been subpoenaed by attorneys for Eliza May, the former executive director of the Texas Funeral Service Commission, which had been investigating Service Corporation International of Houston, the world's largest funeral company, whose chief executive, Robert Waltrip, is a close political ally of the Bush family. May, who was fired in February, is suing SCI, Waltrip and the state of Texas, alleging that Bush and other state officials pressured her agency to stop the investigation.

The Texas governor and front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination sought to avoid testifying in the case by filing an affidavit swearing he "had no conversations with [sCI] officials, agents, or representatives concerning the investigation or any dispute arising from it."

The affidavit also stated that Bush never spoke with the Texas Funeral Service Commission about the investigation, and that Bush had "no personal knowledge of relevant facts of the investigation nor do I have any personal knowledge of relevant facts concerning any dispute arising from this investigation."

But in a forthcoming story by Newsweek reporter Michael Isikoff, Johnnie B. Rogers, attorney for SCI, said he and Waltrip met with Bush's chief of staff and campaign manager, Joe Allbaugh, on April 15 to hand deliver a letter demanding an end to the investigation.

Bush stuck his head into the meeting, Rogers told Isikoff, and said, "Hey Bobby, are those people still messing with you?" When Waltrip indicated that they were, Bush asked Rogers, "Hey, Johnnie B. Are you taking care of him?" Rogers replied, "I'm doing my best, Governor."

Rogers' story appears to contradict Bush's statement that he has "had no conversations with SCI officials, agents or representatives" about the state's investigation. Bush press secretary Linda Edwards told Isikoff that Bush and Waltrip had a "brief verbal exchange," though "they did not discuss the case."

May's attorneys believe the controversy should intensify the call for Bush to testify. "Obviously the statement of Johnnie B. Rogers in Newsweek indicates that [bush] knew more than he's letting on about this case," said May's attorney, Derek Howard. "This is all the more reason to have him deposed."

May's lawsuit alleges she was fired because her department's investigation got too close to discovering illegal embalming practices by SCI. Bush has received $35,000 in campaign contributions since 1996 from SCI's political action committee, and Waltrip is an old friend and benefactor of the Bush family.

A hearing has been set for Aug. 30 in the Travis County Courthouse in Austin to decide if Bush must testify in the case.

The funeral home flap presents the first real test for Bush's high-flying presidential campaign. Earlier stories about his draft status seem to have fallen by the wayside, and the persistent rumors about his rambunctious youth have proven to be nothing more than gossip to date.

But these allegations represent something different. It can't be good news to the Bush campaign that Isikoff, the reporter who first dug up the name Monica Lewinsky, is on the case. The word around Austin is that "60 Minutes" is beginning to get interested in the story.

Meanwhile, the silence out of Austin is deafening. The normally gregarious Rogers has apparently been muzzled, and is not speaking to the media. He told Salon News that all questions about the matter should be referred to SCI spokesman Bill Miller.

Neither Bush's campaign press team nor his gubernatorial press office returned numerous calls seeking comment.

salon.com | Aug. 9, 1999

[gbear]

legal campaign contributions?

Do the words conflict of interests and oaths to prevent conflict of interests mean anything to you? My job is a lot lower than governor, and I have to take those oaths. It's a crime if I violate them too.

Buying and selling politicians is something you're okay with?

[Burgold]

Just to be fair, Kilmer. He was found innocent I believe after multiple investigations and several trials. While it's okay to presume his guilt as probable though unproveable... it's not really fair to give one the benefit of the doubt and not the other.

"the frontrunner for the Republican presidential nomination in contempt for not telling the truth in a sworn deposition, part of a case involving a possible funeral-home oversight scandal."

Isn't whitewater, but the perjury issue is one that Clinton gets bashed unrepentently for.

[Kilmer17]

The perjury point is a better argument than the campaign contributions.

Id like to see more on it.

[JimboDaMan]

Its all about oil.

[@DCGoldPants]

Originally posted by JimboDaMan

Its all about oil.

No, its about how Clinton blew it.

[AJWatson3]

thanks for the post TEG. a good read. lots of articles too. shocked we haven't had any posts questioning the credibility of the austin chronicle as being some left-wing, WEB only print source that has an obvious anti-Bush agenda.

can't believe this issue blew over so quietly.

[Burgold]

It blew over so quietly because the liberal media protects its own and only attacks conservatives... isn't that what the general belief. I am actually surprised by how quiet or possibly chastened the biggest of the conservative and moral voices here have been about these articles. Only Kilmer seemed to have the conviction to defend/consider these issues.

[JackC]

Originally posted by Kilmer17

Im still trying to figure out how Whitewater and this are even remotely similar. In one case, Bush received legal campaign contributions. In the other the Clintons committed a crime.

Care to prove the Clinton's committed a crime my friend?

TEG,

How dare you criticize our president during war times. Are you an American or not?

[Funkyalligator]

Let's impeach him for lying under oath. And spend 40 million dollars of taxpayer money while wasting thousands of hours that could be spent correcting actual problems in our country with legislation.

[Tarhog]

Originally posted by Funkyalligator

Let's impeach him for lying under oath. And spend 40 million dollars of taxpayer money while wasting thousands of hours that could be spent correcting actual problems in our country with legislation.

You're right. Perhaps we could have used that money to fund valuable research...I'm thinking OSHA might have financed 'The Effects of Office Hummers on Productivity and Job Satisfaction Levels in the Federal Worker'. Of course there is a downside, repetitive motion injury risks (not to mention rugburn) and all.....