Customer Reviews

Capitol Punishment: The Hard Truth About Washington Corruption From America's Most Notorious Lobbyist

5 star:		(25)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(6)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(14)

 

 

This book has its interesting moments, and it could have been a really good book. But listening to Abramoff brag on himself page after page after page takes so much away from the story. His self love is a major distraction. But the book is also very revealing - on two levels. One is the revelations he intentionally shares about Washington, lobbying and politics (as well as his experiences in Hollywood and with Imelda Marcos and his treatment in prison). The other is his unintentional revelations as to what kind of person he is. You can't read this book without seeing him for the narcissist he is. To hear him tell it, most people are self-serving, lazy, greedy and bad - everyone but the people he loves like Tom DeLay and his other "friends." From his perspective, he's generous to a fault, kind, godly, and is smarter and works harder than anyone. Anyone who has ever worked on Capitol Hill or in politics will very quickly see through Abramoff's self promotion.

Don't get me wrong. This book is interesting and telling at times (such as the way he portrays Ralph Reed, experiences with members of Congress, battles like the one he had with movie producers who set up shop outside his restaurant, etc.), and I don't regret reading it. But this is not a five-star book, and I really don't understand the unconditional raves for this book or the fact all reviews before mine were five star. A couple of them don't even sound like they read they same book I read. But read the book and judge for yourself. I noticed that this is the first review ever posted by several five-star reviewers, and it is the second or third review for all the other five-star reviewers. Also, 9 of the 12 people who reviewed this book before I did read the entire book and published their five-star rave reviews on the exact same day this book was released - November 7th. All that doesn't always mean anything, but I find that information helpful when deciding whether to purchase a book that seems to get all rave reviews. The subject matter is what makes this book interesting, but the writing and the writer prevent it from being a great book or anything more than a three-star book for me. The three stars (instead of one or two) is for the information and for tackling a subject not many people have taken on.

Even with all the scandals he has been involved with that I already knew a good bit about, I never disliked Abramoff until I read this book. Quite the contrary, in fact. I liked the fact he has taken on and called out some people in power who need to be called out. But reading this book changed my impression of him for the worse. He is truly unlikable, but he's completely unaware of that fact. In fact, he appears to possess no self awareness. He preaches about the evils of Washington and talks as though he is the voice of reason and justice. He's hypocritical and transparent, and it takes away from the good points he does make. Early on he tells a story about being SO shocked when a Congressman wanted to trade votes in order to get a project in his district, but then he does things that are horribly worse than that without batting an eye. He never had a problem with anything until he got into trouble and even now his preachiness seems so self-serving. And he is constantly referencing how devoutly religious he is. He clearly missed the Commandment to "have no other god before Me" because there is so much self-worship in his book. He says, "The charitable giving was good for my soul, but it soon became something of an addiction." Spending money (and finding new and creative ways to make it) seemed to be his real addiction.

Additionally, there is no big message in this book about how to fix government. In the very last pages of the book he does list his dream reforms (which is his first and only attempt at discussing reform of any kind). Some points he makes are very valid, but others make no sense and would only serve to place more power in the hands of fewer people. And if Abramoff had his way, someone who was a paid intern for Congress when they were in college or worked as a district staffer in his/her 20s could never lobby for the rest of his/her life. I find this ironic considering Abramoff never worked a day in Congress, and yet he was one of the worst offenders when it came to ethics violations and corruption. But that is one of his "solutions" to the corruption that he represented in Washington. Also he'll gush (literally) about Tom DeLay and his total disdain for President Clinton because DeLay can't tolerate any dishonesty, but then Abramoff makes excuses when President Bush lies about knowing him or even meeting him. He lacks consistency in the judgment he is so quick to dispense. Abramoff also strongly criticizes Senator McCain for being a narcissist while remaining completely blind to his own narcissism.

His book does show a lot of what is wrong with politics and government - and Abramoff was a big part of that. But this book is simply Jack Abramoff's side of the story. It's no great message of redemption. If you love politics or have a strong interest in it or in government, this book is definitely worth a read. However, do not expect it to be full of deep insights because he's not a deep thinker. His story is one that needs to be heard because a lot of it has not been covered by the mainstream media (and it really needs to be), but I believe his story would be better told by someone else in the form of a biography as opposed to being spun by self-absorbed him in an autobiography. I don't question his facts, just his focus. I think his self-centered presentation could make it easier for his detractors (as well as the people who didn't want to be called out) to discredit the valid points he makes.

I read this book not knowing what to expect. I found it witty, humorous, educational, and easy to read. I learned a great deal about the operations of our government. One item which I learned that I had never focused upon was a reason which Jack gave for our present day predicament, and the reason dates back to the 1913 Constitutional Amendment which allowed for the direct popular election of Senators as opposed to their election by their state legislatures as had been previously done. I knew this historical fact, but I never appreciated the far reaching ramifications that this has had on the dimunition of states' rights.
There are many such observations, and I, therefore, strongly recommend this book. I hope Jack gives us a sequel of about 1,000 pages since I am sure that he must have hundreds of great stories with many fascinating details that were not included in this book.

This is my first review for Amazon, but after reading the big difference in opinions about Jack Abramoff's book, I wanted to add my thoughts. After watching Abramoff on 60 Minutes and the Colbert Report and other shows, I decided to read his book. I found him more appealing on those television shows than I did in this book. Reading his book did not leave me with the same favorable impression I got from watching his interviews.

I don't understand reviewers who bill his book as a cure for what ails politics. Jack Abramoff and people like him are what's wrong with politics. He can blame it on the system all he wants and act like his working within this system or his working the system were simply a reflection on the political system and not on himself, but he would be wrong. The bottom line is that the majority of people serve and work in the political system without being corrupt like Jack Abramoff was or without corrupting others as he says he did.

I also don't know where people are getting that his book is one of great repentance or contrition. I didn't get much of that at all. Instead I got that he would prefer to blame the system rather than truly examine himself and accept blame for his consuming greed. I'm not saying there aren't reforms that need to take place in politics. Of course there are. I'm just saying that even with reforms, corrupt people like Jack Abramoff would still exist. They exist in all fields of work. There are bad apples in every profession.

Abramoff wants people to think that his book is an indictment of the political system, but really it is an indictment of himself. Some of these reviews that fawn over him and talk about how he has the cure for what ails politics are giving him too much credit. Some actually sound like Abramoff wrote them himself. Abramoff had plenty of opportunities while working in Washington to do the right thing. Instead, he chose the path of greed and exploitation, and by writing his book he yet again is trying to cash in. There's nothing wrong with his cashing in after his release from prison, but let's not make him out to be something he's not. He seems to be the same person he was before. Only now no one will hire him to lobby for them, so he's looking at other ways to make a living. That doesn't make him an altruistic do-gooder. It also doesn't make him an expert on doing the right thing or an expert on how to fix Washington like some would have you believe.

I found some of his post-prison suggested reforms to be insulting because most wouldn't even affect the laws that allowed him to do all the corrupt things he did. Other of his reforms wouldn't even work because they are so obviously unconstitutional. He overreaches in a lot of his reform ideas and claims they would protect the public from people like him. No system can protect people from people willing to break the law. Criminals will exist in any system, and that's what Abramoff was. If the system was different, he would have found another way to get around it.

The fact his reform list does not include banning convicted felons from lobbying tells you all you need to know about his reform ideas. Not that I'm for punishing people who have served their time forever, but if he so sincerely wants to fix the system, then why not start with himself? He's a master at pointing fingers at everyone but himself. I also found the fact he tossed his reform ideas in in the final pages of the book to be insulting. How can anyone call this book a cure for what ails politics when he barely mentions reforms and he only includes them in the last few pages of the 330-page book?

"Capitol Punishment" is the story of Abramoff's life. It is not a cautionary tale other than the fact it should caution people about not being so greedy. It's an easy read, which is why I gave it two stars. He's not a bad writer. But he's no expert on how to fix Washington anymore than a bank robber is an expert on how to reform Wall Street. He's lived an interesting life. From his childhood in Beverly Hills, his becoming an Orthodox Jew, his Young Repub days and his work in Hollywood to his friendship with Imelda Marcos, his days is Washington, his time in prison and more. He definitely has not led a boring life.

I believe his time in Hollywood would have lasted a lot longer if he had been able to make more money. If his Hollywood ventures had been more successful and filled his deep need for greed, I think he might never have ended up working as a lobbyist. Greed is a great motivator for him. I think that's the main reason he got involved in so many different ventures -- restaurants, casinos, movies, etc. After seeing several interviews with him, I'm glad I read his book because it gave me greater insight into him than television did. While I did find his book an entertaining enough read, I didn't find it anything more than that. Maybe if it hadn't been oversold as something it's not, I might have liked it more.

In short: The addage "I was born at night, but not last night" has to apply in this case. I purchased this book not knowing much about Mr. Abramoff or the scandals that he was notorious for and, generally speaking, felt that he was probably treated unfairly in the past 6 or 7 years or so. Having read this book, from his point of view, I'm fairly confident that Mr. Abramoff is a bit of an unsavory character and probably deserves much of the criticism he's gotten.

This book seems to try and redeem him. He acknowledges that he did wrong and that he should pay for his offenses. However, he glosses over some of the more egregious topics covered (Suncruz), readily points the fingers at others, portrays himself as more religious than the Pope, and, perhaps most perplexing, expects the reader to suspend common sense. When the author spends so much time and energy providing details about benign / useless events and conversations and then skips through seemingly big parts of the story, the suspicion I think rightly points to the fact that there's a lot more there than meets the eye.

This book, I think, is just a means for the author to make money. I can't help but think of Kevin Trudeau. I feel sleezy having contributed to this guy's pocket (and this, from someone who politically sees the world the same way). If I can dissuade someone from buying this book to save yourself the same feeling - all the better. I've never written a review before, but having read this book, feel pretty passionately that anyone contemplating should satisfy themselves with some decent fiction.

Very informative book on a very disturbing topic. As a US Citizen and taxpayer, it is very unsettling to know that this entire system of dishonesty and bribery exists and is very active in the Congress. Mr. Abramoff has actually done us a great service by revealing this crooked enterprise. The book is generally well written; the chapter detailing the author's incarceration is especially emotional. People make all kinds of mistakes in their lives; it seems that Mr. Abramoff's book is part of his attempt to make amends for his past actions. A very informative and smooth-flowing read.

A few years ago, I vaguely remember hearing about the scandal surrounding Jack Abramoff, "disgraced Republican lobbyist," embroiled in a slew of hearings and under investigation for corruption and bribery. I didn't follow the story that closely at the time, figuring that naturally lobbyists would be corrupt and that there is plenty of scandal to go around in DC.

When I heard that my parents had gone to Mr. Abramoff's book-signing a few weeks ago, and actually bought two of his books, I thought, "Why would they go support a corrupt lobbyist, let alone buy his book? So another `celebrity' gets caught, and writes a tell-all memoir to milk his notoriety -- why reward bad behavior?"

Well, I read his book. And now I know.

I was actually reminded of the movie Quiz Show -- which dramatizes the true story of the investigation into fixed game shows in the 1950s -- while reading Capitol Punishment: the whole game was rigged, Jack Abramoff was playing by the "rules" and only broke them about as much as everybody else, but when things started to fall apart, he was fixed as a scapegoat.

The level of corruption and hypocrisy revealed is simply stunning. Many familiar names are called out here, and some are cast in a very unflattering light. From all I can tell, the book is meticulously researched and the assertions are fully verifiable.

For a bit of background for those unfamiliar with the context, a lobbyist should be merely an advocate for a course of action. Traditionally, lobbyists would petition lawmakers, sometimes in the lobby of the building (hence the name), and present their case on whether to support or oppose a particular law. It's reasonable that concerned constituents should be able to hire a professional to present their case for them, especially when time and distance are a concern. If money changes hands to influence a vote, however, then it's a bribe. So lobbyists are very careful that money doesn't officially change hands; however, perks such as sporting tickets, fancy invitations, and campaign contributions by a "disinterested" third party do tend to materialize, and amazingly enough, as long as the proper protocols are followed, it's not forbidden.

The book starts off with Mr. Abramoff's childhood and formative years. As a devout Orthodox Jew, his upbringing seems beyond reproach. His conservative principles and personal savvy brought him early notoriety and success in the political realm, but his enthusiasm and no-holds-barred determination to win earned him many enemies throughout the years. Through the 80s and 90s, he seems to have rubbed shoulders with all the major and minor players.

He recounts with great clarity the first time he was involved with a quid pro quo deal, and realized the way the great game of favors was played. From there, it seems a slide down a slippery slope. At first, nothing he did was technically illegal, and he rationalized away the gray areas by telling himself that he was engaged in a good cause (as a conservative, most of the causes he lobbied for on behalf of his clients were causes he would have supported anyway). In fact, he claims that he gave up to 80% of his profits away to charitable or otherwise worthy causes.

At times, he crossed the line and did things that were in fact illegal, reassuring himself that his intentions were good and that, for all practical purposes, he was just "taking a shortcut."

I appreciate his honesty and vulnerability as he relates the moral ground he ceded throughout his downward spiral, and shares the way his mind justified questionable behavior; the thought process is a very common one, and one which likely is employed by many a politician today. The lesson for us is to stop making excuses for corruption, and to demand uncompromising trustworthiness both from our elected officials and from the staff who serve them.

What stood out to me was that Mr. Abramoff's convicted crimes were mainly technicalities, representing a sloppy failure on his part to comply with the letter of the law. If he had been a bit more careful to dance around the loopholes, then nothing he did would have been considered illegal. Pretty much everyone else was playing the same game, and indeed many more may have crossed the line as he did, but we simply didn't hear about it because they didn't engage the notice of powerful enemies.

Is his side of the story to be believed? I found it very credible. First, there is myriad evidence documenting the web of intrigue in which he operated; I presume the paper trail of various receipts, tickets, and campaign contributions is still there to verify.

Second, there is the circumstantial evidence of how quick the Left-leaning MSM were to excoriate this poster child for Republican corruption and cast it as purely a partisan problem, and how eager the Republican Establishment were to disavow him and throw him under the bus. The Washington Post's unrelenting assault, in an effort to discredit both the conservatives causes for which he fought and the Republican politicians who were complicit with his efforts, while ignoring the glaringly obvious fact that this sort of thing was happening all over town and that probably every single politician had his or her own preferred lobbying contact(s), is compatible with their history of driving leftist narratives.

Finally, his sincerity is consistent with the genuine devotion he displays to his family and his faith. He recounts matter-of-factly, with no veneer of false piety, his adherence to Jewish Orthodoxy and how his worldview drove his actions. As a hard-working individual, he consistently set aside one day a week to observe the Sabbath, despite the chaos of his hectic and fast-paced schedule. One anecdote even has him walking through the darkened streets of downtown Manila on behalf of a friend, because his custom precluded him from taking a cab after sundown on the Sabbath. His time of reflection and repentance in prison is earnestly presented, and the picture he paints of redemption is compelling.

In the weeks ahead, I'm sure Capitol Punishment will garner more attention, and I think we'll know a bit more about how much to believe about it by observing who tries the hardest to discredit it. There are many significant players -- from Newt Gingrich to John McCain -- who would doubtless be embarrassed by their portrayal in it, and there are likely to be many others named who are implicit in shady dealings. Of course they'll want this scandal swept under the rug, and the most obvious tactic is to shoot the messenger.

This is a gripping story, not to mention timely, with all the current discussion of sudden and relentless reform. I'd encourage everyone to read this book for an inside look at how the game is played in our nation's Capitol. We've heard that scandals such as Solyndra are only the tip of the iceberg. There is much more to come, and we would do well to educate ourselves about the culture of corruption that runs rampant in DC.

I just finished Capitol Punishment and after seeing the promos for his TV book on 60 minutes I was hoping to get some insight on politics and the sale of influence on K street. Instead I got a narcissistic apologia from a criminal participant in the process who is more interested in telling us what a great guy he is and not very interested in providing us lessons, insight or balance. What a surprise from a cooked lobbyist!!

The book goes on and on in boring detail about Jack's hard working, up from Beverly Hills existence and struggle to power as a leader of the college Republicans. A three page summary of that journey would be an interesting background about American politics and maybe give us some idea of how we got to where we are. Instead, we get a boring and repetitive self-serving tale about how Jack's fight for conservative values was important, consistent and motivated by a desire to make the United States better by returning it to its Constitutional roots.

According to Jack, he is really a misunderstood hero, who made a few mistakes along the way, but those mistakes were only the result of brief errors in judgment, betrayals by cynical former allies, the press, and treacherous maneuverings of political opponents whose motives were not as purely conservative and Constitutional as those which motivated Jack to serve the country.

Although Jack does admit that the interconnection of money and political leads to corruption. His suggestions for reform remind us of one of a one page internet email forwarded by a friend with different political beliefs, but without the time to think or analyze things for himself.

I would imagine Jack hopes that true conservatives will read his book; realize he was always fighting the good fight; and let him back in the fold. I would hope his chosen audience will read his drivel and realize just how thin and self-serving Jack's story is and try to reach across the aisle for solutions rather than slogans while lining their pockets like Jack.

The real problem with the book, as indicated above, is that it is boooring. It boggles my mind that a story that involves international travel, movie making, political intrigue, front page news and scandal, can be so dull. As an author, Jack should go back to lobbying.

As a longtime observer of the political process, I was intrigued to see that disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff was out of prison and had written an apparently "tell-all" book. I first heard him on 60 minutes talking about the "revolving door" - how easy it is for senior lobbyists to entice senators, congressmen, and their staff (particularly their chiefs of staff) with the prospect of a job in lobbying after they're ready to move on. With this golden opportunity dangling before them, the powerful person on Capitol Hill was sure to do your bidding so long as they remained in power. (Lobbyists earn far more money than staffers, and the later control access to elected officials.)

In the 60 minutes segment, Abramoff sounded contrite. He now wanted to help reform the process, he said. Fight for term limits ("Washington is a dangerous place"), close the revolving door (make it illegal for public servants to later pursue K street employment), and make it illegal for lobbyists to give anything of value to power brokers (not even a glass of water, let alone campaign funds, or a lucrative job offer). All this made me want to read the book.

Abramoff is an engaging writer, and the book kept my attention, even though I didn't have much interest about his experience in leadership with the College Republicans, or his time making movies overseas (the latter being irrelevant to the book's theme). He described his first experience with Beltway corruption: A congressman offered to deliver him thirteen votes in exchange for getting a military base in his district. (The GOP White House immediately gave him the military base.) Later, Abramoff describes how he began to encourage his clients to reward elected officials who helped promote their causes with generous contributions:

"The quid pro quo became one of the hallmarks of our lobbying efforts....there is no question that contributions have a significant impact on the process-and that impact is not positive. What I did not consider then, and never considered until I was sitting in prison, was that contributions from parties with an interest in legislation are really nothing but bribes. Sure, it's legal for the most part. Sure, everyone in Washington does it. Sure, it's the way the system works. It's one of Washington's dirty little secrets-but it's bribery just the same" (p. 90).

What I liked most about the book were these frank revelations, pulling back the curtain as it were and showing how pervasive money is in the garnering of influence. Specifically, Abramoff shares how he exploited tax loopholes to encourage his Indian clients to give enormous sums of money to politicians, securing influence, but also establishing Abramoff as a major player. I wish the author had more carefully explained when, precisely, his ambition led to his breaking the law. But the overall message of the book seems to be that it doesn't really matter: the whole system is so broken, that even if many of the things Abramoff did were legal (and apparently they were), they still wouldn't be right. They still compromise our democracy and give undue influence to those with deep pockets.

And that gets me to the biggest weakness of the book. Abramoff seems to be saying, "Yes, I technically broke the law-but only because I operated in a broken system, and, in my amazing success, just pushed a bit too far." Abramoff devotes ample space to discussing how seriously he takes his Orthodox Judaism, how charitable he was--how even when he earned obscene amounts of money, he was enormously generous (founding schools, helping others with business ventures, etc.). In other places, Abramoff touts his accomplishments in detail, and even seeks to "set the record straight"--downplaying his guilt here, explaining the purity of his intentions there. All this, I'm sad to say, makes the book come off as more of a victory lap than a bid for redemption.

The truth is Abramoff ripped off a bunch of people, over-sold and over-billed his services, and recklessly disregarded the rule of law. Why? Because he could, and because it expanded his power. He was more ambitious for himself than his country. He charged his client obscene fees because he could -- after all, he "owned" the congressmen who alone could help the clients. His extravagant receipts allowed him to purchase more influence, and the vicious circle continued, ever-widening to more elected officials. Abramoff, even now, seems too high on himself, too proud of the Abramoff Empire that once was. And insufficiently humbled for how he abused his opportunity to influence the process for good. Consequently, his chapter on what reforms should be pursued--potentially the high-point of the book--had some good ideas, but was disappointingly superficial.

All an all, a worthwhile read for those interested in the political system -- but take the self-aggrandizing parts of the narrative with a large grain of salt.

Abramoff has written a book that is both casual and inviting as well as scorchingly honest, both about himself and the broken power system of Washington. You can't help but empathize with a guy who became part of corrupt system and then made huge enemies by playing the system better than anyone else ever did. The fact that the line between morality and dishonesty was so blurred that even good people (and yes, Abramoff was a good person) could be blind as to what side of that line they were on is testament to how badly real reform is needed.

It's easy to dismiss Jack Abramoff as a villain, but that's too simple and smacks of unearned superiority on our part. As is obvious from reading the book, the real Abramoff is a much more complex and -- dare I say -- sympathetic character. The story of how a deeply religious person, charitable to a fault, could wind up in federal prison is a cautionary tale. We are foolish if we are 100% convinced that, were we in Abramoff's shoes and operating in a system that encouraged and rewarded such aggressive behavior on behalf of our clients, we wouldn't stumble in some if not all of the places Abramoff did.

Capitol Punishment: The Hard Truth About Washington Corruption From America's Most Notorious Lobbyist

"Capitol Punishment" is unquestionably the true and unfiltered voice of Mr. Abramoff. This is an autobiography skillfully and entertainingly rendered by Mr. Abramoff's own hand -- it is not the typical "as told to (ghost writers)" quickie publication seeking to capitalize upon fleeting fame or notoriety of its subject. If one reads the book with an open mind - putting aside Mr. Abramoff's public image, the sensationalistic media coverage of his case, and the narrative approach previously adopted by sundry book authors and Hollywood producers - one will be well rewarded with invaluable first-hand insights regarding the Washington milieu in which Mr. Abramoff operated.

Those interested in the U.S. political and legislative process - as it really is in practice, not as it is presented in college Political Science 101 textbooks, and not as cleansed or caricatured by the nation's mainstream media - will find this book to be very illuminating reading.

The book is neither about self-justification nor "payback." The author understandably - and quite successfully -- seeks to present his story in shadings and nuances rather than in monochrome caricatures. His impish humor is easily seen in choice of the book's title. He is unexpectedly generous in his comments on virtually all of those who investigated, prosecuted and incarcerated him. It must be added that he lobs a few hand grenades in the direction of certain elected politicians and political operatives whose public pose of piety was, in Mr. Abramoff's view, at stark variance with private behavior.

The book offers unexpectedly sentimental memories and wry vignettes of childhood exploits (weight-lifting, football) and failures (school elections); of close family ties and of friendships (enduring and betrayed); of college-years politicking on behalf of the Republican Party that brought him early national attention; of meetings with President Reagan and other Republican Party leaders; of his hilariously abortive foray into Hollywood film-making; and of his deep and abiding religious faith.

It is perhaps worth underlining: Mr. Abramoff did not create the milieu in which Washington lobbyists, elected politicians, congressional staff and executive branch policy makers and regulators exist in a symbiotic relationship. The nexus of political power and special interests - fueled by reciprocal favors and campaign contributions -- long predated his arrival on the Washington scene. This scene has surely survived his personal fall from grace. What comes through clearly in Mr. Abramoff's autobiography is that he brought his formidable energy, intellect, political savvy, creativity and competitive drive to bear on what he found. He took full advantage of an opaque scene and its murky ground rules, aggressively pressing his clients' causes and -- by his own admission born of sober reflection -- sometimes pressing the envelope and crossing the line of propriety, good judgment and even legality.

Mr. Abramoff's presentation of all this - thoughtful and frequently unsparing of himself - is important for two reasons: (1) it offers vivid testimony to the way "things work" in Washington, especially the lamentably seamy inner workings of the legislative process and the climate of behavior and expectations fostered by the insatiable need by members of Congress to keep filled their campaign coffers; and (2) it suggests reform measures to discourage tacit "buying" of congressional support for special interest legislation, to foster greater sunlight and transparency, and to halt both the "revolving door" and the easy workarounds of existing "ethics" laws and regulations.

Speaking authoritatively as one who understood and used to maximum advantage the existing system, Mr. Abramoff argues strongly both for congressional term limits and for explicit statutes barring any member of Congress or congressional staff from engaging in future lobbying/influence efforts vis-à-vis Congress or the executive branch. He observes - again, the voice of experience - that such measures would go far toward denying lobbyists the ability to cultivate long-term, potentially corrupting relationships with Congress (both members and staff) based upon current favors and the hope or expectation of highly remunerative future employment with a law firm, "government relations" firm or other lobbying practice.

Beyond all this, Mr. Abramoff's autobiography is a highly entertaining read - sometimes laugh-out-loud funny, as when he describes his early trials and tribulations as Hollywood producer of the 1989 action flick "Red Scorpion" starring Dolph Lundgren (of "Rocky" fame) and filmed in southern Africa. As one of the relatively few Americans who also once set foot in the southern Africa landlocked mountain kingdoms of Swaziland and Lesotho, I can personally attest that Mr. Abramoff has captured brilliantly the sheer comic weirdness of that scene. He has similarly drawn a very powerful and sadly amusing word portrait of the political antics in the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas. His account of his adventures with Imelda Marcos, former first lady of the Philippines, whom he informally counseled on political-financial challenges mounted by her enemies in Manila, is simultaneously funny, eye-opening and poignant. In all of these extended anecdotes, every word rings true - often lamentably so. DWK