“Money talks in this business and bullshit walks.”
This is a quote from Pennsylvania Congressman Michael “Ozzie” Myers as he accepted a $50,000 bribe from what he believed were Arab sheiks. Unfortunately for him, his debauchery would be caught entirely on video and played before a court of law – becoming one of many politicians caught in the net of ABSCAM, an FBI sting operation conducted from the late 70’s to the early 80’s.
The operation started as a way to recover stolen art and securities in the name of a fictional wealthy Arab sheik. New York’s own silver-tongued con-man Mel Weinberg posed as the U.S. representative to the sheik and navigated the web of Manhattan’s underworld in the name of federally-backed justice. It should be noted that Weinberg only agreed to play his role in order to stay out of jail for running a fraudulent real-estate scheme. Nevertheless, he must have played his part with gusto to eventually land himself in the same room as Angelo Erichetti, a U.S. senator and the Mayor of Camden, New Jersey. From here, the tone and scale of the operation changed drastically.
Erichetti spread the word that new money was in town, and they were here to play. Politicians from across the tri-state area and even as far as Florida met with the sheiks to hear their offers and ultimately take their money. Some offered expedited entry into the country, some offered permits for casinos, and the rest practically fell to the ground and swore the power of their office to the sheiks. All they wanted in return was Uncle Sam’s finest green, something the federal agents were supplied enough with to dole out to the whole region.
All in all, six US representatives, one senator, Angelo Erichetti, and three Philadelphia city council members (including the president) were convicted out of a total 31 targeted politicians. Those in charge of ABSCAM must have felt accomplished for their role in weeding out those that would sell the power of their office to the highest bidder. Democracy could rest easy for another night.
However, the very next day (metaphorically speaking), they awoke to find that those with the most to lose from operations such as these were ready to bring their hammer down.
Some say that ABSCAM and its pivoting towards targeting political officials was in revenge for how the legislative branch came at the national intelligence agencies for their part in the Watergate scandal of 1972. While these claims are unsubstantiated, it reflects the mindset of those that set the rules of the game after ABSCAM concluded. While undercover operations are still a tool in the FBI’s kit, under the guidelines that were issued, it was ensured that the wild-dog kind of operation that ABSCAM was could never occur again on American soil.
The Legacy of ABSCAM
Now we live with the consequences. When LeAnna Washington, a Democrat who represented parts of Philadelphia and Montgomery County in the state senate, was questioned by her chief of staff on the appropriateness of using taxpayer money for political gain, she responded by saying “I am the f-ing senator, I do what the f- I want, and ain’t nobody going to change me.” One may wonder why an elected official would respond so boldly to merely the idea that their misuse of taxpayer money is dubious, the answer lies within the legacy ABSCAM left behind.
During the trials of those convicted and the subsequent appeals, they cried that the agents had “entrapped” them into doing acts they never would have had they not been in the situation the FBI orchestrated. Attorney General Benjamin Civiletti issued the first guidelines upon which future FBI operations would be conducted to avoid further controversy. Issues include the aforementioned entrapment, the tarnishing of reputations of innocent parties, and the damage done to the reputation of the government that was still reeling from the Watergate scandal.
But What Specifically Changed?
Since ABSCAM relied on many middlemen to get the federal agents in contact with public officials, the Civiletti guidelines outline and restrict the use of middlemen and detail when they are allowed to break the law and when they are not. From the Office of the Inspector General, “informants may be authorized to participate in two different types of ‘otherwise criminal activity’ at the behest of the FBI, ‘ordinary’ and ‘extraordinary.’ ‘Ordinary’ criminal activity could be authorized by an FBI field office supervisor or higher FBI official. ‘Extraordinary’ criminal activity was defined as any activity involving a significant risk of violence, corrupt actions by high public officials, or severe financial loss to a victim.” Public officials could now enjoy a level of security that was not previously afforded to them. The FBI was trusted not to go after Congress in almost a quid pro quo of their very own – then, it became law to make it harder to clear these operations. Perhaps they were so embarrassed that they were fooled by a con man who, during one of the payoff meetings, “inadvertently arrang[ed] for delivery of heaping hot corned beef sandwiches and coleslaw” (Ted Sherman). For as much business as these public officials were in with the “sheiks,” they seemingly could not tell it was strange for these men to be enjoying Jewish deli food.
No matter the character of the con man that fooled Congress, the elected officials he was in hotel rooms with, sitting on yachts, talking over the phone, were connected to him for one thing – for the gain of only those that had the power to talk. Prosecutor Thomas P. Puccio, at the trial of Congressman Myers, said “There is a lot of tragedy in this room for the citizens of Philadelphia whom this congressman represents . . . There is tragedy for the Congress of the United States, in which Mr. Myers sits.” Philadelphia is not so much a martyr for public corruption, but is an analogy for the rest of the country. Pennsylvania and Pennsylvania-lite, also known as New Jersey, was home to many of the worst actors in the ABSCAM case. These men were willing to sell the power of their office to enrich themselves at the cost of local and national security. At some point, their ego allowed them to think themselves above the law, a mindset that a scary number of politicians have today.
Our Modern Day
Brett H. Mandel is the author of “Philadelphia, Corrupt and Consenting: A City’s Struggle Against an Epithet.” Within, he recounts all of the corruption that took place in the city since its establishment over 300 years ago. There are many counts of politicians just like those seen in ABSCAM, taking bribes and excessive “campaign donations” in return for favors that could only be granted by those in positions of power. Egos were developed, only some were held accountable for their actions. Nevertheless, the audacity of these politicians have grown in the wake of ABSCAM, as if the opposite effect from what the FBI intended had occurred.
It’s not about what you know, it’s who you know. Philadelphia is a burgeoning market, one that is being torn down and reconstructed. One cannot walk along Broad Street without needing to detour around fences and orange plastic barriers. With connections to every major city in the northeast region, Philadelphia is the new frontier for people looking to maximize their profit at the cost of those that live here. Contracts are awarded to those the politicians know, money moves around in the upper echelons without a dime ever reaching the lower rungs of the ladder. Even still, accountability and media coverage is next to none.
Conclusion
ABSCAM showed how deep the corruption goes. It showed how willing politicians are to play favorites, to be used for their power to satisfy their desires. Even still to this day, voters can only focus on how they can get by. Life has only gotten harder as problems continue to go unresolved. With so much pedantics, short reform movements started in good faith that ultimately get shut down by power brokers/people with investments in the misery of others, the people of Philadelphia have their own worries to deal with. Many wonder if they will be the next victim of gun violence. They wonder if they will have to find other places to live outside of the city because of the skyrocketing price of rent. 20% of local citizens worry about where their next meal will come from, or if they will have utilities in their house, compared to an 11.5% national average.
Therefore, it is no wonder that voter turnout for the 2023 mayoral election was only 30%, and in a one-party city, it was not hard to predict which candidate those votes would go to. Apathy has been rising in the city since Covid-19 and the ensuing economic fallout. However, it is important to know that when the voters do not exercise the one true power given to them, then those on top win. When their people are no longer in power because the voters care about what their elected officials are doing, they tighten up. One day, they may even play fair so that everyone can have a piece of the American dream. The hope is that one day, it will not just be a dream.