William Jefferson (D-LA) is Back... unfortunately.

You can call him whatever you like, William “Deep-Freeze, Cold Cash, Dollar Bill” Jefferson has been re-elected.  He is awaiting indictment on charges of bribery, he has been disowned by the Democratic Party in New Orleans, and his fellow Congressmen in Washington, D.C. are (to say the very least) disgruntled to see him return to Capitol Hill.  Yet, despite his status as the latest pariah in Congress, it was announced this past weekend that Jefferson (LA-2) will serve another two years.  He won by an astonishingly wide margin of 57% to challenger, Karen Carter’s 43%.  The victory came as a shock to many people due to the fact that he is currently being investigated by the FBI for his shady transactions involving technology deals in more than one African country.

Why Jefferson was re-elected in the runoff election this month is unknown at present.  Undoubtedly studies and interviews will be done to uncover why, after $90,000 was found in his freezer and the evidence pivoted against him is so damning, did the public choose him to represent them again.  Perhaps, in District 2, which is still ravaged by Hurricane Katrina, people don’t realize just how incriminating the evidence is against him, perhaps his opponent could have run a more effective campaign, or maybe the advantage of incumbency is simply stronger than anyone ever predicted. 

No matter what the reason for Jefferson’s re-election, his connection to the technology company, iGate, and his trips to Africa on the company’s behalf, should have been known to the public long before the information was released.  If his daily schedule had been on-line and easily accessible to his constituents, it is possible that Jefferson may have never gotten so deeply embroiled in the scam.  If this presumption seems a bit too optimistic, then at the very least, his publicized schedule could have potentially made his voters more aware of the ‘work’ he was doing on the taxpayer’s dime.

From 2004 through 2005 Jefferson held numerous meetings in an attempt to complete a deal with the governments of Nigeria and Ghana.  His plan was to have iGate use its technology to deliver high-speed internet over a network that the Nigerian government was building across the country.  Lori Mody, iGate’s investor, was the person to initially alert the FBI to the scandal.

Many of Jefferson’s meetings with foreign officials and his U.S. investor (Mody) were done when he should have been working on congressional matters.  He held several appointments in his office in Washington, D.C. and took at least two trips to Africa under the guise of his position as co-chair of Congressional Nigeria Caucus & Africa Trade & Investment Caucus.  He claims to have led a business delegation to West Africa to explore general investment opportunities and AGOA (African Growth and Opportunity Act).

The following in a timeline of events leading up to the discovery of $90,000 in his freezer in August of 2005, and show the many instances in which Jefferson’s public schedule could have triggered a red flag.

February 15-22, 2004 – Jefferson made a trip to Nigeria and other African countries which were funded by iGate, Verizon, Leth Energy, and Project Consulting Services.

June 2004 – Jefferson has lunch in New Orleans with Brett M. Pfeffer, his legislative aide, who introduces him to Lori Mody, an investor.  Jefferson first tells Mody about iGate and its efforts to secure a deal in Nigeria.

June 25, 2004 – At his congressional office in Washington, Jefferson meets with Mody and President and CEO of iGate, Vernon Jackson.

December 2004 – Jefferson has lunch with Mody in the Congressional dining room.

April 12, 2005 – Jefferson, Pfeffer, and Mody meet in Washington, D.C. and Jefferson explains his plan to obtain Export-Import Bank financing for the iGate deal.

The following three meetings in italics would most likely not have been posted per the Punch Clock Agreement stipulations.  However, they show that what can be considered “personal meetings” outside of the office become lobbyist meetings inside the office.  The lines between personal business and lobbying should remain distinct and citizens should be able to determine when that line is crossed.

April 27, 2005 – Jefferson meets with Mody for dinner in Tysons Corner, VA where he lays out how the Nigerian deal will work. May 12, 2005 – Jefferson meets with Mody for dinner in Washington, D.C. and talks about how he and Jackson discussed the iGate deal with the Nigerian Communications Commission and an unnamed individual. June 8, 2005 – Jefferson and Mody have dinner in Washington, D.C. and Mody gives Jefferson stock certificates for her Nigerian company. 

July 6-11, 2005 – Jefferson travels to Ghana for the purpose of “education and business development” which is paid for by Mody’s company.

July 15, 2005 – Jefferson, Pfeffer, and Mody meet with a member of Ex-Im Bank’s Board of Directors.

July 18, 2005 – Jefferson meets with unnamed individual (who lives in Maryland and is thought to have been Atiku Abubakar, the Vice President of Nigeria) and who, according to Jefferson, will need to be bribed by Mody to get the deal through.

July 26, 2005 – Jefferson meets with Mody to discuss Nigerian deal again and tells Mody that the unnamed individual needs the money as soon as possible.

July 30, 2005 – Jefferson meets with Mody at the Ritz-Carlton Pentagon City in Arlington, VA; this time to talk about a deal with Ghana as well as Nigeria.  This is the meeting when Mody gave Jefferson the briefcase with $100,000.00 in it ($90,000.00 of which ended up in his freezer).

In William Jefferson’s corrupt dealings, the FBI was hot on his tracks as of March 2005, but the public was not.  If his schedule were published, it is possible that the public would have been aware of his African trips and many of the meetings he held with his legislative aide, Brent Pfeffer, and Lori Mody.

The Sunlight Foundation, a non-partisan organization dedicated to increasing transparency and citizen involvement in government, is working on getting information like these meetings into the hands of constituents that need it to make sound decisions at the voting booths.  They believe that openness and access to information will change politics as we know it, and help to create a better, more honest government.  After all, why shouldn’t representatives who work for the public, who are elected by the public, and who are paid by the public’s tax dollars, be expected to account for their time in office?