Caucus legal fees called hush money
10:34 AM 11/07/01
Phil Brinkman State government reporter
Weeks before lawmakers authorized paying their legal bills, caucus staffers hired some of the highest-priced, most politically connected lawyers in Madison.
Lawyers for some staffers also appear to have shared information with one another, suggesting a possible coordinated legal effort.
Those details are adding to speculation about how the employees, some of them young men and women with limited financial means, arranged for attorneys to defend them against allegations of illegal campaign activity: Did they find the lawyers on their own, or were they steered to them and, if so, by whom?
"It stands to reason there may have been a signal given to go ahead and get good lawyers" knowing their fees would be reimbursed later, said Jay Heck, executive director of Common Cause in Wisconsin, which has called for the state to block the payments. "I think, in a sense, this was hush money."
From public records and interviews, it is difficult to piece together how staffers obtained the legal help. Employees' names have been blacked out of bills submitted to the state, and caucus staffers, on advice from their lawyers, have refused to answer questions about anything to do with the investigation.
Spokesmen for their bosses have said they had nothing to do with finding lawyers for the staffers.
"We have no involvement in assigning or recommending counsel," said Steve Baas, an aide to Assembly Speaker Scott Jensen, R-Waukesha. "Everybody is free to get their own counsel."
Mike Browne, a spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Chuck Chvala, D-Madison, also insisted Chvala played no role in hiring the attorneys.
The law firms are certainly known to legislators. Since 1996, the firms representing Senate staff have donated $16,000 to Senate candidates, while firms representing Assembly staff gave more than $3,000 to Assembly candidates over that same period, according to the Wisconsin Democracy Campaign.
They've given many times that amount to other candidates for state office, including governor and attorney general.
As of Wednesday, the Legislature had paid more than $122,500 in legal fees - a practice Attorney General Jim Doyle is seeking to stop. The payments had been authorized by an Assembly committee Sept. 28. A Senate committee followed suit Oct. 3.
Yet, at least 10 staffers began incurring legal fees - some as high as $275 an hour - more than a month earlier, according to the submitted bills. The charges correspond to about the time subpoenas started to be issued for people to testify before a secret court proceeding known as a John Doe hearing.
And while several staffers appear to have been sent the bills first, at least one firm billed Assembly Chief Clerk John Scocos directly before the Assembly authorized payment.
The bill, by attorney Bruce Rosen on Sept. 20, included a cover letter in which Rosen said an attorney at a different firm representing a different client had advised him to submit the bill to Scocos.
Beginning in late August, according to billing records, lawyers for some of the employees began holding telephone conferences with lawyers for other staffers. Attorneys for one Assembly employee also noted three meetings with a "political adviser" and one meeting with a "member of the Assembly."
Some attorneys declined to comment for this story. Others said they were not privy to any conversations between their clients and legislators.
"As far as I know, no legislator sent my client to me," said Stephen Eisenberg, who recently agreed to lower his $200-an-hour fee to $150 after Scocos said that was the limit the Assembly would pay. "As far as I know, I was hired based on my reputation."
Another lawyer hired as part of the investigation, Lester Pines, said it was not unusual for people suddenly faced with possible criminal charges to seek out the best lawyers money can buy. Pines, with nearly 30 years of experience in criminal law, charges $225 an hour.
Pines said he had "no idea" whether his client had been given any assurances ahead of time his bills would be covered. But he dismissed talk of legislators trying to influence staffers' testimony by paying their legal fees, saying lawyers are bound by their code of ethics to represent the interests of their clients, not the people who pay their bills.
That means even if someone did try to buy a client's silence, his or her attorney would advise the person to testify if it were in the client's best interest.
"In order to buy off a witness, you've got to have the lawyer involved," Pines said. "That's not happening. That's the missing link."