Solamere: More Than Simple Voting Machines, It Seems

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

I recently noted that Mitt Romney's family has a private equity firm named Solamere that has an interest in voting machines. I expressed concern that this ownership is, if nothing else, a clear case of conflict of interest. Would-be public officials would do better to earn public trust by not owning a stake in the very machines needed to tabulate the ballots that get them to public office.

oslo raised some points about how much influence over said voting machines Romney or his family would actually have, noting that his interest probably isn't enough for control over said machines. Noted, but the conflict still (in my opinion) out-weighs the real-world influence he may or may not have.

It seems, though, that there might be more interest—and even more conflict—to Solamere than first met the eye. Linda Beale over at The Angry Bear notes a far more in-depth look into Solamere's holdings and investors. From The Nation's article by Lee Fang:

In 2008, soon after Romney ended his first bid for the presidency, his eldest son Tagg and his chief fundraiser, Spencer Zwick, formed Solamere Capital, a private equity firm named after the exclusive community in Utah where Romney owned a vacation ski lodge. . . .

Unlike most private equity firms dedicated to analyzing and buying companies, Solamere specializes in something else: billing itself as a “fund of funds” with “unparalleled networks,” it provides investors with “unique access” to an elite set of other private equity firms and hedge funds. . . .

Solamere, a firm predicated on its founders’ relationship with Romney, presents a channel for powerful investors to influence the White House if he wins. Private equity executives looking to lobby a Romney administration may very well have a leg up if they are already doing business with the firm that the president created for his son.

(Emphasis mine.)

The article notes several individuals and companies already invested in Solamere that have a substantial stake in government regulation and regulatory action. Investors include those that provide:

• Mobility scooters (reliant on Medicaid/Medicare judgments for their market share);
  
• Dental services providers (also reliant on Medicaid participation, no matter what the quality of care);
  
• Private universities (reliant on the GI Bill tuition vouchers, again no matter what the quality of education); and the big one
  
• The "carried interest" loophole that allows, for one example, private equity stakeholders to pay (like Romney himself) just under 15% for their millions of earned income.

Back at the Angry Bear, Beale sums up this particular conflict of interest situation nicely: "This [article] thus amply illustrates the way class warfare really works: a closely knit group of oligarchs with business ties through their private equity empires and a shared corporatist perspective on society can use insider access to the channels of government power to make government work for them and prevent its working for ordinary folk."

It remains to be seen whether Romney or one of the many other Solamere partners is later seen connected in some investigation into the Hart voting machines. Given, sadly, that Solamere was formed so many years ago, and that influencing voting machine outcomes has been demonstrated to be a relatively simple and traceless operation*, we may not be able to rule out untoward manipulation of this particular Solamere holding until after the national election tallies are finalized. Given the billions in personal and corporate fortunes on the line, I'm not holding my breath for an easy election night.

*At the YouTube video, skip to 1:10 (just before the end) to see a demonstration of hackability that brought tears to election workers in Florida. That might get you to watch the whole thing. Or not. Either way, makes no never mind to me.

Comments

[weswilson]

I'm willing to accept Snopes' take on this

It is true that H.I.G. Capital's co-founder, Anthony Tamer, and several of H.I.G.'s managing directors once worked at Bain & Company (whose CEO was Mitt Romney); that Anthony Tamer and his wife are donors to the Romney campaign; and that H.I.G. Capital is the sixth-largest financial contributor to Romney fundraising committees; and it is true that Tagg Romney's firm, Solamere, has investments in other H.I.G. funds that are run by partners who are former Romney colleagues and current Romney fundraisers, and those partners also manage the fund invested in Hart Intercivic. That close a connection between the Romney family, Romney campaign contributors, and a provider of voting systems may raise some eyebrows, but it doesn't establish any direct ownership link between Tagg Romney and a provider of voting systems.

Source: http://www.snopes.com/politics/romney/votingmachines.asp

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

And, as I said originally, a "close connection" is more than any candidate—or for that matter, any company—should have.

[zebra24.livejournal.com]

hmm. I like it.

Why conflict of interest in private-equity firm is bothering you more than 100% government-owned conflict of interest?

Just why?
Fed own your money completely, federal insurance company, Freddie and Fannie, and so on and so forth.
You want government to control election? Isn't it stupid?

Even government schools is conflict of interest much more significant than Romney's share in ballot machine firm.

Ahh.. seems like you forgot that

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/forget-bain-obamas-public-equity-record-is-the-real-scandal/2012/05/24/gJQAXnXCnU_story.html

” fully 71 percent of the Obama Energy Department’s grants and loans went to “individuals who were bundlers, members of Obama’s National Finance Committee, or large donors to the Democratic Party.” Collectively, these Obama cronies raised $457,834 for his campaign, and they were in turn approved for grants or loans of nearly $11.35 billion. Obama said this week it’s not the president’s job “to make a lot of money for investors.”

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Public Schools: A Conflict Of Interest™

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Fed own your money completely, federal insurance company, Freddie and Fannie, and so on and so forth.

The Federal Reserve is not a government agency. Freddie and Fannie are government backed, but privately owned as well. (Not sure what you mean by "federal insurance company.")

Even government schools is conflict of interest much more significant than. . . .

That gave me a big shot of mirth and schadenfreude, since I immediately assumed you attended privately-owned educational institutions. Go public schools! ;-)

More seriously, as I pointed out before, the conflict of interest is in apparent conflict of interest only. Having privately-owned voting machines cast deciding ballots in a public election makes traditional crony capitalism look like kindergarten juice box peddling for favorite nap time spots.

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

Public police stations are a conflict of interest. Think about it: They make the laws, then they ENFORCE them with their own police force? This is straight out of 1984...

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

They make the laws? You must have learned that in public school!

[kylinrouge.livejournal.com]

GASP! I'm in the Matrix!!!

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

After reviewing your WaPo article (oh, and why that rag is ever touted as left-leaning continues to be beyond me), I see that there is a subtle but perhaps important difference between the companies that contributed to the President's last campaign and the Solamere investors. It all goes back to an old joke: What do you call alternative medicine that works?

Say what you will about solar and wind, but they prove to be alternative sources of energy because of the subsidies provided to "tried-and-true" carbon-based energy sources. Because of this uneven playing field, the alternatives only enjoy a market advantage in limited areas (mostly off-grid installations). If you were an alternative energy provider, how would you change that?

Given that most carbon companies give to Republicans, you would likely give to the alternative political party. It seems that happened, and with a vengeance. Ah, but even if you get your guy elected, the carbon subsidies are still in play. You can get access to the market, maybe, but you won't be able to get access to a fair market. So you run the risk of going bust. As they have.

That doesn't mean the product you deliver isn't a good one, or that it isn't needed in today's dwindling carbon resource environment. It just means you can buy enough political influence to get in a market that will crush you.

By contrast, the Solamere investors I pointed out are providing sub-standard products, at least, as I've said, the ones with which I am familiar. Do check out the Frontline pieces on the dental services and for-profit colleges. Not good for the people that attend either in quite a few cases, but very, very profitable. That I find more offensive and repugnant than the track record of Obama supporters in an un-even playing field.

After you even the playing field for energy by removing the carbon subsidies, though, what would you call the alternative energy sources that work?

Energy sources.