Norm Coleman touts lobbyist’s endorsement without telling you he’s a lobbyist

Sen. Norm Coleman’s campaign, highly paid Republican bloggers and their lapdogs in the mainstream media are trumpeting the news that former DFL state Sen. Doug Johnson of Cook has endorsed the Republican Coleman for U.S. Senate. What they aren’t telling you is that Johnson is a registered lobbyist for Excelsior Energy, which is trying to build a controversial $2.3 billion “clean coal” energy plant on the Iron Range that has earned Coleman’s enthusiastic support for tens of millions of dollars in federal grants and loan guarantees.

Coleman helped secure $36 million in Clean Coal Power Initiative funding for Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Energy Project from the Department of Energy in 2004. The following year, Coleman authored a provision in the 2005 Energy Bill that authorized loan guarantees for the project and also ensured that the technology the plant would use will qualify for tax credits.

Johnson, who has been registered as a state lobbyist for Excelsior Energy since February 2005, is one of 18 lobbyists for the company registered in Minnesota. It didn’t take long for Johnson to hit the revolving door and start cashing in on his 32-year legislative career after he left the state Senate in 2002. He registered as a lobbyist for several entities less than a year later in August 2003, and currently represents 10 clients at the state level.

“I want to thank Senator Coleman for all he has done to make the Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba Energy Project a reality,” Johnson gushed in a May 2005 press release from Coleman’s office, just three months after he went on Excelsior Energy’s lobbying payroll. “Norm was decisive in including this provision in the last Energy Bill which was unfortunately filibustered, he was key to getting Excelsior $36 million in Clean Coal Power Initiative funding last year, and today’s action of the Senate would not have happened without Norm’s leadership.”

As in this week’s media reports about Johnson’s endorsement of Coleman, Johnson was only identified in Coleman’s press release as a former state senator and not as the registered lobbyist for Excelsior Energy that he was at the time.

Coleman heaped praise on Johnson on his blog, but also avoided any mention of his lobbyist status:

“Doug’s been a tremendous force in this state, and on the Iron Range, for nearly four decades. He’s not just a highly regarded public servant, he’s a passionate advocate for the Range. An individual who has put his heart and soul into making a difference, and improving the lives of the region and the state,” said Coleman.

In addition to millions in federal funds, Excelsior Energy’s Mesaba project also has hauled in millions in state funds. It’s already collected $9.5 million in loans from the state Iron Range Resources (IRR) agency and is eligible for up to $10 million in funding from the state Renewable Development Fund.

Just last week, the state Legislative Auditor’s Office released an audit report critical of Excelsior Energy’s use of state loan monies — specifically state funds improperly spent on lobbying — and called for the return of more than $40,000 in duplicate, unallowed and undocumented expenses. These included expenditures for such things as alcohol, a golf outing, office party, flowers and food.

The audit was prompted by a citizen’s complaint. Johnson was not mentioned in the audit, although he was registered as a lobbyist for Excelsior Energy during the period the improper expenditures were reported.

“Iron Range Resources did not adequately oversee Excelsior Energy’s use of loan proceeds to ensure that the company complied with certain loan provisions,” the audit report concluded. “IRR did not clearly define prohibited lobbying costs, did not adequately review documentation that Excelsior Energy submitted to support use of loan proceeds, and did not set limits or constraints on certain travel costs. As a result, the company used loan funds for some expenses that appear to be related to lobbying activities and was reimbursed $40,161 for inappropriate, duplicate, or unsupported costs.”