Over the last ten years, Enron Corp., its employees and their spouses, gave almost $6 million to federal parties and candidates, slightly more than half of that in soft money and the rest in hard money. They got plenty for their cash: the ability to create a whole new unregulated business in energy derivatives, extensive input in the writing of the Bush Administration's energy legislation, veto power over regulatory appointees, a lucrative delay in government intervention in California's energy crisis, top level calls from Bush and Clinton officials lobbying the Indian government to protect a multi-billion-dollar Enron investment. Senator Phil Gramm, the company's number two recipient of funds in the Senate, carved out specific loopholes in legislation for it, while his wife Wendy took care of the company's interests as head of the Commodity Futures Training Commission and then got a plumb sinecure as an Enron director.

Arthur Andersen, Enron's accounting firm, gave another $5 million. This money worked to great effect when the time came to block SEC efforts to clamp down on the burgeoning and lucrative practice of selling consulting services to companies at the same time as auditing their books. Had the SEC rule gone into effect, Enron's worst financial abuses might have been nipped in the bud. Instead, Andersen accountants permitted Enron to overstate its profits by at least $580 million. Arthur Andersen made $27 million in consulting fees from Enron in the last year alone.

Now, investors in Enron stock, including thousands of company employees and pensioners, are out some $60 billion in share value. Energy consumers out West were gouged for billions more. A host of Enron top executives, many of them big contributors to President Bush's 2000 campaign, cashed in their stock to the tune of $1.1 billion, while ordinary employees saw their 401k accounts disappear into dust.

And yet, there are many prominent Americans who say Enron and Arthur Andersen's campaign contributions didn't buy them anything. "No help here," says the President of his administration. "It's silliness," says a Republican congressman as the House debated campaign finance reform. These people are whistling past the graveyard, as polls show that six out of ten Americans think that both the Bush and Clinton Administration's did favors for Enron in return for campaign contributions.

But that hasn't stopped the Enron apologists from blowing smoke at us. As a public service, we present the Enron Hall of Shame. The following are the top ten Enron Whoppers. To read the complete list, go to http://www.howdarethey.org/whoppers.htm.

President George W. Bush: "...you know, Enron had made contributions to a lot of people around Washington, D.C. And if they came to this administration looking for help, they didn't find any."

Vice President Dick Cheney: "The issue here isn't, with respect to Enron, isn't what advice they may have offered the energy task force. The issue, with respect to Enron, is the corporate collapse."

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer: [Re calls Vice President Cheney made to Indian government officials on behalf of Enron] "I don't think you could say that they were influenced by the contributions that were given to the Bush campaign."

Commerce Secretary Donald Evans (former chair of the Bush-Cheney campaign): "All through the campaign, when I talked to people about making contributions, I said, "For this contribution, you're going to get good government, you're going to get a president that has a great mind, a big heart and an extraordinary leader and this whole world can trust. And if you're looking for anything else, you got the wrong candidate.

Senator Mitch McConnell (R-KY): "This whole argument that influence is for sale is utter nonsense. What did Enron get? They got nothing, nothing whatsoever, except investigations, criminal prosecutions, subpoenas. They've gotten nothing but problems. Their contributions got them nothing."

Rep. John Linder (R-Ga.): "It's silliness. If there's any evidence, bring it forth. And if there isn't, then don't keep implying that there might be."

Rep. David Dreier (R-CA): "Those who will try to draw a correlation between the bankruptcy of Enron and the political process-obviously there is no correlation."

GOP national chair Marc Racicot: "I have not seen any evidence of any public official -- whether Democrat or Republican -- that reflects something that could be classified as wrongdoing. So even though there certainly have been campaign contributions received by people on both sides of the aisle, there does not appear to be any wrongdoing as a result of the participation of Enron in the political affairs of this nation."

DNC national chair Terry MacAuliffe: [after being asked about favors Clinton Administration officials did on behalf of Enron, followed by the receipt of campaign contributions] "I'm not saying there's anything wrong with it. I haven't said there's anything wrong with what the Bush White House has done.... Our only point is we want disclosure."

Weekly Standard executive editor Fred Barnes: "The bigger the contribution, the more favors the donor gets: That's the argument. Enron proves the opposite....Their election donations bought them nothing."