I heard a short piece about this on the radio yesterday, and it just boils my blood like nothing else. Tom DeLay is the most crooked fucking politician in Washington, and he has enough power to bend rules around himself. This has to stop, but nobody is paying attention to this shit.

--PunkDavid

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/30/politics/30delay.html

G.O.P. to Make Ethics Inquiries Harder to Begin
By CARL HULSE and KATHARINE Q. SEELYE

Published: December 30, 2004

WASHINGTON, Dec. 29 - In the wake of back-to-back ethics slaps at the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, House Republicans are preparing to make it more difficult to initiate ethics investigations and could remove the Republican chairman who presided over the admonishments of Mr. DeLay last fall.

A House leadership aide said a package of rules changes to be presented to the House when Congress convenes on Tuesday could include a plan that would require a majority vote of the ethics panel to pursue a formal investigation. Now, a deadlock on the panel, which is evenly split between parties, keeps a case pending. The possible change, the aide said, would mean that a tie vote would effectively dismiss the case.

The aide said the change would instill more bipartisanship in ethics cases. But Democrats and outside groups said the proposal would dilute an already weak ethics process.

It remained uncertain whether Representative Joel Hefley of Colorado, the current chairman of the panel, would stay in that post. A spokesman for Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, who would play a chief role in determining the appointment, said no decision had been made.

Many Republicans expressed dissatisfaction with Mr. Hefley after the committee reports critical of Mr. DeLay were issued, saying he had allowed Democrats to score political points against Mr. DeLay for conduct that did not merit such scrutiny.

But the potential for change in the chairmanship has drawn fire from Democrats. "It is our responsibility to uphold a high ethical standard," Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, the House Democratic leader, said in a statement Wednesday. "Removing a chair of the ethics committee for upholding that standard would be a stain on the House of Representatives."

Democrats are planning to try next week to force a floor vote on a proposal requiring any member of either party's leadership to step aside if indicted on a criminal charge. The move would reverse last month's vote by Republicans, in a closed-door party meeting, to eliminate such a requirement for Republicans to protect Mr. DeLay should he be indicted in a campaign finance inquiry under way in Texas.

In Texas, state Republican legislative leaders and party officials are considering some maneuvers of their own in light of the investigation. One proposal would take authority for prosecuting the campaign finance case away from the Democratic district attorney in Austin and give it to the state attorney general, a Republican. Another possible move would legalize corporate campaign contributions like those that figure into the state case.

The October rulings by the House ethics panel regarding Mr. DeLay came after years of inaction by the panel, a stance attributed to an unofficial truce between the two parties over the filing of complaints after several bitter and partisan ethics fights in the 1990's.

In the first, Mr. DeLay was admonished for going too far in trying to persuade a lawmaker to support a Medicare prescription drug law. In the second, he was criticized for giving the appearance of granting undue access at a fund-raising event and for involving a federal agency in a political matter in Texas.

But the panel also later chastised Representative Chris Bell, the Texas Democrat who initiated a complaint against Mr. DeLay after losing his own seat, for exaggerating the accusations. Republicans said the tone of the complaint showed that lawmakers needed to be more accountable for ethics filings, and some called for new controls on complaints and a ban on outside groups working with lawmakers to prepare them.

Representative David Dreier, Republican of California and chairman of the Rules Committee, has indicated he will consider changes in the ethics process but his office could provide no details Wednesday night.

Members of outside groups that monitor the ethics process said they were not certain what would be proposed but they expected Republicans to try to deter new cases, particularly in light of the possibility of more growing out of an inquiry into lobbying on Indian gambling issues.

"They are trying to put the genie back in the bottle, and it is all seemingly to protect one man," said Tom Fitton, president of the conservative group Judicial Watch and part of a coalition pressing for stronger ethics rules.

Mr. Fitton and others said an effort to oust Mr. Hefley would smack of retaliation.

"The removal of Representative Hefley would constitute a declaration of war against ethics in the House," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21.

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that a possible replacement for Mr. Hefley would be Representative Lamar Smith, Republican of Texas and a former member of the panel. Mr. Smith this year contributed $5,000 from his campaign account to Mr. DeLay's legal defense. Aides said Mr. Smith had not been approached about the post.

In Texas, no bills have been introduced regarding the jurisdictional issues or campaign contributions. But Andrew Taylor, a prominent Republican lawyer in Austin, recently told The Austin American-Statesman that he expected to be lobbying to legalize corporate donations when the Legislature returns in January.

And Texas Republicans have made it clear that they want to transfer the authority for prosecuting the case away from Ronnie Earle, the Travis County district attorney, and give it to Greg Abbott, the state attorney general.

Earlier this year, the executive committee of the Republican Party of Texas endorsed transferring state money for the public integrity unit from the Travis County district attorney to the state attorney general.

The unit was moved to the county office by the State Legislature, not the State Constitution, so the Legislature can return it, said Sherry Sylvester, a spokeswoman for the Texas Republican Party. Ms. Sylvester said that allowing the local district attorney's office to prosecute state cases because it covered the state capital is analogous to giving a District of Columbia district attorney the power to prosecute members of Congress.

nice to see the good ole boy's network is still in fine shape.

Completely agree PD.

They're gonna make it more difficult for guys like this to get caught:

Republican Senator Chuck Hagel, long-connected with the Bush family, was recently caught lying about his ownership of ES&S by the Senate Ethics Committee.

ES&S is the largest voting machine manufacturer in the U.S. and counts almost 60% of all U.S. votes.

This isn't really very recent.

--PunkDavid

Maybe not recent, but relivant.

This is one of those things that gives you a huge feeling of hopelessness.

I still wonder why bombing countries is more ethical than blowjobs.

As one who earned a Bachelor's degree in Ethics and Social and Political Philosophy, I can authoritatively say this sucks.

Because its not.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
GOP reverses course over ethics rules
House Republicans opt to retain tougher standards

From Ted Barrett
CNN

Tuesday, January 4, 2005 Posted: 12:03 AM EST (0503 GMT)
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay has been admonished three times by the House ethics committee.

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Majority Leader Tom DeLay asked House Republicans Monday to reverse a December rule change that allows indicted leaders to continue to hold leadership posts in the chamber.

The rank-and-file members agreed to do so without dissent, two House Republican leadership aides who attended the meeting told CNN.

The so-called DeLay Rule had been heavily criticized. At Monday night's meeting, lawmakers praised DeLay for seeking the reversal.

Rep. Zach Wamp, a Tennessee Republican, had opposed the rule change. It would have allowed DeLay to remain in power if he were to be indicted by a grand jury in Travis County, Texas, that is conducting a campaign finance probe that involves DeLay.

"It takes a big man to do what he did, and a smart politician," said Wamp, who feared the DeLay Rule would have created a chasm in his party. "This allows us to stick together."

But Republicans did vote to change one key rule to require a majority on the ethics panel -- which is split evenly between Democrats and Republicans -- to vote in favor of conducting a formal investigation into allegations of wrongdoing against a member.

Currently, an investigation is triggered if the committee remains evenly split for 45 days on whether to take that step. The new rule is designed to provide a "presumption of innocence" for the accused, similar to what exists in the judicial system, according to Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, who once led the committee.
'Took the bullets right out of Nancy Pelosi's gun'

Monday night's meeting was called to review proposed changes to internal House rules, which will be voted on Tuesday by the full House.

Also at the meeting, Speaker Dennis Hastert announced the withdrawal of another proposed change to House ethics rules. This one would have removed language stating that a member "shall conduct himself at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House."

Republican opponents considered the existing language too vague and open to political abuse. But after other Republicans complained it would be wrong to drop a standard that parallels the code of conduct for military personnel, the proposed change was dropped.

"I don't want to see us retreat at all on standards," said Wamp, a member of the GOP class of 1994, which rode to power with Rep. Newt Gingrich on promises of ethical reform.

DeLay did not apologize at the meeting for the controversy the rule change created. And comments from Republicans indicated Monday night's move was motivated primarily by politics.

A spokesman for DeLay said Democrats will now lose the one talking point that Republicans believed might have been effective against them.

Wamp said the move "took the bullets right out of [Democratic leader] Nancy Pelosi's gun."

DeLay has been admonished three times by the House ethics committee, and he faces possible indictment in Texas in connection with a campaign finance probe.

The ethics panel said DeLay's attendance at a June 2002 golf fund-raiser for his leadership political action committee created an "improper appearance." The event was attended by energy company officials and held as House and Senate conferees were about to hash out energy legislation.

The committee also found that DeLay's office improperly contacted the Federal Aviation Administration in May 2003 to track a plane carrying Texas Democratic legislators, who had fled the state in an attempt to thwart a Republican plan to redraw the state's congressional district map.

The committee said the contacts amounted to an improper use of governmental resources for a political undertaking.

DeLay is still the biggest douche in the history of Congress. I guess that's how Texas likes their politicians.

*Cue Dukes of Hazzard theme song*

How can you castrate something that had no balls the begin with? Shouldn't we all be in accordance here? Ethics review in the political realm, especially at the Federal Congressional level, is a paper tiger.

Does it have to be? Is there a way to have real ethics review without creating a REAL tiger that can be really dangerous to democracy?

My objection, and the reason I first posted this, was because of the possibility that the chairman would be replaced purely because he had allowed the leader to be rebuked. And then the chairman would be replaced by one of the leader's fluffers. That's not really fair. He's not just a fluffer, he actually gives the on-camera blowjobs.

Now they passed a new rule that requires a majority vote to initiate an ethics investigation, essentially insuring that a member of the accused's party must affirmatively vote for teh investigation. Previously, a tied vote would initiate an investigation, thereby preventing partisan stonewalling on ethics issues. I don't know if this will have much practical effect in most cases, but like the other changes recently, it seems designed to specifically protect Tom DeLay, and I REALLY don't like that. Several Republicans in the House don't like it either, which is why they reinstated their rule about a party leader having to step down if indicted. So instead, they're going to try to take the legal case out of the hands of the DA in Austin (a Democrat) and give it to the Texas Attorney General (another fluffer of DeLay's).

But if you don't think ethics can be enforced, then fuck it.

--PunkDavid

You misread me. I'm stating with that kind of revolving door at the leadership level on THIS committee you're going to get a paper tiger. I'm debating the politics, I'm essentially in agreement with you. But that's how it works with all these committees. Get ready, because this is the most polarized Congress in the history of the United States.

Other than that, I have nothing more to add. Unless you're a lawyer or lobbyist, there's no real use debating the context of the House. That's why we have the Senate.

Um, I hope you guys realize that DeLay is not getting a free pass -- nor is anyone else that could possibly be investigated. There's still something called the criminal justice system that is very much at play here. DeLay is still under indictment. Let's not forget that. The way you guys are talking, he's going to walk scott-free with absolutely no consequences.

I think what's at issue here is that his fellow lawmakers want to bend the rules so that even if he is criminally guilty, he won't necessarily be in trouble politically. I find it appaling that this is happening in Congress, and I don't understand why most people just don't seem to care.

Two things. First, he is not yet under indictment. He may be soon, but he isn't yet. Second, as I said above, DeLay's friends in the Texas Legislature are currently trying to prevent that from happening as well by transferring authority to indict on this charge from the county to the state level, thereby putting the power to bring charges in the hands of a politician who is personally beholden to DeLay politically.

The antics in the House Ethic Committe are merely symptomatic of the larger problem.

--PunkDavid

Two things also. First, I think DeLay's a piece of shit. Second, the reasoning given is that the prosecutor fashioned some trumped up charges against DeLay in order to fulfill his vendetta.

To the extent the lawmakers are doing what they are doing, here's a solution -- vote them out of office.

Damn you two - I feel like I'm watching Court TV.

A smelly drippy piece of shit.



Which may or may not be true. Still, the tactics DeLay's people are using stink. Here's a solution, let the jury decide.



Except DeLay has Gerrymandered that possibility away also.

--PunkDavid