SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TigerPaw who wrote (9105)1/16/2006 3:31:34 PM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 541478
 
Congress unwilling to clean its own house

capitolhillblue.com

By Staff and Wire Reports

Jan 16, 2006, 02:44

The Republican and Democratic leaders of Congress' ethics committees are in no hurry to investigate crimes of their own despite the growing revelations about the favors that lobbyist Jack Abramoff won for clients and the largesse he arranged for lawmakers.

Instead, they remain on the sidelines.

The House committee, stymied by partisan disagreements, launched no investigations in 2005 even after former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, requested an inquiry into his foreign travel arranged by Abramoff.

The lack of commitment to investigate issues about lawmakers' conduct with Abramoff, his lobbying team and his clients is raising anew the question of whether Congress adequately can discipline its own.

"There have always been questions about whether Congress can police itself," said Kathleen Clark, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis who specializes in ethics. "The situation in the House removes all doubt. The House is not policing itself."

The Associated Press asked the four lawmakers who lead the ethics committees whether they would make a commitment to investigate ethical wrongdoing if, as expected, the information Abramoff supplies in a plea agreement exposes misconduct by a number of members of Congress. Each of the four _ two Republicans and two Democrats _ declined, through his spokesmen, to do so.

The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct is headed by Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash.; the top Democrat is Rep. Alan Mollohan of West Virginia.

The Senate Select Committee on Ethics is led by Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio; the ranking Democrat is Sen. Tim Johnson of South Dakota.

While the committees have an equal number of Democrats and Republicans, forging a bipartisanship consensus in ethics investigations often has proved difficult.

After the House levied a $300,000 fine against former Speaker Newt Gingrich, R-Ga., for ethical violations in 1997 _ payment for part of the cost of investigating his conduct _ weary members of both parties declared an ethics truce. For several years, there were no major cases for several years.

The House committee revived itself in 2004, admonishing DeLay on three separate issues. The House Republican leadership reacted by refusing to extend the term of the chairman at that time, Rep. Joel Hefley, R-Colo. He had asked to stay on.

Last year, Hastings and Mollohan feuded for months over investigative rules, and then for additional months over the composition of the staff. The entire year was gone before the leaders finally chose the committee's top staff member; he started work only recently.

Abramoff pleaded guilty this month to conspiracy, tax evasion and mail fraud in Washington and to additional charges in Miami. He has agreed to cooperate with prosecutors.

The committees traditionally defer to prosecutors and do not interfere with criminal investigations. But they can investigate violations of standards of conduct that are separate from criminal violations.

Committee actions can range from a critical letter to recommendations of serious punishment by the full House _ all the way to expulsion.

The Abramoff criminal inquiry raises numerous issues. Lawmakers, for instance, are prohibited from accepting trips from lobbyists.

One way Abramoff lavished favors on lawmakers was through free travel that he arranged through nonprofit organizations that got money from the lobbyist's clients. DeLay has said he was unaware that Abramoff may have paid for some of his travel.

Rep. Bob Ney of Ohio, who has been implicated in the Abramoff investigation, announced Sunday that he will step aside temporarily as chairman of the House Administration Committee with jurisdiction over many of the rules governing lobbyists and travel.

More than four dozen lawmakers _ from House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., to Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D. _ sent to federal agencies letters that were favorable to Abramoff clients or took official actions in Congress to help them.

Around the same time, those lawmakers received large political donations or used Abramoff's skybox or restaurant for fundraising. Some lawmakers didn't provide reimbursement until years later.

Ethics watchdog groups have written the committees alleging those activities violate congressional ethics standards that require lawmakers to avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Congress' response to the budding scandal so far, especially in the House, has been a flurry of proposals to write new laws to control lobbyists' relations with lawmakers. Some experts believe that without an investigation that can lead to discipline, ethics violators get a free pass.

"You have to publicly reprimand someone," said Judy Nadler, the former mayor of Santa Clara, Calif., and now a senior fellow at Santa Clara University. "If there are no consequences, things will not change. This is drive-by ethics."

Former Sen. Warren Rudman, a Republican who served on the Senate ethics committee, said, "The amount of politics that intruded into the House committee is discouraging."

Rudman said the ethics leaders have an obligation to follow up on any potential violations of standards of conduct. "It would be impossible not to address some of these issues," said Rudman, who served during the Keating Five investigation that suffered through partisanship in the Senate panel.

That investigation had similarities to the Abramoff case. It involved donations to five senators from a savings and loan operator, who persuaded the lawmakers to intervene with federal regulators on his behalf. The timing of the donations and official actions was a key issue with both the Keating Five and the Abramoff cases.

Andrew Kohut, president of the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, said the Abramoff case is "likely to raise the issue of how well Congress does in keeping track of its own behavior."

But he said the public will not really get interested until more lawmakers are publicly named in the criminal investigation.



To: TigerPaw who wrote (9105)1/17/2006 1:26:11 AM
From: stockman_scott  Respond to of 541478
 
Now there’s Fox, which promotes the ruling party’s agenda and tries to “drown out the voices of reason, the voices of constitutionality,” Clyburn said.
__________________________________________________________

Clyburn: Bush appointees created ‘culture of corruption’
By LEE HENDREN
T&D Staff Writer
Thursday, January 12, 2006

Sixth District U.S. Rep. James E. Clyburn said Thursday he can support Republican proposals to ban congressmen from accepting gifts, including privately funded trips.

But he thinks it’s the wrong response to a lobbying scandal roiling Washington in this election year.

“There’s almost a total (gift ban) now. It’s (limited to) $50,” the Democratic congressman said in an interview after giving a speech at Claflin University.

“If we limited all travel to only travel taken by the federal government rather than sponsored by private groups, I’d be for all of that,” Clyburn said. “Traveling ain’t anything I’m all that enamored with.”

Republican leaders are “seriously considering” the action as “a very strong statement” to voters, Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif., told The Associated Press.

“The problem is not lobbyists” or the rules governing their activities, Clyburn said. “The problem is these congresspeople who occupy positions of power in Washington who are not following the law.”

“The rule was, if you take a trip sponsored by somebody, you have to reveal it. You have to file a report (stating) exactly what the trip’s all about. No big deal,” Clyburn said.

“If you remember, my name came up in this at one point,” he said. “My reports were all there, so, no problem.”

The problem is not with the law or the reporting system it created, Clyburn said; it’s with “the character of the people we’re electing to office. ... These people were not filing the reports!”

Clyburn, who has served in Congress since 1992, sees ethical problems all around Washington.

For instance, he said “every single professional lawyer in the Justice Department rejected” a Texas redistricting proposal engineered by Rep. Tom DeLay, the former House majority leader.

The lawyers said the plan was unconstitutional and violated the Voting Rights Act of 1965, Clyburn said.

“However, they were overruled by (President) Bush’s appointees who put in their culture — a culture of corruption,” Clyburn said.

“If they had followed the law as the lawyers (understood it), DeLay’s efforts would have stopped right there. No, no. And that’s why he’s headed to jail, because they were outside the law. Rather than following the law, they went outside the law,” the congressman said.

DeLay has been charged with moneylaundering, but has not been found guilty.

“They’ve had droves of resignations from the Justice Department, but the media never write about it,” Clyburn said.

“I mean, you know, if my staff were to resign en masse, you are going to want to know why. So you’ve got all the professional lawyers in the Justice Department leaving (and) no media is writing about that,” he said.

“And that’s why you see all these other things. They’re (investigating) who leaked the stuff on (Valerie) Plame — somebody who just got sick of this stuff and said, ’Come on, this ain’t right.’ How do you get mad at somebody’s husband and you ’out’ them (as) a CIA operative?”

“They want to know now who leaked the (information) on the (domestic) spying — somebody who knew that this wasn’t right,” Clyburn said.

“The people who are doing right, who are the whistle-blowers, they’re getting blamed for blowing the whistle on the wrongdoers,” Clyburn said. “Nobody seems to be doing anything about the wrongdoers.”

“If the Justice Department were allowed to pursue this investigation, what you’re going to find will make Watergate look like a Sunday school picnic,” Clyburn said.

“When asked about the (Watergate) break-in, whether or not he had violated the law, (former president Richard) Nixon said, if the president does it, it’s not against the law,” Clyburn said.

“You look at what George Bush is saying, some of the words and phrases may be different but it’s the same thing: When I do it, it’s not against the law,” Clyburn said.

“If this ain’t Watergate revisited, you tell me what it is.”

But there’s a big difference now, he said. Back in the 1970s, the media was dominated by The Washington Post and The New York Times and journalists like Bob Woodward, Carl Bernstein and Ben Bradlee who strove to fulfill their role as watchdogs of government.

Now there’s Fox, which promotes the ruling party’s agenda and tries to “drown out the voices of reason, the voices of constitutionality,” Clyburn said.

thetandd.com