Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: sandintoes who wrote (7596)	5/25/2006 10:47:47 AM
From: Peter Dierks	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 71588

Principle over politics By Tim Chapman May 25, 2006 Over the weekend FBI agents raided the Capitol Hill office of Rep. William Jefferson (D-LA) in search of documents connecting him to a federal bribery investigation. When the search was over, agents left with some damning evidence, including nearly $100,000 in cash found in the Louisiana Democrat’s freezer. Republican partisans delighted in the delicious irony of yet another Democratic talking point falling flat on its face. Indeed, the culture of corruption charge that Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi love to bandy about rang hollow as yet another of their own appeared to be going the way of Abramoff and Co. But the partisan popping of the champagne corks in GOP operative land was short lived, as former Republican revolutionary and Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich threw a freezing cold bucket of ice water on the situation. On Tuesday the Hill newspaper reported that Gingrich fired off a missive to Capitol Hill Republicans condemning the raid as an unconstitutional breach of power. “What happened Saturday night ... is the most blatant violation of the Constitutional Separation of Powers in my lifetime,” Gingrich wrote. “As a former Speaker of the House, I am shaken by this abuse of power.” Soon thereafter, Congressional leadership followed suit. Speaker Dennis Hastert and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist expressed concerns about the constitutionality of the raid. The tried and true Separation of Powers doctrine is at stake, and clearly congressional leaders are sympathetic to Gingrich’s sentiments. Hastert’s top lieutenant, John Boehner, even went so far as to suggest that the matter would not be settled until the Supreme Court stepped in with a ruling. In response to congressional leadership’s concerns, right-leaning pundits everywhere are crying foul. Charges of political ineptitude and tone deafness are filling the conservative blogosphere and column pages. John Podhoretz, a contributor to National Review Online, sums up the feelings of many conservatives writing on a National Review group blog, “The Republican party has been reeling from bribery and corruption scandals of its own. So the Speaker of the House, the leader of Republicans in the House, actually complains to the president that the raid on the Democratic congressman's office is an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers. In so doing, he reinforces the image that Congress, which almost never polices itself, cares less about corruption than it does about its prerogatives. It also steps on the very important political story that might help diffuse the image of specifically Republican corruption.” Podhoretz can’t help but conclude that, “Denny Hastert is a blithering idiot.” Well, politically speaking, maybe. But aren’t conservatives who are criticizing Hastert and others trying to have their cake and eat it too? A common complaint of conservatives lately is that the GOP has lost its ability to stand on principle, politics be damned. Why haven’t Republicans, on principle, objected to big spending government programs like the Medicare Prescription Drug Act or No Child Left Behind? Why can’t Republicans, on principle, say no to anonymous earmarking that greases the skids for poorly crafted legislation? Why have House Republicans been able to muster so few votes for a budget modeled after the revolutionary 1995 budget that passed the House with all but one vote? The answer is that the politics of the situation -- or so they think -- demands that they vote against the principled position. Now, Republican leadership is taking a principled position on the FBI Jefferson raid at the expense of the politics of the situation. Indeed, this position is scoring zero political points for Republicans while at the same time letting Democrats off the hook. Pundits are right to be baffled at the politics of the situation, especially given the GOP’s past track record of playing to the politically popular position. It is worth examining the position that GOP leadership has taken. In 219 years the Executive branch has never infringed on the Legislative branch in this manner. This week’s raid was a first. Now consider if the situation were reversed. Can you imagine what would have happened if House impeachment investigators had sent a team to President Clinton’s White House to search for subpoenaed documents? The FBI claims that it raided Jefferson’s office with extraordinary safeguards in place. But did it? The historical practice of allowing a representative of the House such as the general counsel to observe the search was not honored. Quite to the contrary, in fact. The general counsel was not allowed in the room at the time of the search and was instead given assurances that the FBI would police itself in regards to privileged and unprivileged documents. Police itself? Surely this was not what the Founders envisioned when they set up a system of Separation of Powers; a system designed to work off friction between the competing branches of government. To assume that one branch would police itself to the benefit of another branch is to assume that the Founders system is not needed. Critics of congressional leadership certainly have a point regarding the politics of the situation: This is messy, and it appears silly. But critics should concede that a principled argument is being made here. Those critics are free to critique that argument, but they should recognize that those legislators who are making it are not in any way motivated by politics … for once. This conservative would like to see Republicans stand for principle on a much broader range of issues. But hey, beggars can’t be choosers. Tim Chapman is the Director of the Center for Media and Public Policy at The Heritage Foundation and the host of Townhall.com's Capitol Report. Copyright © 2006 Townhall.com townhall.com