The Hill: House Democrats finalize new ethics rules

[DeepModem Mom]

Dems finalize new rules
By Jonathan E. Kaplan and Jackie Kucinich

House Democrats hurried yesterday to put the finishing touches on ethics reforms that would ban lawmakers and staffers from accepting trips, gifts and meals from lobbyists and prevent the new majority from holding votes open to change the outcome.

Democrats will adopt and then amend the House Rules package tomorrow to ban all travel paid for by lobbyists or organizations that employ lobbyists, require the ethics committee to pre-approve travel paid for by outside groups, enact a total gift ban, and require lawmakers to pay the market cost of flying on a corporate jet, said Democratic staffers and officials with government watchdog groups.

And, because they feel they lost the 2003 Medicare prescription drug benefit vote because GOP leaders held it open for three hours, during which they flipped opponents into the “yes” column, Democrats will include a provision in the rules to prevent any sort of repetition, said aides to incoming Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

Democrats also will eliminate the practices of changing conference reports after members have signed them and excluding elected members from conference committees....

New House rules could take eight weeks or longer to go into effect because the ethics committee (the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct) might be required to clarify and interpret issues, such as how to define a lobbyist and how a pre-approval requirement for travel would function....

http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/010307/demrules.html

[no_hypocrisy]

1. Will the new rules be retroactive?

OK, I already know the answer, but I like to dream.

[CompassionateLib]

11. Not a chance

Both parties would get nailed by that.

You don't really believe only their politicians need to be watched, do you? Keep your friends close, keep your politicians closer. I'm glad the rules will be stronger and apply to all and while the Republicans should have done it and didn't at least now it'll be done in some form. Frankly the rules we are proposing are still pretty weak.

[Cass]

2. I hope there's something in there about changing bills after they've been voted on. I remember

hearing about this being done once or twice and was astounded that was legal.

[jamesinca]

3. Yes there is

"Democrats also will eliminate the practices of changing conference reports after members have signed them and excluding elected members from conference committees...."

[ChairmanAgnostic]

4. that alone would be a welcome change.

the GOP whores who have fucked our country for 6 yrs had no morals, scruples, or ethics.

[aquart]

6. And yet we can't hang them for it.

Those are videos that truly belong on YouTube.

[CompassionateLib]

55. Politicans don't

Belonging to a party that shelters William Jefferson's outright acceptance of bribes, Harry Reid's accepting thousands in boxing tickets and other favors, Cinthia Kinney's assault on a 15 an hour or so security guard shows there's plenty of poor ethics across the board.

No question, what is different is at least Democrats are tightening the rules and deserve credit over the Republicans, who came to town under a fake ethics reform banner themselves, then ran DC with none. But we can't trust any politican without a spotlight on them. For politicans ethics isn't what you do but what you get caught doing. Let's keep the spotlight on them all.

[ManWroteTheBible]

56. You should pay closer attention...

Reid gave up those tickets before he was required to... McKinney was assaulted first... and who "sheltered" William Jefferson?

[CompassionateLib]

57. I can't argue that

Reid did nothing until it was publicized. Kinney was not assaulted first and your point on Jefferson is pointless, he had bribe money in his freezer, I don't care who "sheltered" him, he was corrupt.

As I said, we change the rules, they didn't and we are clearly ahead of them for that reason. All I'm saying is anyone who thinks their politicians are amoral and corrupt and ours are angelic and honest are naive. Politicans are politicians and the honest ones are weeded out far before they go to DC.

[Cass]

9. Excellent! nt

[derby378]

26. Are there any high-profile examples of conference reports being "doctored?"

Thanks!

[Morgana LaFey]

5. They need a rule that

no legislator votes for a bill s/he (or her staff) hasn't read in its entirety. period.

I'm sick of that shit.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

7. first, we need congresscritters who know HOW to read. Virgil Goode, for ex.

Several others come to mind.

[Pierre.Suave]

8. to read...

they would need a functioning brain, something Virgil is lacking.

[Tight_rope]

31. And I second your motion too!

:kick:

[Freddie Stubbs]

12. How exactly would you enforce that rule?

:shrug:

[Ezlivin]

29. The same way contracts are enforced all the time - signature required

We could have our representatives sign a document that says, in essence, "By signing below I acknowledge that I have read the entirety of HRXXXX/SRXXXX."

[Tight_rope]

30. I second that motion!

:kick:

[StClone]

42. And time to read bills

Remember sudden and miraculously appearing fully formed bills needing to be voted on immediately with names like "God's Patriotic Funding Bill."

[Mind_your_head]

44. "God's Patriotic Funding Bill"

:rofl:

Thank G_d the pubs don't have the 110th Congress majority or that truly wouldv'e stood a chance to be the name of a real bill!!!

[emmadoggy]

10. I love that the Dems are doing this.

Isn't it rich, though, that now those 3 repubs want to introduce the legislation that Pelosi tried to get through in 2004 - the "Minority Bill of Rights"?? The article says the repubs are afraid what the Dems are doing will set a dangerous precedent. Yeah, umm, aren't THEY the ones who already set it??? (or am I missing something here?) Gimme a break. It smacks of the whole, "what's good for the goose...." thing.

It just goes to show that they seemed to be so delusional and arrogant as to assume that they would have control forevermore and never had the foresight to think about how all the things they were doing could come back to bite them in the ass. Same thing goes for all the lack of oversight and extra power they have let the executive branch soak up. Are they so short-sighted as to realize that those powers could go to a Democratic President some day?? Of course, I know the answer to that. Lucky for them, most Dems have a lot more scruples than they do (not that we shouldn't give them a taste of their own medicine now and then, though.)

The repubs are like a bunch of whiny brats. When they are in control, they run things with an iron fist and bend the rules to suit their needs. But as soon as the shoe's on the other foot, they whine like a bunch of wussies. They are classic bullies.

[tblue37]

22. They DID believe they would be in power forever.

After all, Rove had THE MATH. But the tsunami of anti-Republican votes was so great that even the typical voter suppression and black box voting cheats weren't enough to prevent a Dem majority. I am quite certain that if there had not been massive cheating and voter suppression, the Dem majority would be even greater, but the Republicans' little tricks were probably just enough to flip some close races and to tighten the margin in the races won by Dems.

[tblue]

37. Hello My Twin Sister! And you are right. They stole 4% of the vote. Instead of a 7% margin, it

would've been an 11% gap between Dems and Repugs. I heard this on Randi's show. So 4% of voters who thought they voted had their votes disappeared in those dang machines and other lovely HAVA enhancements. I don't remember if that percentage counted voter suppression, but I don't believe it did.

The Repugs sure did believe their rule would last 1000 years, just like the Third Reich predicted for itself, and we all know how that turned out, thank God.

[tblue37]

46. Great tblue minds think alike! (eom)

[HowHasItComeToThis]

47. Investigating VOTING MACHINES MUST BE FIRST

:kick: :kick: :kick: :grouphug: :applause: :applause: :applause: CODE MUST NOT BE PROPRIETY.

SCREAM AND YELL.

PROBABLY THE VOTING WAS TAMPERED WITH BUT NOT QUITE ENOUGH TO MAINTAIN POWER.

[underpants]

13. Folks, THIS SELLS

this and the 5 day workweek are going to sell like hotcakes. Across the board.

[wake.up.america]

14. Any chances of public roll calls on votes?

[LiberalFighter]

21. They already have that

There are situations where they don't vote but they are generally procedural.

[geiger]

15. what a waste of time

they should be working on repealing the new bankruptcy laws, among other things

[w4rma]

16. You're kidding, right? All of this sets the foundation for repealing that stuff. (nt)

[geiger]

18. they dont enforce the rules they've already got

actions speak louder than words. I was disappointed that Pelosi became fixated on this. There are a lot more meaningful projects that need work.

[William769]

28. And where would you have liked her to start?

Not on ethics? Not on Minimum wage? Not on a five day work week? She has to start some place and it seems she is taking on a little of everything. Thats not good enough for you?

[onehandle]

17. Excellent start.

Now destroy the entirety of the lobbyist system.

[Leilani]

19. The Lobbyists have already figured a way around new rules

On C-Span this AM, I heard the rules are weak, & are easily bypassed.

The ban on lobbyists does not include non-profits.

Groups like AIPAC have a non-profit wing, so they can continue to pay for influence.

Sounds like a lot of smoke & mirrors.

[Eric J in MN]

36. Right. This bill is garbage.

Every provision has a loophole.

No travel organized by lobbyists UNLESS it's only a one day trip!

No travel paid for by outside groups UNLESS the Ethics Committee approves!

[NavyDavy]

20. damn, alot of nay sayers on this post today.....give it a chance we

don't even take control until tomorrow....but to some that doesn't matter....

[Der Blaue Engel]

23. I only see one, really

Naysayers are just louder and puff up their fur a lot, so it looks like there's more. ;)

[SaveOurDemocracy]

24. For some, the glass will always be seen as half empty ...

It's a relief to see them determined to act on many of the inequities and the corruption that flourished and grew under GOP rule. I believe success will breed confidence; and bigger challenges will be addressed as they move forward. I also believe they (the Dems)know that the American voters are awake and watching.

This is just the beginning. I agree, there are many issues requiring swift action ... the bankruptcy bill is an important one.

Each and every positive gain and reform is a victory. Those who expect perfection are doomed to disappointment.

[anitar1]

32. After the last 6 years , my faith is sorely eroded,

but I am willing to wait and see what our Dem reps really do. Am not going to start demonizing them. Let's give them a chance. We will know soon enough. and yes, ethics is one of the most important, imho.

[autorank]

25. This IS the 1st impression the public will have of Pelosi. They'll like it.

I'm feeling better already about our chances to actually make real and sustained change.

This is a process issue and the public has given up on expecting the process to change.
This is real change. It's very clear. No gratuities, period. If you use their services,
pay for it.

Couldn't be happier with this step.

Clean up this part of the process and the next issue is getting rid of privately funded
campaigns, imho. But this is just great for right now.

K&R and thanks for posting. Great news!

[ClintonTyree]

27. You never get a second chance to make a first impression.....

and coming right out of the gate the Democrats are sending a message that it WILL NOT be "business as usual" on Capital Hill.

I wholeheartedly applaud this move and look forward to seeing the Democrats undo years of Republican damage. It ain't perfect, but it's a start! :applause:

[autorank]

52. Isn't that the truth...one of the few that's always right. n/t

[geiger]

54. The "public" has heard it all before

The American public is US, not some anonymous, alien entity out there. The intelligence of the American People continues to be insulted, assaulted, and talked down to. It's counter-productive.

[Joanne98]

33. I wish they could get rid of Presidental signing statements

[Joanne98]

34. AIPAC and the Aspen Institute want to be exempted from the new rules.

State and local government agencies and some foundations, such as AIPAC and the Aspen Institute, want to be exempted from the new rules.

[Trident]

41. Exempting AIPAC

What an insane idea. On what basis would AIPAC be arguing for an exemption? I sincerely hope no one is seriously entertaining this proposal. AIPAC is part of the problem in Washington. They need to be neutered.

[IronLionZion]

53. You know what I think about that?

:puke:

I hope there are enough sensible congresspeople who won't exclude these groups, but I'll believe it when I see it. AIPAC is part of the problem. I predict some DUer will call me an anti-semite.

[cmd]

35. My NEW congressman is leading the debate tomorrow

(snip)
Democratic leaders plan to pair three freshman members with more senior lawmakers to lead the debate on the House floor on Thursday and Friday. Rep. Zack Space (D-Ohio), who won the seat vacated by former Rep. Bob Ney (R), will lead debate over new trip and gift rules. Ney has pleaded guilty to crimes stemming from the scandal surrounding Jack Abramoff, the convicted former GOP lobbyist.

I wish him well. What a way to get your feet wet! It's fitting that Ney's replacement will be introducing ethics reform. This is part of the DCCC plan to insure the reelection of Democrats who live in Republican leaning areas. Those freshmen are being given assignments that will put them in key legislative positions and they are being mentored on how to be an effective representative. The 2008 race has begun even before the reps are sworn in.

[Mind_your_head]

38. These are great first foundational steps....

I believe them to be genuine attempts/efforts. However, I and most of us in the "reality based community" KNOW that there will ALWAYS be people/interests who WILL find ways to go around the rules/law. I hope that our congress-critters will have the integrity to maintain and uphold the 'SPIRIT of these new rules' too. I offer the following as an example of what prompted me to write this:

<snip>

House Democrats boast that their proposed ethics legislation will ban travel provided by lobbying organizations to lawmakers. Don't believe it.

Maneuvering by the American Israel Public Affairs Committee and others has opened a gaping loophole in the bill. Lobbies such as AIPAC and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have their own nonprofit foundations, which will still be allowed to underwrite congressional junkets under the new rules.

Watch for more lobbying groups to set up their own "non-lobbying" foundation affiliates as a result.

<snip>

Source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/01/AR2007010100682.html
(look at the very bottom of the page)

Edit to add: Or should I just say that the Repubs (and the organizations that buy them?) have already been "busy little beavers" figuring out how to circumvent the new rules?!?!

[Towlie]

39. Every Democratic proposal listed makes you think...

"My God, is that how the Republicans have been doing things???"

[knight_of_the_star]

40. This is ridiculous

From the article:

Meanwhile, GOP Reps. Tom Price (Ga.), Eric Cantor (Va.), and Patrick McHenry (N.C.) plan to introduce a resolution next week modeled on legislation that Pelosi introduced in 2004.

Pelosi’s “Minority Bill of Rights” demanded that legislation move through the committee process before reaching the House floor and urged GOP leaders to give lawmakers 24 hours to review legislation before it is considered and voted on by subcommittees or on the House floor.

McHenry expressed concern that excluding Republicans from the legislative process would set a bad precedent. GOP Reps. Buck McKeon (Calif.), Peter King (N.Y.) and Jim McCrery (La.) yesterday urged the Democrats who will chair their committees to conduct hearings on proposals that Democrats will consider in the first 100 legislative hours.

Democrats justified excluding Republicans by saying that the bills had already been discussed in the 109th Congress.

“It is a choice between leading with integrity and leading by force,” McHenry said. “To say they are advocating is ludicrous on its face by their opening hours of action.”


They have NO ground to stand on with this complaint, they had the Capitol Hill Police sicced on Dems to keep them from going over a budget bill, see how they like having what has been done unto them returned in kind.

[Skittles]

43. yes - we have HAD their input for the past 12 years

frankly we have had ENOUGH of their input....normally I would not agree with this shut-out but to these bastards I say SIT DOWN AND SHUT THE F*** UP

[Blutodog]

45. AMEN !!

Fuck the Repigs if they can't take a joke.

[knight_of_the_star]

48. The country is on our side with that Skittles

I think last November the American people already gave this guy their response:

"SHUT THE FUCK UP YOU WHINING GASBAG!"

[Springster]

49. I wish she had called me for some input cause I have several

1. Money for an election can come only from that state or district. No vote in a particular election means no contribution in that election. NO EXCEPTIONS.

2. Repeal of all Congressional exemptions to workplace laws applying to any other workplace within the USA. FSLA, Freedom of Information Act, EEO & OSHA come to mind

3. ALL committee chairs elected by secret ballot.

4. ALL travel - no exceptions - either personal and paid by member or Official business paid by official funds.

5. NO Closed meetings except for classified hearings.

6. Members must meet US Government security clearance standards for access to classified material.

7. NO immediate family members on paid congressional or campaign staffs.

8. Finally, an Independent Congressional Inspector General appointed by Majority and Minority Leaders of both House and Senate for a fixed term of 10 years. The IG could report findings to either Congressional House, or if a law has been broken, to the Justice Department.

[Greatwildbeast]

50. It kinda silly really

I mean if in a private ceremony he wants to use a Koran he should just do it quietly. Using Thomas Jefferson's Koran sort of appears as a cave in to the Christian Fundamentalists. Like a compromise.

And it's not really newsworthy.

[lonestarnot]

51. Yesssssss!