Is There an Ethicist in the House?

[Robbien]

ike some election-cycle cicada, the House ethics committee has broken its long silence and begun making a bit of noise. It is taking notice of public pressure for an investigation of allegations that bribe offers and intimidation were part of the long night of Republican arm-twisting when the Medicare drug subsidy bill squeaked through Congress last year. Representative Nick Smith, a Michigan Republican, had angrily complained of "$100,000-plus" bribe offers and threats against his son's political career. He later backed off a bit, but a full investigation of the gamesmanship under way that night is clearly needed. Whether the ethics panel is up to the task remains doubtful. The committee has been more or less flat-lining for years, ever since the rules were changed in 1997 to block outside complaints about suspect members and questionable behavior.

Back in the waning days of the 20th century, ethics battles in the House destroyed or damaged careers. Speaker Jim Wright, a Democrat, had to resign, and Speaker Newt Gingrich, a Republican, was fined $300,000. The lessons the parties drew from this, unfortunately, was not to clean up their act. Instead, they muzzled the ethics panel with a mutually assured destruction pact in which neither side complains about the other.

Now, to prove that cozy silence is no longer the standard, the ethics panel must do a prompt and thorough job on the Smith case, using subpoena power and taking action that is credible to the public. Other issues beg for investigation, notably the seamy plan by the Republican majority leader, Tom DeLay, to exploit a charitable foundation, which aids children, by offering political donors tax exemptions as a way to finance party galas this summer at the Republican National Convention.

Leaders from both parties defensively refuse to reopen a channel for the public to make complaints and resolve doubts. The Democratic leader, Nancy Pelosi of California, blandly says the public has the opportunity to ask individual House members to file complaints.

Democracy 21, a watchdog group, has taken up this suggestion, sending a letter to every House member detailing the ethical flaws in Mr. DeLay's charity scheme. Democracy 21 cites little-known rules saying that if just one member has the courage to forward the complaint formally, the ethics panel may have to take it up. Any takers in the House?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/27/opinion/27SAT2.html?ex=1080968400&en=09b3c87759014013&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

[TreasonousBastard]

1. Oh, sorry, I thought you needed an ethicist...

and this is politics.

Political ethics is an oxymoron. The rules are cleverly designed to make it look like politics is being cleaned up, but they are there simply to trip up the weak and unwary.

While it is rumored there may actually be one or two genuinely ethical people in politics, "ethics" is usually brought up simply when someone has the goods on an enemy.

Preferably, that someone has his own skeletons in a very secure closet, or it can get very embarassing all around.

[boobooday]

2. The Toxic Bug Man is Going Down!

Can I get a witness, people?

If even one of these brewing scandals blows up, well, never mind. I just have a feeling that this is going to be a rough summer for old Shrub.

http://www.wgoeshome.com