Ethics trials highlight racial tensions in Congress

[boston bean]

Since its 2009 inception, the Office of Congressional Ethics — an independent watchdog set up at the behest of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) — has investigated at least eight members of the black caucus.

Waters came under scrutiny last year after Massachusetts-based OneUnited Bank, one of the nation's largest minority-owned institutions, received $12 million in bailout funds.

The funding came three months after Waters, a senior member of the House committee that oversees banking, helped arrange a meeting between officials of the bank, other minority-owned financial institutions and Treasury Department representatives. Waters' husband, Sidney Williams, had owned stock in the bank and served on its board.

Waters has previously said that she fully disclosed her husband's ties to the bank.

Ethics advocates maintain that lax enforcement of House ethics rules encouraged Rangel and Waters to take defiant stands. Rep. Gene Green (D- Texas) may have furthered that perception late last week when he said panel members who investigated Rangel advised that he be given a simple reprimand, rather than a censure or expulsion from the House.

Neither Rangel nor Waters are ultimately expected to be forced to resign even if they are found guilty of breaking ethics rules.

Meredith McGehee of the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington ethics advocacy group, disputed the caucus' contention that the House ethics process is racially biased. Instead, she said, veteran lawmakers who have little to fear from their constituents are more likely to run afoul of ethical standards."

"I understand their concerns," McGehee said, "but it's what happens when you are in a safe district. You don't have a lot of competition."

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/aug/01/nation/la-na-waters-20100801

What do you think Meredith McGehee meant by saying "veteran lawmakers who have little to fear from their constituents are more likely to run afoul of ethical standards"?

Is she saying that black lawmakers are only voted for by black voters who will vote for the just because they are black? WTF is she talking about.

I'm sorry folks, but there is something very amiss here.

[mzteris]

1. I don't think it's any coincidence

that the two being investigated are black.

I bet if you "investigated" any and every single member of Congress - you'd find "SOMETHING" . . .

I really really think it's time to strike back. Enough of the bipartisan attempt, it's clear the republicans will NEVER EVER play with a sense of fairness and concern for "the people". They only care about themselves.

[Pavulon]

2. They have been on the CREW crooked list for years. (nt)

[Freetradesucks]

3. They are clearly being singled out

because they are black and liberal (and a little bit uppity too). Do you honestly think that all white repukes are innocent? It's a modern day lynching.

[BeHereNow]

4. Welcome to DU-

Lynching is pretty accurate, I'd say.

Gotta keep the haters happy, so they throw a few black "libruls" under the bus.

Blatant and disgusting, isn't it?

War criminals from the Bush Inc. walk among us as free men while
others are thrown to the crooked justice system as examples and
fodder for the racists among our citizenry.



BHN

[BeHereNow]

5. Recommending- pay attention people.

This is no accident.
This is quite deliberate.
BHN

[Octafish]

6. U.S. Congress didn't investigate a chimpministration that lied America into 2 illegal wars.

For people raised on television: "Where were the cameras?"

[BeHereNow]

7. Indeed- not a peep about the real criminals among us.

Are we surprised at this recent hypocrisy?
Hell, no.

BHN

[EFerrari]

8. K&R.

[L0oniX]

9. Clue: Congressional Ethics = oxymoron ...for the most part.

[BlueCheese]

10. Off the top of my head...

I remember James Traficant, Tom DeLay (woohoo), and Cunningham as other congressfolk who were pushed out by scandal. This doesn't mean that Rangel and Waters aren't being specifically targeted, of course.

I would also guess that you'd need the consent of at least one Democrat on the House Ethics Committee for proceedings to go anywhere. I wonder how that played out. Does anyone know?