Sometimes you almost don’t need anything but a title.
The Office of Congressional Ethics, a powerful symbol of Democrats’ promise to “drain the swamp” in Washington, is in danger of having its power stripped after the midterm elections.
Members of the Congressional Black Caucus have led the charge, airing complaints about the aggressive, independent panel in a private session with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last month, and they’ve drafted a resolution that, if approved, would severely curtail the panel’s power.
But there’s hot competition between the CBC and the official House ethics committee over who has less regard for the Office of Congressional Ethics, also known as the OCE. And the rest of the House doesn’t appear to be far behind in its disdain. Privately, Democratic and Republican lawmakers, and even some congressional leaders, acknowledge that there’s a strong sentiment to change rules that empower the office to publicize investigations and wreak havoc on lawmakers’ political lives.
But pay no attention to the man behind the curtain:
Of course, nobody wants to be portrayed as loosening ethics in an election year, and Butterfield was quick to point out that change could come as members “promulgate rules for the 112th Congress” in January 2011.
The thing apparently is working:
The threat to the OCE’s independent authority was underscored Wednesday when a group of government watchdog groups released a letter to Pelosi, calling on her to keep the office intact.
“To date, the OCE has made important progress in restoring the shattered credibility of the House ethics enforcement process,” wrote six groups, including the League of Women Voters, The Campaign Legal Center and Public Citizen.
Which is why Democrats want it trimmed. Here’s the nugget:
But several said a turning point for the office was its handling of the PMA investigation.
A number of Democrats were privately infuriated that the OCE board had authorized handing over PMA to the Justice Department — a significant upgrade in the seriousness of the investigation.
The now-defunct lobbying group — which specialized in obtaining spending earmarks for its clients — is at the center of a still ongoing criminal probe by DoJ. Several senior members of the Appropriations Committee, including the late Rep. John Murtha (D-Pa.) and Rep. Pete Visclosky (D-Ind.), have been implicated.
Under the OCE’s rules, it may “refer information to state and federal authorities in the event that information indicates a crime has occurred or is about to occur.”
But members from both parties insist there was no indication criminal action had occurred in interactions with PMA, and the Justice Department has not charged anyone involved in the case, on or off Capitol Hill, at this point. OCE critics say this shows the panel overreached on the PMA inquiry.
The OCE acted within the limits of its power and Democrats were caught red-handed. The real objection here is that Congressmen are pressured to act ethically at all times. As Mike might say
“Wah wah wah wah”
And a couple of reminders:
Nazi Pelosi, 2006:
“The American people voted to restore integrity and honesty in Washington, D.C., and the Democrats intend to lead the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history,”
Nazi Pelosi, 2010:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Friday said that she is running the most ethical Congress in history.
That’s reflected nicely in the non-action on Rangel.
“Ethics? We don’ need no stinkin’ ethics!”
DrJohn has been a health care professional for more than 30 years. In addition to clinical practice he has done extensive research and has published widely with over 70 original articles and abstracts in the peer-reviewed literature. DrJohn is well known in his field and has lectured on every continent except for Antarctica. He has been married to the same wonderful lady for over 30 years and has three kids- two sons, both of whom are attorneys and one daughter on her way into the field of education.
DrJohn was brought up with the concept that one can do well if one is prepared to work hard but nothing in life is guaranteed.
Except for liberals being foolish.
From the post: Members of the Congressional Black Caucus
This may be a bit off topic, BUT, what would we be called if we formed a Congressional WHITE Caucus and promoted it as such?? 🙄
Hypothetically speaking: Why would one need a commitee to overseas ethics when there are no ethics? Just wondering.
I had forgotten that there was an ethics committee. I wonder if the politicians remember what “ethics” mean.
The only way you can have an unbiased ethics committee is if all of the members are non-politicians and are not connected to them in any way. Politicians policing themselves just doesn’t sound right.
@TexasFred
I’ve often thought similarly about what would happen if a “United Caucasian College Fund” was created to help poor but promising Caucasian youths. My bet is that both would be attacked in the media as racist white supremest/separatist organizations.