Tom DeLay
As some of you know (and others of you are blissfully unaware), Tom DeLay is the Majority Leader in the House of Representatives. Lately, there have been assorted accusations of ethical violations committed by him, and calls for his resignation or removal from his leadership role (or from the House completely). However, these accusations tend not to hold water. In no particular order, I will address several of them.
First, he paid family members for campaign work. Now, whether you consider this unethical or not, it does not violate the Congressional ethics rules and is not uncommon among members of both parties (~30 members did it last election cycle, as I recall, about evenly split between the parties). The amount paid was not unreasonable compared to that paid by others to their family members, nor was it the highest salary amount. And as far as family ties go, much less attention is paid to those who have family members who are highly-paid lobbyists; for instance, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, of Nevada, has family members in almost all of the major sectors for lobbying in his homestate. Paying a family member (usually less than) what you'd pay a non-family-member for similar campaign work can be justifiable. Family members working for firms lobbying that Representative or Senator (and sometimes even ones only officially lobbying others) are certainly something that should be looked into, to verify that it's not something like one of Jesse Jackson's shakedowns (where he organizes or threatens to organize a boycott against a company unless they meet certain "minority representation" standards, and then, amazingly, one of his sons ends up with a dealership, distributorship, or whatever, and then he ends up praising the company -- an "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine" deal).
Another charge against DeLay is that he accepted a paid trip from Korea-United States Exchange Council (KORUSEC) in 2001. That wouldn't have been a problem except that days before his trip, they changed their financial status and registered as a foreign agent (members of Congress can't accept paid trips from foreign agents). However, they did not inform him of this at the time, the change did happen just a few days before he left (presumably after he had already accepted the invitation for the trip), and accepting trips KORUSEC was legal before the change. What's especially surprising about the Democrats' feigned outrage over this is that trips continued to be provided to members of Congress and members of their staff. In fact, a member of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's staff accepted a paid trip from KORUSEC in 2003, well after the change in financial status. Not only that, but the staff member didn't file the necessary paperwork for that trip until after reporters started snooping around earlier this year, when the media and Democrats were playing up the charges against DeLay. Now, while accepting a paid trip from a foreign agent is wrong for a member of Congress, all evidence points to DeLay not knowing they were registered as such, and that they had not yet registered as such when he accepted the trip (though they were by the time he took it). Messy, yes. Grounds for removal, no.
There are several instances where DeLay is essentially accused of guilt by association. Several people that he has had contact with stand accused of illegal fundraising and the like. However, there is no evidence to tie DeLay to this fundraising. He might want to choose who he associates himself with better, but you can't really show any wrongdoing there.
Another problem for DeLay is that the district prosecutor where he lives is a fierce Democratic partisan who has not been afraid to use his position for personal vendettas. He indicted Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson right after her election, but the charges were thrown out on the first day of court. He's aggressively gone after various people close to DeLay in one way or another but has not yet been able to pin down DeLay. Because of him, Republicans looked into changing their party rules, which state that anyone who is indicted has to resign from any leadership post they have (though they don't have to resign from the House); they ended up leaving the rules as they were.
DeLay currently wants the accusations against him reviewed by the House Ethics Committee, so that he can be cleared. The committee has five members of each party on it, and the Democrats are currently blocking action. Interestingly, the recent (and now former) ranking Democrat on the committee (Jim McDermott of Washington, aka Baghdad Jim for his trip to Iraq before the U.S. invasion, kissing up to Saddam) is in line to go before the committee, as he was found guilty (by a court of law) of leaking illegally taped phone conversations to the New York Times of a Republican’s cell-phone conversations (how did this guy ever get on the ethics committee in the first place?).
On a note unrelated to the accusations against him, DeLay formerly ran an exterminating business. Democrats have taken to using "exterminator" as a perjorative for him. What is it with the Democrats and their elitist snobbery? The guy provided a useful service to many people -- certainly much more useful than the lawyers that most Democrats formerly were.
The Democrats absolutely loath Tom DeLay. He's probably their second-most hated Republican, behind George W. Bush. Just as they tried throwing all sorts of things at Bush in an effort to remove him from power (with some success in unfairly tarnishing him, but failing in their final goal), so they are attempting to throw all sorts of charges at him, hoping one will stick (they're trying the same with John Bolton, too). I predict them having the same amount of success as they had with Bush.
First, he paid family members for campaign work. Now, whether you consider this unethical or not, it does not violate the Congressional ethics rules and is not uncommon among members of both parties (~30 members did it last election cycle, as I recall, about evenly split between the parties). The amount paid was not unreasonable compared to that paid by others to their family members, nor was it the highest salary amount. And as far as family ties go, much less attention is paid to those who have family members who are highly-paid lobbyists; for instance, Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, of Nevada, has family members in almost all of the major sectors for lobbying in his homestate. Paying a family member (usually less than) what you'd pay a non-family-member for similar campaign work can be justifiable. Family members working for firms lobbying that Representative or Senator (and sometimes even ones only officially lobbying others) are certainly something that should be looked into, to verify that it's not something like one of Jesse Jackson's shakedowns (where he organizes or threatens to organize a boycott against a company unless they meet certain "minority representation" standards, and then, amazingly, one of his sons ends up with a dealership, distributorship, or whatever, and then he ends up praising the company -- an "I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine" deal).
Another charge against DeLay is that he accepted a paid trip from Korea-United States Exchange Council (KORUSEC) in 2001. That wouldn't have been a problem except that days before his trip, they changed their financial status and registered as a foreign agent (members of Congress can't accept paid trips from foreign agents). However, they did not inform him of this at the time, the change did happen just a few days before he left (presumably after he had already accepted the invitation for the trip), and accepting trips KORUSEC was legal before the change. What's especially surprising about the Democrats' feigned outrage over this is that trips continued to be provided to members of Congress and members of their staff. In fact, a member of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi's staff accepted a paid trip from KORUSEC in 2003, well after the change in financial status. Not only that, but the staff member didn't file the necessary paperwork for that trip until after reporters started snooping around earlier this year, when the media and Democrats were playing up the charges against DeLay. Now, while accepting a paid trip from a foreign agent is wrong for a member of Congress, all evidence points to DeLay not knowing they were registered as such, and that they had not yet registered as such when he accepted the trip (though they were by the time he took it). Messy, yes. Grounds for removal, no.
There are several instances where DeLay is essentially accused of guilt by association. Several people that he has had contact with stand accused of illegal fundraising and the like. However, there is no evidence to tie DeLay to this fundraising. He might want to choose who he associates himself with better, but you can't really show any wrongdoing there.
Another problem for DeLay is that the district prosecutor where he lives is a fierce Democratic partisan who has not been afraid to use his position for personal vendettas. He indicted Senator Kay Bailey Hutchinson right after her election, but the charges were thrown out on the first day of court. He's aggressively gone after various people close to DeLay in one way or another but has not yet been able to pin down DeLay. Because of him, Republicans looked into changing their party rules, which state that anyone who is indicted has to resign from any leadership post they have (though they don't have to resign from the House); they ended up leaving the rules as they were.
DeLay currently wants the accusations against him reviewed by the House Ethics Committee, so that he can be cleared. The committee has five members of each party on it, and the Democrats are currently blocking action. Interestingly, the recent (and now former) ranking Democrat on the committee (Jim McDermott of Washington, aka Baghdad Jim for his trip to Iraq before the U.S. invasion, kissing up to Saddam) is in line to go before the committee, as he was found guilty (by a court of law) of leaking illegally taped phone conversations to the New York Times of a Republican’s cell-phone conversations (how did this guy ever get on the ethics committee in the first place?).
On a note unrelated to the accusations against him, DeLay formerly ran an exterminating business. Democrats have taken to using "exterminator" as a perjorative for him. What is it with the Democrats and their elitist snobbery? The guy provided a useful service to many people -- certainly much more useful than the lawyers that most Democrats formerly were.
The Democrats absolutely loath Tom DeLay. He's probably their second-most hated Republican, behind George W. Bush. Just as they tried throwing all sorts of things at Bush in an effort to remove him from power (with some success in unfairly tarnishing him, but failing in their final goal), so they are attempting to throw all sorts of charges at him, hoping one will stick (they're trying the same with John Bolton, too). I predict them having the same amount of success as they had with Bush.
posted by DC | 3:36 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home