Posted on 01/17/2007 7:19:41 PM PST by Lunatic Fringe
WASHINGTON (AP) A Democratic effort to pass ethics reform has been derailed by a partisan dispute in the Senate.
Well, the eeeeeevil Republicans OBVIOUSLY don't want to be ethical! /sarc
I guess the lack of a new ethics law means lawmakers just can't be expected to be ethical all on their own.
**UPDATED with link**
WASHINGTON - Democrats' hopes of starting off their control of the Senate with a sweeping commitment to ethics reform received a painful jolt Wednesday, their ethics and lobbying legislation sidetracked by a dispute with Republicans.
Democrats failed to clear a crucial legislative hurdle when the Senate voted 51-46 to proceed with the bill that would have reduced the influence of lobbyists in shaping legislation and forced lawmakers to be more open about the pet projects they slip into legislation. Sixty votes were needed to advance the legislation.
With the vote, the bill was effectively driven from the Senate floor.
Republicans voted against the motion to proceed because they were upset that Democrats were blocking an amendment, sponsored by Sen. Judd Gregg (news, bio, voting record), R-N.H., that would have given the president authority, with the approval of Congress, to single out individual spending items in legislation for elimination.
"I hope this is going to be just a bump in the road," said Democratic Whip Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill. But there was no further action on the legislation scheduled, and revival of the bill hinged on reaching some kind of compromise on the Gregg amendment.
Both parties blamed the other for the temporary demise of what they hailed, when debate on the legislation started a week ago, as a model for bipartisan cooperation.
"It's a terribly unfortunate day for this body," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record), D-Nev.
Democrats, who seized a narrow majority in the Senate, as well as the House, after campaigning on the "culture of corruption" when Congress was controlled by the Republicans, had promised to start off with a major effort to break the links between lawmakers and lobbyists and reassure voters of the integrity of members of Congress.
The legislation would have barred lawmakers from accepting gifts and travel paid for by lobbyists, made it more difficult for former lawmakers to lobby their old colleagues, denied pensions to lawmakers convicted of serious crimes, required more reporting by lobbyists on their activities and required disclosure of the pet projects lawmakers insert into legislation.
Before the vote that deadlocked the bill, the Senate voted 88-9 to approve a Reid amendment that would have required senators who catch rides on corporate jets to pay charter rates. Now they reimburse jet owners with the far cheaper equivalent of a first-class ticket.
The bill was jointly sponsored by Reid and Republican leader Mitch McConnell (news, bio, voting record), R-Ky.
McConnell noted that a similar ethics bill passed the Senate last year by a 90-8 vote and said he hoped, despite the deadlock, that "we can continue to work on a path toward finishing the underlying bill."
He also pointed out that, before coming to a final vote on the bill last year, Democrats had used a similar procedural tactic to win a vote on a proposal they wanted considered.
Democrats said the Gregg proposal was not relevant to the ethics bill, and Republicans in turn said they would not vote to proceed with the bill unless Gregg's proposal came to a vote.
"The new majority party has been very vocal about its commitment to fiscal responsibility and spending restraint," Gregg said. "Yet it seems to be dragging its feet when it comes time to put those words into action."
Reid and Gregg were close to an agreement where the line-item veto proposal would come to the floor this spring, but Reid said Sen. Robert Byrd (news, bio, voting record), D-W.Va., a staunch opponent of ceding any legislative control over the purse to the president, objected.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070118/ap_on_go_co/senate_ethics_6
Actually, they can pass all of the ethics laws they want in order to appear like they want things to be on the up-and-up...while building loopholes into them so they can still do (almost) anything they want and get away with it.
On the contrary, the Gregg amendment was quite relevant to the ethics process. Which is exactly why the dems didn't want it to be in the bill.
When you've got the world's largest pot of honey, you can never get rid of the flies.
At least NH has one good guy still standing.
When you've got the world's largest pot of honey, you can never get rid of the flies.
________________________________
OOPS.
Honey attracts birds and bees.
A different kind of honeypot attracts flies.
It was pointed out on another thread that one of the chief purposes of this bill is to clamp down on churches, make them file all kinds of bureaucratic reports, and prevent them from making public broadcasts.
If the whole thing goes down in flames, it can't be too soon.
Sure, it would violate the religion clause, but what activist judge is likely to give a damn about that?
Ah there we go, the old tricks: add a completely unrelated "gotcha" to a bill, and throw a fit when somebody tries to make it easier to cut spending.
That's what gets me. They don't have to accept those trips and other gifts provided by lobbyist.
We need a "Just Say No to gifts" campaign for the congress.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.