Congressional Ethics: Wrangling With Rangel

Americans hate Congress, but love their congressmen. Sadly, the people with the power to take strong action against errant congressmen continue to let them give the institution a bad name.

There was "clear and convincing evidence" gathered by the U.S. House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct that Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., violated the U.S. Code, the Code of Ethics for Government Service, the congressional franking regulations and official House rules and codes.

During the two-year investigation that led to the committee's findings, Rangel labeled his unethical actions as benign bookkeeping errors, accounting mistakes, misunderstandings and misrepresentations. In the case of his failure to pay taxes on rental income from an expensive Dominican beach house, Rangel said his inability to speak Spanish contributed to the oversight.

Shortly before the House censured him for his behavior, Rangel petulantly and defiantly left the ethics committee's hearing on his case.

The voters of New York's 15th district re-elected Rangel this year. In another example of how Americans profess to hate Congress but love their congressman, Rangel won a six-way Democratic primary with 51 percent of the vote and the general election with 80 percent.

THE PREROGATIVE OF THE VOTERS

Re-electing Rangel, despite the disclosures made by the ethics committee and news reports -- before the voting -- is the prerogative of his constituents.

But those election outcomes don't require the ethics committee and the House to condone clear violations of codes and rules.

The committee's chief counsel and a member of the investigatory subcommittee said they found no evidence that Rangel's mistakes were criminal or "corrupt."

The counsel also said that Rangel "probably" did not gain a personal, financial benefit from his actions -- an odd conclusion since, among other perks, the congressman and his wife benefited from living in rent-controlled New York apartments provided at discount rates by a Manhattan developer.

Nevertheless, on one of the 11 counts, the committee deferred to the executive and judicial branches on whether Rangel violated any criminal laws.

What's more, some of the most troubling findings expose unethical, if not technically corrupt, behavior.

For example, the committee found clear, convincing evidence that between 2005 and 2008, Rangel personally signed and sent form letters, on congressional letterhead, to more than 100 foundations and wealthy individuals, soliciting donations to the City College of New York's Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service -- where the congressman plans to have an office and staff. In some cases, a brochure included with the letter suggested donations between $6 million and $30 million.

'EVERYBODY DOES IT'

As Rangel has argued, other members of Congress have leaned on corporations and foundations to fund centers that bear their names or support their political causes. But, in the cases Rangel has cited, those members had the sense not to use official stationery.

Most troubling is the committee's findings that Rangel solicited donations from individuals and entities who had business before the House and the Committee on Ways and Means, of which he was chairman. Rangel solicited donations from those individuals and entities at a time when he and his staff were communicating with them about legislation that could impact their interests.

He brushed it off as being something that his colleagues did as well. As noted previously, Rangel was blunt about it.

And mothers have long told their children, just because "everybody" is doing something doesn't make it right.

The Office of Congressional Ethics needs to be strengthened. Instead, House members want to pull what teeth the watchdog has grown before they have a chance to grow more.

John Boehner, the new House speaker, should listen to what Chris Littleton, council president of the 58 Tea Party groups in Boehner's home state of Ohio, has to say: "They should be as transparent as they can be."

Yes, please. Before America has to witness another opaque case of Charles Rangel.

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.