Ethics and politics: U.S. House Republicans sting themselves

Manchester Union Leader ^ | November 19, 2004 | Editorial

[billorites]

BACK IN 1993, Republicans in the U.S. House saw an opportunity to embarrass Democrats. With some Democratic representatives facing indictment, the Republicans passed a rule holding that any member of the party leadership who was indicted would have to step aside until cleared. They said this showed that the GOP was more ethical than the Democrats, who made leaders step down only if convicted. Well, well, well.

On Wednesday, with House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, R-Texas, facing possible indictment in a probe of campaign finances involving Texas legislative races, House Republicans voted to rescind the 1993 rule.

House Democrats, who have never had a rule requiring members of leadership to step down upon indictment, now say they will create one. It is their time to embarrass Republicans.

Remember when Democrats claimed that the effort to impeach President Clinton was motivated by nothing but politics? Well now Republicans are saying that if DeLay is indicted, it will be for entirely political reasons. Will they keep saying that if he is convicted, as numerous Clinton associates were?

Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., told The New York Times, “every time we start to water down what we did in ‘94 we are basically saying the revolution is losing its character.” How right he is. The 1994 Republican revolution was supposed to usher in a new era of smaller, leaner, more ethical government. But slowly those ideals were dropped as Republicans got comfortable in the seats of power.

The ethics rule House Republicans voted to drop was, it turns out, never about ethics. It was about embarrassing Democrats. But as Rep. Charlie Bass, R-N.H., noted in explaining why he voted to keep the rule, even if the rule — created for the purpose of political exploitation — is open to political exploitation by Democrats, abolishing it now gives the appearance that House Republicans are insincere when they profess a commitment to high ethical standards. Too bad that appearance is not deceiving.

[Miles from Tulia]

1) I've been active in Houston, Texas, Republican politics since Barry Goldwater was the Republican nominee for President (1964, for those in Rio Linda.)
2) At the time, Democrats had control of the political machinery -- local, county, state and national.
3) The Census was taken in 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000. Guess who did the redistricting in 1970, 1980 and 1990? That was not controversial? Republicans told themselves to just work harder AND DID NOT COMPLAIN. (And the GOP is an amateur, when it comes to gerrymandering.)
4) After 2000, Republicans had the controls for the first time (since Reconstruction, after the Civil War.) Only then could they participate in redistricting.
5) The "lawsuit" is a continuation of the FIASCO where State Democrat Legislators fled to Oklahoma and New Mexico, to impede the redistricting process. (They finally had to come home and redistricting was completed.)
6) Republicans didn't do that in 1970, 1980 and 1990 and if you believe that national level Democrats had no hand in the redistricting process, I have a title to an Alamo that I would like to sell you. (I'll make it cheap.)
7) A local Democrat Congressman by the name of Chris Bell
and the Austin, Texas district attorney (Ronnie Earle, a Democrat) are the ones who are behind the suit against Tom.
8) The suit, filed by a Democrat Congressman with the help of a Democrat district attorney is purely political. Its sole purpose is to create bad publicity for Tom Delay and other Texas Republicans.
9) I live in Harris County, Texas where I lived in Tom Delay's district (1980.) Some time before 1990, a district line was moved by a court so that I lived in Ken Bentsen's district. And Chris Bell is now my Congressman, because he succeeded Ken Bentsen.
10) Since House Republicans acted, maybe we will see an end to this charade (eventually.) Congressional Republicans do not want Tom to step down just because a meaningless suit gets filed in an Austin, Texas Kangaroo Court -- and neither do I.

IT IS AMAZING HOW A NEW HAMPSHIRE NEWSPAPER CAN CRITICIZE REPUBLICANS FOR DOING THE EXACT THING THAT DEMOCRATS DID WHEN THEY WERE ABLE TO.

[Timocrat]

People seem to forget that Ronnie Earle went after Kay Bailey Hutchinson the senior US senator from Texas. When the case got to court, i think in Fort Worth Earle could not produce any evidence. Earle is a Democrat party operative he is not impartially administering justice. Ever since the Republicans became the majority party in Texas the Demaocrats have used their position in Travis County( Austin the state capital is in Travis) to try to affect state and national Republican officeholders.

Also Dave McNeely at the Austin American Idiot is an Al Hunt wannabe

[k2blader]

Why *is* it okay to have a double standard?

[jf55510]

The House was right to do this. Ronnie Earle is on a partisan witch hunt and is going after Delay. He went after KBH and failed and he has gone after numerous Republican elected officials and has failed. Delay should not be punished for Earle being a Dem party hack.