According to the AP News Alert I got last night, "The House has voted to create an independent ethics office to investigate misconduct among its members." What they didn't tell us about, was the cover up of blatant rules violations by Speaker of State Nancy Pelosi. For that, you have to come here...This, which came in yesterday, is about the Democrats cover up of a non-partisan report that laid out the sham of their proposal:
Rebuilding the bonds of trust between Congress and the American people must be the highest priority for both parties. The American people have every right to expect the highest ethical standards from their representatives, and Members of Congress have every obligation to deliver. But Democratic leaders have apparently decided to move forward with a vote on a flawed proposal from Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA) that would punt on fundamental ethics reform – and further break, rather than repair, the bonds of trust between Members of Congress and the American people.The answer to that last question is not only NO, but HELL NO...as Democrats pushed through their agenda anyway -- violating House Rules set by Speaker of State Pelosi at the same time.
Members on both sides of the aisle have rightfully taken aim at this misguided proposal. But in the last few hours, we’ve also learned that they aren’t alone. The non-partisan attorneys for the House Ethics Committee also have raised substantive concerns about the Pelosi/Capuano plan, according to documents released by the Committee’s Ranking Republican Member, Rep. Doc Hastings (R-WA), earlier today. In a letter to his House colleagues, Hastings explained the importance of these documents – which the Majority has covered-up for months as its flawed ethics “reform” proposal advanced to the House floor:“The memo contains the expert analysis of the committee’s nonpartisan attorneys concerning the impact that the independent ethics entity proposed by Speaker Pelosi and Rep. Michael Capuano would have on the due process protections afforded Members – and on the ability of the Ethics Committee to carry out its responsibilities to enforce the rules of the House…”As Hastings letter reveals, Rep. Capuano refused to ask the Ethics Committee for official comments on his plan and the chairwoman of the Committee – Rep. Stephanie Tubbs Jones (D-OH) – refused to provide the Ethics Task Force with the substantive concerns outlined by the Committee’s own non-partisan attorneys in response to a request from Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX).
“In light of my first-hand knowledge of the serious concerns raised about the Pelosi / Capuano plan by the House’s own ethics attorneys, I have been hopeful that Members would not be forced to vote up or down on any ethics enforcement proposal until those concerns were addressed. However, with floor consideration now imminent, I cannot in good conscience withhold this analysis from Members, and have attached our attorneys’ memorandum in its entirety below.”
The Politico reports on this bombshell as well, citing the words of the nonpartisan, independent Ethics Committee attorneys who expressed deep reservations about the Majority’s plan:“Pointing to the fact that [Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE)] can also interview witnesses in ethics cases, although it does not have subpoena power like the committee, Kellner suggested ‘the interview of witnesses by both the new entity and the Committee might result in conflicting statements that would undermine the value of testimony from that witness.’”House Republicans have offered a stronger plan for reforming the ethics process and restoring trust between the American people and their elected leaders. Rather than adding a new layer of bureaucracy between Members and the FBI will only make it easier for Congress to sweep ethical problems under the rug, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-TX) and his GOP colleagues have offered an alternative to strengthen the Ethics Committee, improve the transparency of the ethics process, and turn gridlocked cases over to federal law enforcement authorities directly. The Democratic leadership has blocked a vote on this common sense alternative. With documents exposing the Ethics Committee attorneys’ opposition to the Democrat plan now a matter of public record, will the Majority now reconsider?
“Kellner also objected to the fact that the OCE would turn over materials to any member or staff when it sends a case to the ethics committee. In his view, this is a ‘bad idea for the Committee’s purposes that the ‘written report and findings of the board’ be transmitted both to the Committee and to the individual under review. This will provide information to a potential respondent at an inappropriate stage, including alerting the respondent as to witnesses who have been identified as potential recipients of subpoenas.’”
“In addition, Kellner suggested that it would be unwise for OCE to notify a potential target of a review that it was going to occur, since this would tip off that person.”
Rep. Eric Cantor:
Only the Democrat House Leadership could find an unethical way to pass an "ethics" bill.What's he talking about? We need to go to Republican Leader, my Congressman and a Great American -- John Boehner -- for more:
House Democrats had crafted legislation, an ethics bill in name only, that will do nothing to clean-up Washington. In fact, many non-partisan experts believe that it will only further empower the special interests.
Tonight, on the House floor, House Democrats were headed towards defeat. They were opposed by a bipartisan coalition of Members, who wanted to work towards meaningful ethics reform, rather than accept the empty rhetoric offered by the House Democrat Leadership. At the end of the vote, the bipartisan coalition had prevailed; yet, Speaker Pelosi held the vote open and strong-armed less senior Representatives into voting her way. This action violated House rules that were enacted in January of last year.
One thing is clear - House Democrats have failed the American People. They can't even pass an "ethics" bill without violating the rules.
“Democratic leaders campaigned on ‘ethics reform’ yet tonight they violated their own ethics rules for partisan, political gain. Sadly, this is just the latest in a long line of abuses that include a stolen vote last August in order to give illegal immigrants taxpayer-funded benefits.Here's what happened:
“Rebuilding the bonds of trust between Congress and the American people should be our highest priority, but tonight this Congress took another step to break the public trust. The American people have every right to expect the highest ethical standards from their elected leaders. Unfortunately, neither the actions of the Majority tonight, nor the ‘ethics’ scheme we were asked to vote on, does anything to restore the confidence of the American people in this Congress.”
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) expressed disappointment tonight that House Democratic leaders would violate the ethics rules they put in place at the beginning of the 110th Congress in order to pass a flawed “ethics” proposal that does nothing but add a new layer of bureaucracy that will only make it easier for Congress to sweep ethical problems under the rug. The measure passed by a vote of 207-206 after Democratic leaders held the vote open for additional time beyond what House rules state is permissible in order to influence Democrats to change their votes in favor.House Democrats: We Can't Even Do An Ethics Vote Ethically...
House Rule XX, clause 2(a) in part states “A record vote by electronic device shall not be held open for the sole purpose of reversing the outcome of such vote.” The rule was implemented by Democratic leaders at the beginning of the 110th Congress. Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) campaigned on the rules change, including it in her 2006 campaign document “A New Direction For America” on page 24, which states that “Floor votes should be completed within 15 minutes. No vote shall be held open to manipulate the outcome.”
Just so you know, House Republicans proposed an alternative designed to strengthen the Ethics Committee, improve the transparency of the ethics process, and turn gridlocked cases over to federal law enforcement authorities directly. As usual, Democratic leaders refused to allow a vote on the alternative.
UPDATE: And now, for something completely different: a Democrat who gets it!
Mr. DINGELL. Mr. Speaker, I have a number of concerns about the resolution before us today. First, I am concerned that granting the power and authority to investigate Members of Congress to an independent, outside entity cedes away too much of the power granted to the legislative branch by the Constitution of the United States. We need to be clear about what it is we are doing today; we are altering the scheme created by Framers of the Constitution in a way that weakens this body.UPDATE 2: Republican Leader, my Congressman and a Great American -- John Boehner -- is calling for an investigation:
The Constitution grants Members of Congress important protections that allow us to carry out our official duties free from the threat of investigation by an outside entity. Among other things, the immunity provided by the speech and debate clause allows us too vigorously pursue our oversight responsibilities without fear of retribution. Rather than allow some outside body to decide the standards that should be used to judge whether a Member of Congress is capable and responsible enough to carry out his or her duties, the Constitution vests that power in the voters, and with Congress itself.
I understand the problem that this resolution is attempting to address: People in this country are losing faith in the institutions of government. I believe that delegating the authority for investigating Members of Congress to an outside entity only confirms these fears. I believe that rather than giving into the skepticism and cynicism inherent in this view, we need to show people that government is responsible and that it can work.
If the Committee on Standards and Conduct is no longer capable of carrying out this responsibility, by all means we should find a way to reform it, empower it, and give it the tools it needs to uphold the integrity of this body. However, it seems to me that it would be unwise and unnecessary for us to tell the American people that we are no longer capable of policing our own.
Regardless of what we do here today, it will remain up to the voters to decide who represents them in this body. As the dean of the House, I have had the privilege to serve in this body and represent the people of my District for many years. During my time in the House I have witnessed politicians be indicted, be forced to resign because of public pressure, and be investigated and reprimanded by the House. I have also seen politicians accused of wrongdoing, or tarnished by the mere appearance of wrongdoing, who have been given the opportunity to make their case before the voters and return to this body.
In today's world, where the Internet and 24 hour cable news amplify and repeat almost any charge, regardless of its veracity, it seems unlikely that many Members of Congress will be able to avoid public scrutiny if they commit illegal or unethical acts. The question before us is not whether we want those who commit such acts to go unpunished, but what is the best way to ensure that they are held accountable. While I respect the views of those who believe an independent office is necessary, I cannot bring myself to agree. Ultimately, I will place my faith in the voters and in this body to ensure that the House of Representatives remains a strong and honorable institution.
House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) today offered a privileged resolution directing an immediate investigation – by the House Ethics Committee and a Select Committee created last summer after the Majority stole a vote in order to give illegal immigrants taxpayer-funded benefits – of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and other House Democratic leaders after they violated their own ethics rules and refused to close a House vote on a faux ethics reform proposal until they had twisted enough arms to ensure its ultimate passage.
In October 2005, then-Minority Leader Pelosi declared that, “No vote shall be held open in order to manipulate the outcome. When we take back the People’s House, we will heed that declaration.” So strongly did she believe that House leaders should not hold votes open for nefarious purposes that on January 5, 2007 – in one of the very first acts of the 110th Congress – the House adopted this rule: “A record vote by electronic device shall not be held open for the sole purpose of reversing the outcome of such vote.”
That’s what makes last night’s events so remarkable. After the 21 minutes passed during the ethics vote – already 6 minutes beyond the 15 allotted for the vote – 413 Members had cast their votes. 209 Members voted to continue debate on the measure and consider the stronger GOP alternative ethics proposal, which would have fixed the House Ethics Committee process by exposing it to public scrutiny and bringing in the Justice Department and FBI should the process break down, while 204 Members voted to shut down debate in favor of the Majority’s weaker plan. During the next six minutes, no new Members cast votes. However, three of them changed their votes after arm-twisting by Democratic leaders in direct violation of the House rules they wrote.
