Articles
Los Angeles Times: House OKs an Outside Panel to Investigate its Ethics
03/12/2008
By Richard Simon
WASHINGTON -- In a major overhaul of how it polices itself,
and in response to a spate of scandals that have tarnished Congress' image, the
House voted Tuesday night to create a panel of outsiders to investigate ethics
complaints against lawmakers.
The measure establishes an independent Office of
Congressional Ethics in answer to criticism that lawmakers have been reluctant
to vigorously investigate their own.
Right up until the final roll call, Pelosi worked hard to
overcome opposition from within her own caucus to set up the office, which is
intended to make it harder for politics to influence the process. "Remove
the doubt that is in the minds of the American people about the integrity of
this body," she pleaded before the vote.
"The public does not trust us," added Rep. Michael
E. Capuano (D-Mass.), who chaired an ethics task force that proposed the new
office.
The measure was approved, 229-182, after a heated debate.
Voting to create the office were 196 Democrats and 33 Republicans; opposed were
23 Democrats and 159 Republicans.
Tuesday's vote applies to the House. The Senate has rejected
the idea as unnecessary.
Opponents complained that lawmakers were abdicating their
responsibility and inviting partisan witch hunts.
"This is about the House, and the membership should
decide whether any member has failed to meet its standards," said Rep.
Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii), delivering an impassioned speech opposing the new
office. "Does anybody believe that complaints won't be in the media
immediately, regardless of validity?"
"If you have a single ounce of self-preservation,
you'll vote no," added Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.).
The measure's approval came as Congress considers cracking
down on a practice that has figured prominently in Capitol Hill scandals: the
special-interest items, known as earmarks, that are slipped into legislation by
lawmakers, often at a lobbyist's behest.
The vote to create the outside ethics office drew mixed
reaction from watchdog groups. Common Cause welcomed it; the League of Women
Voters complained that the new office lacks the subpoena power needed to do its
job.
"The House has never before had procedural mechanisms
and strict timelines to prevent the ethics committee from ignoring a
complaint," said Mary Boyle of Common Cause. "Under this proposal,
complaints would no longer languish uninvestigated for months or even
years."
Currently, ethics complaints are referred to the House
Ethics Committee, formally known as the Committee on Standards of Official
Conduct. But the committee, with five Democrats and five Republicans, has been
ridiculed for years as a symbol of congressional dysfunction for failing to
aggressively investigate the scandals that have rocked Capitol Hill in recent
years and sent two lawmakers to prison.
The panel, in perhaps its highest-profile action in recent
years, rebuked then-Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) three times in 2004 for
his hard-nosed political tactics. But the next year, the panel's Republican
chairman was bounced from his job, and two GOP lawmakers whose political action
committees had contributed to DeLay's legal defense fund were appointed to the
committee. A partisan dispute over rules then shut down the panel through much
of 2006.
The new office will be a panel of six non-lawmakers --
possibly retired judges or former members of Congress or staffers -- jointly
appointed by the House speaker and the minority leader. Lobbyists will not be
allowed to serve.
If the outside panel determines that allegations of
misconduct warrant further investigation, it will turn its findings over to the
ethics committee for action. The outside panel is expected to put pressure on
the committee to act. The committee will face new deadlines to act and will be
required to release more of its findings to the public. Individuals other than
members of Congress would still be barred from filing ethics complaints against
lawmakers, though the panel could initiate investigations on its own.
Responding to allegations that the panel could lead to
politically motivated investigations, Capuano noted that one appointee from
each party would need to give approval to open a probe.
"There is now a complete and utter breakdown in the
process," said Brett G. Kappel, a Washington ethics lawyer. "Anything
to get the process working again would be an improvement."
The measure follows last year's overhaul of ethics rules for
Congress, including some aimed at reining in lobbyists' influence, passed in
response to scandals that resulted in jail sentences for two former GOP congressmen,
Randy "Duke" Cunningham of Rancho Santa Fe and Bob Ney of Ohio.
William J. Jefferson (D-La.) and Rick Renzi (R-Ariz.) have been indicted on corruption charges, and still others are under investigation. Jefferson supported the ethics office; Renzi did not vote.