Congressional Democrats make impressive move

Friday June 16, 2006 saw a heartening step away from blatant and obvious corruption seen all too commonly these days with members of Congress and Executive branch. They voted to take away Congressmen William Jefferson's seat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee in the wake of deep implication in a rather embarrassing bribery scandal and FBI discovery of $90,000 stashed in his freezer.

Jefferson, one of the Democrat representatives of Louisiana, has served eight terms and used his powerful influence to apparently serve his own interest during the Hurricane Katrina disaster in New Orleans. Rescue forces were diverted to his home to evacuate objects among which seems to have been this freezer cache of money. Those actions causing some raised eyebrows and ridicule at the time, the FBI raid and bribery scandal since have gone far to answer some of the questions raised by his antics during the Hurricane's aftermath. The details of the case are still being sorted out, and Jefferson has not yet been charged with a crime pending further investigation of the money's origins, etc. The impression of self-serving corruption, however, is impossible to avoid, and has in fact, been routinely concluded by members on both sides of the aisle. It is this which makes Friday's vote significant.

For what is even more encouraging, is it came at the hands of the much maligned Democrat minority. It was Jefferson's own Democrat leaders and colleagues that strongly pushed for Jefferson to lose his seat on the House and Ways. This effort was spearheaded by their House party leader, Nancy Pelosi who rightly concluded that regardless of the official status of FBI charges at the moment, the abuse of office and position is abundantly clear. Pelosi has of late been saying, as part of an attack on a perceived "culture of corruption" about the Majority Republican leadership, that the Democrats will reaffirm standards of accountability in ethics among their representatives. The result has been rather interesting.

An Associated Press announcement notes:
"House Democratic leaders pushed for his [William Jefferson's] Ways and Means Committee assignment to be taken away. Nancy Pelosi, the party's House leader, has said repeatedly that Democrats will be held to the highest possible ethical standards, while she and others in her party accuse Republicans of nurturing a "culture of corruption."

"Mr. Jefferson has legal issues that he and his family must deal with. Mrs. Pelosi has political issues that she and her caucus must deal with," said Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina, chairman of the Democratic caucus.

His remarks reflected the political forces at work - an attempt by Pelosi, D-Calif., to make ethics a campaign issue in a Democratic bid to win control of the House this fall."

More at: House pulls lawmaker from powerful committee

The last quoted comment on the part of Associated Press suggests that the action was a form of political `pandering' to contrast with the Republicans and in part, it most likely is just that. Yet still, that position misses the basic point. The fact is that a precedent of renewed accountability has been set, and with it, a public expectation for it to continue.

Whether one believes the motive sincere or cynical, the House Democrats have now set a provocative standard and challenge to raise the level of ethics on Capitol Hill. To `walk the talk' as it were, of which, very little has been seen to date. The whole point is that Jefferson is being removed on ethical grounds, not legal ones, and that is important for any attempt to start raising the bar. Too often precise legal loopholes or carefully worded statements or outright obstructionism have been used to shield close to self-evident mischief. With the recent resignation of Speaker of the House Tom Delay, and now the removal of William Jefferson from the Committee on ethical grounds alone, a change of sort seems afoot. Certainly a change in the `rules' that will likely guide political campaign tones this fall.

Naturally some people and organizations like the Congressional Black Caucus have said that Jefferson was entitled to a Constitutional presumption of innocence. This is correct for a legal matter, but not for an appearance of `above reproach' that a powerful Committee position requires, or should. A presumption of innocence is not mandated in matters of ethical behavior where perhaps the letter of the law has been followed, but the use and prestige of an office is not. It only makes sense in a time when Congress, and particularly the out-of-power party, are bringing strong pressure on the Executive branch to respond more ethically and transparently, that Nancy Pelosi turn around and demand that of her colleagues. Nor has the CBC indicated otherwise either, making no opposition in the vote or calling for a roll-call other than stating a concern for the uprecedented nature of Pelosi's action.

The actions of both parties to date have hardly been to a high standard and the absurd and wide-ranging scandal around the convicted Republican Lobbyist Jack Abramoff comes immediately to mind, as well as others. But this year has seen a marked "stiffening" in Congressional standards and response to both internal matters and particularly in opposition to the White House's use of power. Two recent examples being the opposition in defiance of veto-threat to President Bush's Dubai `ports deal' and his own party's pressuring the resignation of Republican House Majority Leader Tom Delay from his position. It is interesting to wonder if something of a counter-reaction is now setting in. Legislatures go through cycles of corruption and reform, and one can hope that one is beginning now. For House Republicans stand in solidarity with the decision, and with the Democrats, have turned around and are demanding the return of Jefferson's documents, and hard drives seized from his Washington D.C. congressional office. Thus, having rebuked and chastised one of their own, Congress has then in turn closed ranks and is confronting the ever-growing expansion of executive power and tendency of the administration to roughshod precedents and even legal barriers.

One can hope that such a phase is now coming into being, and whichever party comes out strong in the November mid-term elections, one hopes that this `turning back' toward accountability trend continues. For it is significant that this also extends to the charges leveled:

"Congressional leaders in both parties have made it clear they do not want to interfere with the investigation into allegations against the Louisiana lawmaker, even though they have sided with him in this legal dispute".

As for William Jefferson, the Democrat's taking the initiative to take away his Committee seat has, IMO, somewhat cleared Capitol Hill of his coming shipwreck. Missteps and abuse of position will always occur -- its enough that they be held immediately accountable at least informally where the legal rigid parameters of the law perhaps fall short. This helps defuse the perception of blatant nepotism, favoritism, cronyism and avoidance of responsibility that can otherwise grow.

After all, these are times where transparency and higher ethics are in need more than ever. For as "Both the political punishment and the legal case appeared to be without precedent. Jefferson has not been charged with a crime, and officials said last month's FBI search of his congressional office was a first." With such turmoil afoot, the time is ripe to make an effort to do much better and to not leave open doors for malfeasance. If this gesture jump-starts this process, it is a good thing itself.

Well done, House Democrats!

- Anthony