Saturday, November 18, 2006

Democrats Split on How Far to Go With Ethics Law!


Why are Democrats Split on How Far to Go With Ethics Law, why do you even need to ask?

From left, Senator Barack Obama, Senator Harry Reid, Senator Richard J. Durbin and Representative Nancy Pelosi, all Democrats, are proposing new ethics rules for Congress.



By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK
Published: November 19, 2006
WASHINGTON, Nov. 18 — After railing for months against Congressional corruption under Republican rule, Democrats on Capitol Hill are divided on how far their proposed ethics overhaul should go.

Kate Phillips and The Times's politics staff are analyzing the midterm elections and looking ahead to 2008.
More Politics News

Democratic leaders in the House and the Senate, mindful that voters in the midterm election cited corruption as a major concern, say they are moving quickly to finalize a package of changes for consideration as soon as the new Congress convenes in January.
Their initial proposals, laid out earlier this year, would prohibit members from accepting meals, gifts or travel from lobbyists, require lobbyists to disclose all contacts with lawmakers and bar former lawmakers-turned-lobbyists from entering the floor of the chambers or Congressional gymnasiums.
None of the measures would overhaul campaign financing or create an independent ethics watchdog to enforce the rules. Nor would they significantly restrict earmarks, the pet projects lawmakers can anonymously insert into spending bills, which have figured in several recent corruption scandals and attracted criticism from members in both parties. The proposals would require disclosure of the sponsors of some earmarks, but not all.
Some Democrats say their election is a mandate for more sweeping changes, and many newly elected candidates — citing scandals involving several Republican lawmakers last year — made Congressional ethics a major issue during the campaign. After winning the House on election night, Representative Nancy Pelosi, the House Democratic leader, promised “the most honest, most open and most ethical Congress in history.”
Senator Barack Obama, an Illinois Democrat tapped by party leaders last year to spearhead ethics proposals, said he was pushing for changes with more teeth. “The dynamic is different now,” Mr. Obama said Friday. “We control both chambers now, so it is difficult for us to have an excuse for not doing anything.”
He is pushing to create an independent Congressional ethics commission and advocates broader campaign-finance changes as well. “We need to make sure that those of us who are elected are not dependent on a narrow spectrum of individuals to finance our campaigns,” he said.
Sweeping change, however, may be a tough sell within the party. Representative John P. Murtha, Democrat of Pennsylvania, was embarrassed by disclosures last week that he had dismissed the leadership proposals with a vulgarity at a private meeting. But Mr. Murtha is hardly the only Democrat who objects to broad changes.
Senator Dianne Feinstein, the California Democrat who will oversee any proposal as the incoming chairwoman of the Rules Committee, for example, said she was opposed to an independent Congressional ethics watchdog. “If the law is clear and precise, members will follow it,” she said in an interview. “As to whether we need to create a new federal bureaucracy to enforce the rules, I would hope not.”
Other Democratic lawmakers argued that the real ethical problem was the Republicans, not the current ethics rules, and that the election had alleviated the need for additional regulations. “There is an understanding on our side that the Republicans paid a price for a lot of the abuses that evolved,” said Representative Barney Frank, Democrat of Massachusetts, alluding to earmarks. Senator Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat and a senior member of the Appropriations Committee, said the scandals of the current Congress were “about the K Street Project for the Republicans,” referring to the party’s initiative to put more Republicans in influential lobbying posts and build closer ties to them.
“That was incestuous from the beginning. We never had anything like that,” Mr. Harkin said of Democrats. “That is what soured the whole thing.”
Democrats, of course, have also cultivated close ties to lobbyists, who play a major role in campaign fund-raising for members of both parties. Indeed, ethical violations and house-cleaning efforts have both been bipartisan activities over the years. Congress has seesawed between public calls for changes and a reluctance to cramp incumbents’ campaign fund-raising and political power.
The Republicans who took over the House in 1994 adopted some of the same policies the Democrats now propose, including a ban on gifts and travel, only to relax the rules later. In 2002, Senators John McCain, Republican of Arizona, and Russell D. Feingold, Democrat of Wisconsin, pushed through a bipartisan law to restrict campaign donations and spending. The advocates of that bill are now pushing to close loopholes around so-called 527 groups.
And Republican leaders in the House and the Senate also vowed to pass what they called comprehensive ethics and earmark reform bills earlier this year. Critics complained that lawmakers had watered them down, and the two bills were never reconciled. (The Democratic proposals would also require a combination of internal House and Senate rules changes and legislation in both chambers.)
The current Congress, however, has set a high watermark for corruption scandals. One Republican, Representative Randy Cunningham of California, is in jail and another, Representative Bob Ney of Ohio, is on the way. The former House majority leader, Tom DeLay, resigned under indictment, and the payoff scandal surrounding the lobbyist Jack Abramoff may ensnare others as well. On the Democratic side, Representative William J. Jefferson of Louisiana faces bribery charges.
Advocates of an overhaul believe the reaction to the Congressional embarrassments make the Democratic takeover of Capitol Hill their best chance for significant change since the aftermath of Watergate, when Congress created the presidential campaign finance system. But they consider the Democratic proposals just the beginning of a cleanup.
“A ban on gifts, meals, corporate jet flights — a lot of that resonates with the public because people think there is just a lot of free giveaways in Congress,” said Chellie Pingree, president of the ethics advocacy group Common Cause. “A lot of this is sort of skirting the issue of how campaign funds are shaping the legislative process.”

No comments: