home

Changing the Rules

by TChris

Stung by last year's decision of the House ethics committee to deliver three admonishments to Tom DeLay for his ethical lapses, House Republicans assured that their misdeeds would evade committee scrutiny this year by requiring a majority vote of the equally divided committee before an ethics complaint can be investigated. While House Republicans backed away from the other efforts to undermine ethical standards that TalkLeft discussed here, they are not in complete agreement as to the wisdom of yesterday's action.

The chairman of the committee, formally the Standards of Official Conduct Committee, Rep. Joel Hefley, R-Colo., said there is "no question" that the move will weaken ethics enforcement. He said he would work to roll back the change. "It's a bad mistake," he said.

While Hefley may have the courage to vote in favor of investigating complaints against Republicans, he knows that he won't have that opportunity. His term is expiring, and he's not counting on his colleagues to keep him in the post.

"I assume that I'm going to get booted," he said.

< Do Cities Need Sheriffs? | Stupid Prosecution of the Week >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    Re: Changing the Rules (none / 0) (#1)
    by wishful on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 07:53:14 AM EST
    Look, in a faith-based government, we don't need ethics.

    Re: Changing the Rules (none / 0) (#2)
    by cp on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 08:43:11 AM EST
    "ethics are what the weak create to protect themselves from the strong." sorry, i can't attribute that at the moment. "ethics? we don't need no stinkin' ethics!" tom delay (with apologys to john huston) hey, the guy kills bugs for a living, what did you really expect?

    Re: Changing the Rules (none / 0) (#3)
    by pigwiggle on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 10:04:43 AM EST
    "ethics are what the weak create to protect themselves from the strong." Sound like Nietzsche, although less poetic. What are the odds these rules will be changed back when the House makes it back into the Democrat’s hands?

    Re: Changing the Rules (none / 0) (#4)
    by cp on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 10:17:17 AM EST
    yes pig, it does, doesn't it? i would say the odds are the odds are pretty darn good. and the r's will cry foul. i think, when one gets elected to public office, short-term memory loss immediately ensues. but i forget.

    Re: Changing the Rules (none / 0) (#5)
    by Talkleft Visitor on Wed Jan 05, 2005 at 10:54:11 AM EST
    "ethics? we don't need no stinkin' ethics!" Hey, that's my line!