ByJosh Zaharoff Posted on Wed Mar 12, 2008 at 08:23:21 AM EST
We'll be talking more about the big win soon, but a couple quick notes on the remarkable passage of an independent Office of Congressional Ethics last night in the U.S. House.
First, the widespread editorial support was critical. We kept a growing list of the papers that penned the reasons that Congress needs independent enforcement of its ethics rules, although I suspect we missed a few. But getting USA Today, the New York Times, LA Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Boston Globe, Philadelphia Inquirer, Roll Call and others in the span of just over a week -- that's not easy. And it's critical because we needed to create an environment in which Congress could not ignore the proposal without repercussions.
Second, the Speaker deserves whatever credit she gets for this and probably more. If Nancy Pelosi hadn't initiated the ethics task force, decided that her caucus had to implement its suggestion of an independent enforcement body, and most importantly twisted arms of her fellow Democrats, this wouldn't have happened. Plenty of members of the Democratic and Republican caucuses wavered on this and hoped it would go away. Pelosi wouldn't let that happen, and neither would we. And thank goodness it didn't.
Third, as much as I liked our Roll Call ad and suggestive YouTube video (below), I'm relieved that major league baseball will NOT have to investigate Congress. As great a player and personality as David Ortiz is, I'm not sure how well Big Papi would adapt to being an enforcement officer, plus the Red Sox need his bat in the lineup.
And fourth, let's not be under any illusions: we'll still need to be vigilant as watchdogs and to make sure that the proposal is enacted and the office functions properly. The mission doesn't end, but this is a big boost and a landmark victory. Thanks to those who helped make it happen.
Voters have made their dissatisfaction with the status quo clear by giving Democrats a working majority. The new House leaders must act swiftly to win approval for the task force recommendation and demonstrate that they are committed to ethics reform rather than business as usual.
What we said: “There is no reason to trust Congress' ability to police itself. An independent watchdog commission should be established as a complement to any reforms. History has shown, beyond a doubt, that power corrupts without regard to whether someone has an R or a D after his or her name.
I haven't seen or heard of anything from prominent TV pundits like Keith Olbermann (yet) on this, and I also haven't seen anything from prominent bloggers. Hopefully they'll jump on board for this final push -- if you know we've missed something, drop it in the comments.
...
Just trying to keep up with all the editorial support for an ethical Congress with independent oversight....
When Congress judges itself, ethics fall by the wayside
Anyone who's been called for jury duty knows that one of the first questions a judge asks prospective jurors is: Do you know the defendant? A "yes" answer is almost always disqualifying, which makes perfect sense.
After all, how can people objectively sit in judgment of someone they know? Even if they could, the public would rightfully question the verdict.
Somehow, though, Congress has never been able to grasp that common-sense concept.
Members should face up to a vote that tests their mettle -- and most recent campaign promises -- as upholders of ethical reform for the peoples' House. We suggest lawmakers fight their anxiety by quietly repeating the name Jack Abramoff, Jack Abramoff -- the imprisoned superlobbyist who corrupted House members -- as a prevote mantra.
And AlterNet ran my piece today on the strange contradiction of Congress hectoring Major League Baseball about the league's lack of independent oversight when Congress itself has a lack of... you know.
ByJosh Zaharoff Posted on Thu Mar 06, 2008 at 10:29:07 AM EST
At least two major papers joined the call to Congress to pass independent ethics enforcement. The LA Times endorses H.Res.895 and describes the enforcement body and why it likes the structure:
The [six member] board would conduct both preliminary and advanced investigations and refer serious charges to the Ethics Committee. If the committee were to reject a recommendation for further investigation, the board's report would be made public -- a powerful incentive for the committee not to engage in cover-up.
The Philly Inquirer added a similarly forceful endorsement, starting off with this absurd statement by Rep. Louise Slaughter:
ByJosh Zaharoff Posted on Wed Mar 05, 2008 at 03:46:50 PM EST
Roll Call (subscription req'd) editorialized in support of the independent ethics office today:
After months of study and a parliamentary balk last week, House ethics reform -- specifically, creation of an independent Office of Congressional Ethics -- could hit the House floor this week. We hope it passes.
The Capuano plan is real reform, and the Boehner objections are a smokescreen. The idea that having an independent arm of Congress to initiate investigations of ethics violations would be an obstacle to investigations by the FBI is particularly smoke-filled.
It is too late to just make cosmetic changes to the current system.... It is time to bring independency and transparency to the ethics enforcement process.
ByJosh Zaharoff Posted on Tue Mar 04, 2008 at 06:06:44 PM EST
Several years ago, Major League Baseball came under scrutiny as reporters and fans became concerned about the use of steroids and other performance-enhancing drugs in the game.
What was MLB's response?
In a nutshell: Don't worry, everything is fine, and we can police ourselves. And yes, there may be a bad apple here or there, but trust us, we'll find them and keep it clean!
How did that go?
Really well, if you take "really well" to mean "the widely publicized Mitchell report that confirmed many of the fans' worst fears, including the alleged use of performance enhancements by Roger Clemens, Barry Bonds, and many others, tarnishing the careers of all-stars and several surefire Hall of Famers and giving a black eye to the entire sport." Terrific!
And then, as we all know, the U.S. Congress stepped in with hearings to provide some outside, independent oversight into the national pastime.
Funny, isn't it? We've read about a litany of congressional scandals, from Tom DeLay and Duke Cunningham to William Jefferson and Rick Renzi, and many more in between. How many of them have we seen on CSPAN and then the nightly news, sweating it out in a hearing room? Why, none. And whose job is it to oversee and police them? Why, it's Congress's own job, of course!
You'd forgive Clemens and Bonds if they brought a mirror with them at the next hearings, saying, "Look at yourselves."
But this goes beyond a convenient analogy. The parallels are uncanny between the baseball scandals and the congressional scandals. The beginning, of course, is each body insisting that they can police themselves, despite growing evidence to the contrary. (Literally growing: in baseball it was Barry Bonds' head, and in Congress it was Tom DeLay's campaign bank account.)
Meanwhile, polls show a striking downward trend in public opinion. In baseball, over 85% of fans think that steroids are a serious problem, some going as far as to say it's ruining the game. In Congress, approval ratings now hover at 23.5%.
What to do?
Here's what the Mitchell Report recommended for major league baseball:
Independence is the most important principle of an effective drug testing program. The parties previously have recognized the importance of this principle by delegating some of the administrative authority for the program to an independent program administrator. However, under the current program, both the independence of the program administrator and the level of authority that has been delegated to him are limited.
An anonymous hotline or ethics committee for reporting tips may prove useful. USADA and its counterparts have employed such hot lines for some time and report that they have yielded information that resulted in the detection of drug violations.
Here's what Common Cause and a host of other reform organizations want for Congress:
An independent Office of Congressional Ethics...
1. The Office would, for the first time, allow for individuals other than members of Congress to initiate formal investigations into allegations of wrongdoing.... 2. The proposal calls for reasonable reporting and public disclosure of the activities of the Office. This again improves oversight of the ethics rules by eliminating the absolute secrecy surrounding the existing process. The proposal strikes an appropriate balance between the privacy concerns of those facing allegations and the ability of the public to be informed about the actions of their representatives.
If it's good enough for baseball, it should be good enough for Congress, right?
The bill is on the way in the next 48 hours, and we need them to finally hit a home run on this. They need to do the right thing and create an independent ethics office for Congress.
ByJosh Zaharoff Posted on Mon Mar 03, 2008 at 10:51:24 AM EST
Hey look, everyone! We sure don't need that independent ethics office in the U.S. House when the existing ethics committee -- made up of members of the House -- police themselves so bravely.
They're launching a probe into the conduct of Rep. Rick Renzi! The efficiency is unparalleled! Oh, except Renzi is already under federal indictment and the Justice Department -- you know, the one that fired nine U.S. Attorneys for a reason I can't recall, yes THAT high-functioning Justice Department -- is already investigating Renzi.
In fact, the ethics panel will likely cede any further investigation to the feds. And the Renzi story and FBI investigation of his questionable land deal broke nearly a year ago.
But don't worry, members of the House! We still believe that you can police yourselves! Keep sticking this evidence in our face, and we'll surely realize the folly of trying to impose ethics on such a tough-on-crime bunch that acts with such speed and gumption.
UPDATE: Speaker Nancy Pelosi is pushing her caucus to act on ethics reform and today she sent this letter to Minority Leader John Boehner, saying that she plans to bring the issue to the House floor "soon." Our sources tell us that that should be interpreted as "this week." But before she'll do that, the House Democrats have to come around on an independent ethics office, along with enough House Republicans. Even if common sense and good governance are on our side in this fight, history is not. Anyone with a handset and dial tone should be calling their Representative today and telling them to step up and act on ethics reform to avoid looking ridiculous.
Common Blog
