<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>Common Cause Blog</title>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com</link>
<description>Citizens working to end special-interest politics and reform government ethics</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2000 - My Site</copyright>
<pubDate>2008-08-29T22:34:55Z</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate></lastBuildDate>
<managingEditor>Common Cause Blog</managingEditor>
<webMaster>Common Cause Blog</webMaster>

<item>
<title>Convention fever</title>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com/story/2008/8/25/134030/272</link>
<description>&lt;p>I'm spending the week in Denver at the site of the Democratic National Convention, along with several other Common Cause staff. &#160;We're helping to lead a full day on media and democracy issues at the &lt;a href="http://www.bigtentdenver.com">Big Tent&lt;/a>, home of bloggers, independent media, and other activists, which you can view through a live web feed.&lt;/p>  &lt;p>We'll also be watch dogging the many lavish parties to see who's trying to buy access and influence with lawmakers, and contributing to the &lt;a href="http://www.politicalpartytime.org">Party Time&lt;/a> blog of the Sunlight Foundation. &#160;We'll be urging candidates to sign the &lt;a href="http://www.commoncause.org/votersfirst">Voters First Pledge&lt;/a> for public financing of elections and to &lt;a href="http://www.recapturetheflag.com">Recapture the Flag&lt;/a> by committing to restore the rule of law and the Constitution.&lt;/p>  &lt;p>Keep an eye out here for updates from Denver. &#160;Here's one to start off, with a quick look back to a week ago.&lt;/p>  </description>
</item>

<item>
<title>Wrangling with ethics</title>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com/story/2008/7/30/92711/3296</link>
<description>&lt;p>&lt;a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/19/opinion/19sat4.html">The New York Times opines&lt;/a> on Charlie Rangel's growing ethics controversy, with mixed reviews.&lt;div class="blockquote">For all his angry denial of any wrongdoing, it is commendable that Representative Charles Rangel is calling for an ethics inquiry into his use of Congressional letterhead to trawl for financial support for an academic center, the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at the City College of New York, which is expected to cost tens of millions of dollars.&lt;br>&lt;br>At the same time, it's puzzling that Mr. Rangel insists that there is no need for any vetting of another case of his relying on the kindness of well-heeled friends -- for years he has leased four rent-stabilized apartments at below market rates from a New York landlord who seems to favor politically elite tenants.&lt;/div>Two thoughts:&lt;br>  &lt;ol> &lt;li value="1">While it is commendable that Rangel is encouraging an inquiry into some of his actions, rather than resisting all oversight and accountability, such a move &lt;i>after the fact&lt;/i> does not negate those actions, which smack of influence peddling. &#160;We'll see what the inquiry uncovers.&lt;br> &lt;li value="2">This may be a great opportunity for the new Office of Congressional Ethics to flex its muscles. &#160;That said, the OCE was &lt;a href="http://www.commonblog.com/story/2008/7/30/75811/2088">just formed&lt;/a> and its muscles are untested--indeed, they need to get the shop in order, including hiring staff, opening an office, etc--while Rangel's muscles have been flexing for awhile. &#160;Seems unlikely we'll see a whole lot of activity right away, but this is exactly why we need independent oversight of Congress and why the OCE could play a pivotal role in such cases.&lt;/p>  &lt;/ol> &lt;p>Rep. Charlie Rangel&lt;/p> </description>
</item>

<item>
<title>Formation of Office of Congressional Ethics Is Positive Step</title>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com/story/2008/7/30/75811/2088</link>
<description>&lt;i>Cross posted from &lt;a href="http://blog.thehill.com/2008/07/29/formation-of-office-of-congressional-ethics-is-positive-step/">The Hill&lt;/a>.&lt;/i>&lt;br>  &lt;br>Believe it or not, leadership of both parties was able to find people willing to sit on the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE). Although we would have preferred that fewer than half the nominees be former members, this is another step toward finally having an independent body involved in investigating ethics complaints in the House. Hopefully, the appointees can make the OCE into an effective investigative body free from partisanship.&lt;br>  &lt;br>&lt;br>  Ethics complaints in Congress were at one time used as political weapons. Then we had the ethics truce. The idea behind the OCE is that it will finally allow ethics complaints to be taken seriously by individuals who aren't in some way connected with the accused. At the time of its passage, Common Cause noted that the success of the new office depended entirely on the appointment of individuals who would aspire to being as non-partisan and objective as possible. Hopefully, these distinguished nominees will fulfill that goal in their service on the OCE.&lt;br>  &lt;br>&lt;br>  Unfortunately, the Senate chose not to create a similar body in that chamber, even though the Senate Ethics Committee has hardly been any better at investigating possible misconduct of its members. As we have said before, unethical behavior does not have to rise to the level of illegal behavior. Nevertheless, Senator Ted Stevens has been indicted on seven criminal counts of possible corruption in a case that has been in the news for some time. Yet, the Senate Ethics Committee hasn't weighed in on any of that. Hopefully the OCE will be a more proactive than the Ethics Committees in the House and Senate have been so that it doesn't take a criminal indictment to get its attention.</description>
</item>

<item>
<title>Passing Ethics Where it Counts - Connecticut Steps Up to the Plate</title>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com/story/2008/6/23/111759/019</link>
<description>&lt;p>Imagine getting a note from your bosses' go to guy requesting a donation - to a favorite charity, to the bosses' bonus fund, to his or her kid's school. &#160;The note said, "You'd better pony up for this!" &#160;What would you do? &#160;Well, in all likelihood, you would whip out your checkbook and start writing. &#160;In this economic climate especially, no one wants to put their job in jeopardy. &lt;/p>  &lt;p>But how would it make you feel? &#160;Somewhat used, I imagine. &#160;Perhaps resentful. &#160;What if your boss was an elected official, and the chief of staff was hitting you up for a contribution to the bosses' campaign fund? &#160;You can't say no and expect to get a good job review ever again, and your boss gets a guaranteed flow of funds into his or her campaign coffers. &#160;Oh well, that's the way the game is played, right?&lt;/p>  </description>
</item>

<item>
<title>Abramoff Rides Again, Sort Of</title>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com/story/2008/6/9/15715/44664</link>
<description>Government Reform Committee in House releases &quot;proposed report&quot; on Jack Abramoff's connections with the White House:&lt;br>&lt;br>&lt;a href="http://oversight.house.gov/documents/20080609101725.pdf">report &lt;/a>(pdf)&lt;br></description>
</item>

<item>
<title>Common Cause Weekly Update - June 4, 2008</title>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com/story/2008/6/1/95728/57796</link>
<description>&lt;p>This past week's news includes another cause for celebration: Minnesota is now the 38th state with a Common Cause chapter.&lt;/p>&lt;p>&lt;strong>Politicizing NASA&lt;/strong>&lt;/p>&lt;p>Josh Zaharoff &lt;a href="http://commonblog.com/">posted&lt;/a> on June 2 the results of an &lt;a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/02/AR2008060202698.html">investigation&lt;/a> by the NASA inspector general's office. The inspector general found that political appointees in the space agency's public affairs office worked to control and distort public accounts of its researchers' findings about climate change for at least two years.&lt;/p>&lt;p>From the fall of 2004 through 2006, the report said, NASA's public affairs office &quot;managed the topic of climate change in a manner that reduced, marginalized, or mischaracterized climate change science made available to the general public.&quot; It noted elsewhere that &quot;news releases in the areas of climate change suffered from inaccuracy, factual insufficiency, and scientific dilution.&quot;&lt;/p>&lt;p>Josh points out that &quot;the reason we have career staff at government agencies is to handle such issues without political interference -- the exact opposite of what's happening now, as this story shows.&quot;&lt;/p></description>
</item>

<item>
<title>Ethics: VICTORY</title>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com/story/2008/3/12/82321/9652</link>
<description>&lt;p>We'll be talking more about the big win soon, but a couple quick notes on the remarkable passage of an &lt;b>independent&lt;/b> Office of Congressional Ethics last night in the U.S. House.&lt;/p>  &lt;p>First, the widespread editorial support was critical. &#160;&lt;a href="http://www.commoncause.org/ethicseditorials">We kept a growing list&lt;/a> of the papers that penned the reasons that Congress needs independent enforcement of its ethics rules, although I suspect we missed a few. &#160;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.&lt;/p>  &lt;p>Second, the Speaker deserves whatever credit she gets for this and probably more. &#160;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. &#160;Plenty of members of the Democratic and Republican caucuses wavered on this and hoped it would go away. &#160;Pelosi wouldn't let that happen, and neither would we. &#160;And thank goodness it didn't.&lt;/p>  &lt;p>Third, as much as I liked our &lt;a href="http://www.commoncause.org/ethicsad">Roll Call ad&lt;/a> 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.&lt;/p>&lt;object width="425" height="355">&lt;param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Cfw__0Jcg2A&amp;hl=en">&lt;/param>&lt;param name="wmode" value="transparent">&lt;/param>&lt;embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Cfw__0Jcg2A&amp;hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355">&lt;/embed>&lt;/object>&lt;/p>  &lt;p>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. &#160;The mission doesn't end, but this is a big boost and a landmark victory. &#160;Thanks to those who helped make it happen.&lt;/p>  &lt;p>For more, check out our &lt;a href="http://www.commoncause.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&amp;b=194883&amp;ct=5096655">press release&lt;/a>.&lt;/p>  </description>
</item>

<textInput>
<title>Search Common Cause Blog</title>
<description></description>
<name>string</name>
<link>http://www.commonblog.com/search/</link>
</textInput>

</channel>
</rss>