Jefferson storms back to win re-election

[pitohui]

http://www.nola.com/newslogs/tpupdates/index.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_tpupdates/archives/2006_12_09.html#213969

Confounding political pundits and a slew of rivals who had become confident
of his defeat, U.S. Rep. William Jefferson, D-New Orleans, neatly
sidestepped a roiling federal corruption probe to win re-election on
Saturday to his 9th term in Congress.

offered w.out comment, have to admit i had a soft spot for the old scoundrel myself but the hubster is gnashing his teeth

note to mods: the title is offered two ways, as "storm" on the front page of nola.com and also as "swarms," as i believe "swarms" to be a typo i have offered the "storms" version

[jumpoffdaplanet]

1. According to the NOLA results page

Oraleans has barely been counted.

88 of 392 precincts, with Carter leading.

http://www.sos.louisiana.gov:8090/cgibin/?rqstyp=elcmp&rqsdta=12090614519063

Are there not enough Orleans votes to overtake the Jefferson precincts count?

[NJ Democrats]

2. Um, I'm seeing some 300 precincts still not counted

How can you say Jefferson won?

[pitohui]

3. i'm not saying it, that's the headline at the new orleans newspaper website

it will be quite interesting to see if the results change later in the evening

newspaper is also saying that evil jeff parish sheriff harry lee actually went around telling folks not to vote!

for those who don't know, harry lee is sort of a comic book bad guy, come to life, a chinese-american who dreams of being in the kkk, his claim to the fame in the 1980s being his attempt to build a wall (i'm not kidding) between "white" metairie and "black" new orleans

[pitohui]

4. carter concedes

http://www.nola.com/elections/newslog/index.ssf?/mtlogs/nola_politics/archives/2006_12.html#213971

Karen Carter made her concession speech at 10:20 and in doing so, capped off what was one of the most interesting and hyped political races in recent years.

ABC26 Political Analyst Jeff Crouere says it was Carter's failure to get out the white vote that got her in the end. Crouere sums the election results as a loss for Carter not a win for Jefferson.

[oberliner]

5. Is this a good thing?

What was so bad about Karen Carter?

[jsw_81]

6. Louisiana voters should be ashamed

If Pelosi and other House Democrats are really serious about fighting corruption they'll refuse to seat this crook next month. Or are we just going to look the other way because he has a "D" next to his name?

[Rainscents]

7. You really don't know all the facts...

I believe, he was set up by republicans and FBI.

[jsw_81]

8. Yeah

I'm sure it's all a huge conspiracy. Just like with McKinney, right? :eyes:

[pitohui]

9. true dat

why don't they ever set up these "stings" on GOPers?

[KingFlorez]

10. Those aren't facts

That is a conspiracy theory.

[BlueManDude]

26. spare me please.

[brentspeak]

37. Do you have any proof of that?

[ButterflyBlood]

44. Even if it was a set-up, he still took the money

The fact is, Democrats can be corrupt to. We need to quit making excuses for anyone on our side who turns out to be a crook as well.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

56. Oh really?

No wonder the GOP is so ineffective. They've got to be pretty stupid to target a guy from a district where only a Democrat would win anyway.

He took money. He's a crook. He goes out the same door as Ney and Cunningham. Sorry, that's how it goes. His main opponent was a Democrat anyway.

[tomhayes]

11. What are you talking about?

REFUSE to seat him? Do they have the power to do that?

Why not re-seat him and INVESTIGATE THE HELL out of him?

Can the congress "refuse" to seat a duly elected official?

[billyoc]

17. you bet,

Article I, Section 5, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution clearly states that “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members"

[tomhayes]

23. I don't think they can refuse to seat someone who *does* meet the requirements

>Article I, Section 5, Clause 1 of the United States Constitution clearly states that “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members"

I think the qualifications are to be over 25, a U.S. citizen for 7 years and live in the state you were elected in.

Also from section 5:
"Each House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two thirds, expel a member."

So they have to seat him but they can then vote to expel him. Right now the congress is in the hands of the Republicans who did not choose to have a vote to expel him. Don't blame Pelosi for that.

[MGKrebs]

32. The Supreme Court has apparently ruled on this, but

not everyone agrees with the decision:

Could the House or Senate decide, at the moment someone arrives as a member-elect to be sworn in, that his criminal or unethical past may justify barring him from membership as unqualified? I think it could, under the last clause I cited, .... The Supreme Court disagrees with me, though, in its decision in Powell v. McCormack (1969), in which it held that the House could not refuse to swear in the duly elected Adam Clayton Powell, Jr. when he met all the age, citizenship, and state residency requirements that the Constitution imposes for House service. It could swear him in and then expel him, but it could not decline to seat him in the House as an initial matter. I think Powell was wrongly decided...

http://bench.nationalreview.com/post/?q=NTRkMzFjMTdlNDlkNmEyZDYxNTU4MTcyYjliMzU5NzI=

[tomhayes]

48. Isn't Matthew J. Franck a RW NUTJOB??

And citing the NEOCONSERVATIVE National Review for their opinion (which is directly disagreed with by The Supreme Court of the United States) a bit lacking.

And doing this at the beginning of a new congress is even more problematic. Since the congress has not been sworn in how do you propose to exclude Jefferson??

Tell me the constitutional mechanism please.

[MGKrebs]

50. I'm not suggesting anything at this point.

I was short on time but thought it would be helpful to show a possibly related Supreme Court case, thinking that someone else might actually follow up a little bit. A Google search result from National Review cetainly adds context. Very perceptive of you.

[happyslug]

63. Here is the Decision in Powell Vs McCormick

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0395_0486_ZS.html

[humbled_opinion]

51. So now the GOP will start with the see when our crooks are caught

They resign but when the Dem crooks are causght they get re-elected... I fully expect Nancy Pelosi to handle this appropriately. If she is serious about ending corruption this is an excellent place to start. Ask for his resignation.

[KingFlorez]

12. He should be denied committee assignments

It needs to be made clear that corruption won't be tolerated.

[tomhayes]

25. They DID deny him committee membership

From Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_J._Jefferson:
-----
Stripped of committee membership
On May 24, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi publicly requested his immediate resignation from the House Ways and Means Committee; he declined to do so.<27> Although Mel Watt, the chair of the Congressional Black Caucus declared the strong support of the caucus for Jefferson it has since been reported that two prominent members of the caucus, John Lewis (D-Ga.) and Charles B. Rangel (D-NY) have played a major role in the campaign to force Jefferson to step down.<28>
On 15 June 2006, House Democrats voted to strip Jefferson of his committee assignment while the federal bribery investigation continues. Members approved the move after Jefferson repeatedly refused to step aside. Despite claims of the Congressional Black Caucus that Jefferson was being treated unfairly, the vote passed 99-58. Some have reported that the vote was passed as a result of Democrats who are determined to make an election-year point about ethics. The full House, which is the only group with the power to actually remove Jefferson, then stripped him of his seat on the committee on June 16th in a voice vote without debate. Jefferson had offered to step aside temporarily if the Democratic caucus established a rule concerning cases like his and if his seat went to Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-LA). This offer was rejected by House Democratic leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi.<29>
-------

[w4rma]

16. I don't think they have a choice. The voters voted for him and he isn't resigning. (nt)

[beth9999]

52. Sure there's a choice...

Either house of Congress can expel any member with a 2/3 vote.

[tomhayes]

53. Well, there it is

> Sure there's a choice...
>Either house of Congress can expel any member with a 2/3 vote.

All that is required is Congress be in Session and a vote taken.

There's no mechanism to refuse to seat a duly elected congressman. That's what the the other posters have been clamoring for.

I say that when the next congress is in session they get a functioning ethics committee and do an accelerated investigation and go from there.

The Justice Department can help this by charging him with a crime. That'd probably help speed up any vote to expel him.

[beth9999]

54. OK, so fine... do what the Repugs threatened to do with Ney

Seat him and then on the first day, vote to expel. Same effect.

[tomhayes]

55. But Ney had plead guilty

So that means he had been charged and pleaded guilty.

Why doesn't someone CHARGE him with something so he can plead guilty or go to trial??

I think the Dems need to do a LOT of stuff before trying to expel Jefferson as it stands now. Marginalize his power, start an investigation IMMEDIATELY and someone charge him with something. I do agree that it was VERY liekly a politcal decision to not investigate him in the House Ethics committee before the election.

And it didn't help the FBI brought up *a lot* of separations of powers issues with their raid on his congressional office.

William Jefferson sounds and seems like a crooked politician to me but I think he deserves some due process.

[theHandpuppet]

21. Agreed

We can't expect others to clean their house if we don't do it ourselves.

[ButterflyBlood]

46. It would set a bad precedent

to refuse to seat someone just because they are under investigation. He has yet to be charged or convicted of anything, although I have no doubt that will happen.

The Democrats are doing the right thing for now in stripping him of his committee assignments. And once he's convicted, if he refuses to resign, they should vote to expel him.

[sendero]

59. Exactly...

... if this guy is guilty, let it be decided in a court of law. At that time, they can bump him to the curb.

Not based on media reports that may or may not be factual.

[Freddie Stubbs]

61. He was not stripped of all of his committee assignments

He was thrown off of the Ways and Means Committee, but he retained his seat on the Budget Committee.

[Freddie Stubbs]

60. They can't refuse to seat a duly elected Representative

You can't just overturn an election because you don't like the result.

[AtomicKitten]

13. oy vey

Well, it is democracy in action.

[Trajan]

14. NOT good ....

But who am I to say anything about what the voters in Louisiana want ? ...

Nevertheless ... $90,000 in your freezer is pretty damning, no matter WHAT excuse anyone can think of here ....

Do YOU have $90,000 in your freezer ? .... I sure as fuck dont ....

I dont have a thin dime in any of my kitchen appliances ....

The voters have spoken, but the party needs to keep him at arms length .... my opinion ....

[IndyBob]

15. I gotta agree

"cold cash" in the freezer is damning. This was not legitimate money. We should not tolerate crooks.

[Sgent]

18. He should not be seated

2/3 vote kicks out any member, and a majority vote can invalidate the election.

At the very least, he should be kicked out of the Democratic Caucus.

[tomhayes]

24. Explain how what you propse could work?

1)2/3 vote kicks out any member, and a majority vote can invalidate the election.

So right now they could take a vote in the REPUBLICAN House to expel him for this term. So how do the DEMS stop this?

Also, even if kicked out, won't he just be re-seated because he won re-election? And then another vote would have to be taken to kick him out.

>At the very least, he should be kicked out of the Democratic Caucus.
Well, that's a political choice they are going to make next time.

Frankly, what is needed is for charges to be brought against him criminally to kick the political process off. He hasn't even been arrested has he?

[Vodid]

19. Jefferson's advertisements, position on issues...

Attacking Karen Carter because she was FOR stem cell research, same sex marriage, and pro-life. I'm surprised and saddened that he won. Check out his political advertisement here...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUwmtzms0MI&eurl

[theHandpuppet]

22. What a shame

Dem voters had the chance to make a real change and they opted for this?

[Ian David]

28. Remember: Jefferson is a CONSERVATIVE crook. Just like the Repukes.

Conservatives will vote for anyone, no matter how dishonest, so long as they share enough of their bigotries.

[originalpckelly]

33. The people who voted for this man ought to be ashamed.

Sad day for the Democratic Party when a crook is re-elected, and not only that a conservative crook!

[KingFlorez]

40. He ran as a fundamentalist Republican

That's okay though, he'll be indicted soon and Karen will have another chance. She's much more progressive than he is.

[LaBanty]

20. $80k in cold cash

This isn't any better than any 'Puke taking payoffs, getting caught, and still welcomed in politics as if nothing ever happened. Holding politicians accountable applies for people from all parties. If Jefferson was a GOP I'd have hoped the Dems would have lacerated and investigated him as much as Foley or anyone else.

Frankly, this is an embarrassment, if not a liability. Just because he's a Dem doesn't give him a pass.

[Ian David]

27. Did they count all the absentee ballots in his freezer? n/t

[robcon]

29. It's a shame, but not a shame for the Democratic Party.

It's a shame for the voters of New Orleans.

[Vinca]

30. Too bad - this is going to give the Republicans something

to carp on constantly. He should have stepped aside.

[Azathoth]

31. You'd think the people of New Orleans would have had enough of bad/corrupt government

I guess not.

[OHdem10]

34. While it seems strange for Jefferson

to win with the "Cloud" hanging over his head--this one
thing has concerned me.

Why has it taken so darn long for the FBI to charge him
with a crime? I would have thought the FBI would have
charged him before the elecction. Is this really such
a slam dunk case. Everything is left to one's imagineation.
Could there have been a "planting" of evidence?

[Igel]

42. Have they had a chance to look at the evidence?

The entire review of the documents seized was held up in court until it was decided, once again, how things would go. Of course, the review is just the first step; the FBI gets the documents only after the review.

Once they get the documents, then they have to figure out exactly what to do about them--is there sufficent evidence to charge thim? If so, with what--do they go for a greater charge that they may not convict on, or shoot for a lesser charge? Should they leverage the evidence to get other people implicated in the documents, or to negotiate with Jefferson for cooperation or a plea bargain?

I have no idea what stage of utilizing the documents they've reached.

[markus]

35. Shame on who?

Did the voters of New Orleans create the environment in which any procesution of a successful black person is rejected in that community because of the intrinsic distrust of what was once called "the Man?" Did Jefferson himself think up the strategy that drove church-centric black voters away from Carter based on her social issue positions? Did the voters of the 2nd Congressional District create the environment in which armed deputies turned back (predominately black) evacuees trying to walk out of the flood into the suburban West Bank, and make Carter's comments on that an issue against her?

Before you blame the voters of the 2nd Congressional District you need to look our your window at your congressional district, and take a long hard look in the mirror.

/s/
Markus
New Orleans, LA
Sadly gerrymandered into the GOP-dominated, suburban 1st Congressional District.

[pitohui]

36. excellent thoughts by markus EOM

.

[brentspeak]

38. I'd be the first person to denounce the idiot voters in my congressional district

NJ's 5th, which has reelected Republican nut-job Scott Garrett to a third term. It's a complete disgrace. And I do blame the voters of La's 2nd District (the ones who voted for Jefferson, that is): it's their job not to be manipulated by wedge issues, and to reject a clearly corrupt sitting Congressman.

[skipos]

39. Actually, the voters should have taken a long hard look at the two candidates

and realized that Carter, despite her faults, would have been better. Too many voters have a tendency to rally around our crappy incumbents (Arnie in CA, Lieberman in CT, Mayor Kilpatrick in Detoit, Cuellar in TX, Nagin in LA) and it is damaging. It sends a message to our politicians "you can be a dishonest and/or irresponsible and/or law breaker and we will still support you."

[rocktivity]

41. DING DING DING! Markus, you're our grand prize winner!

Did the voters of New Orleans create the environment in which any procesution of a successful black person is rejected in that community because of the intrinsic distrust of what was once called "the Man?"

Nancy Pelosi's "culture of corruption" line isn't as well-known as "stay the course," but I think it's why Jefferson (and Nagin) won--pure revenge rather than wedge issues. The Rethuglican "man" tried to blame their Hurricane Katrina incompetence on Nagin, and Jefferson's Congressional office space was the target of an unprecedented FBI raid--a fate that didn't befall Abramoff, Foley, or Delay. Is it any wonder that so many people decided that Jefferson and Nagin didn't "deserve" to lose their jobs? Are they REALLY "more" corrupt than their GOP counterparts?

:headbang:
rocknation

[Igel]

43. "Are they REALLY "more" corrupt than their GOP counterparts?"

Unfortunately, I don't think many people actually asked that
question.

They uncritically assumed what the answer was, and then
decided that "corruption" is an intrinsically
relative thing:  If Jefferson's less corrupt than a repub,
then he's by definition 'good'.

start
     \
      \
       \
        \
         \
          \
           \
            \__end

[Katzenjammer]

47. "If Jefferson's less corrupt than a repub, then he's by definition 'good'."

Well, that's how it works at DU, so how can anyone here fault the people of that district?

[w4rma]

49. Jefferson was running against a progressive Democrat. (nt)

[ButterflyBlood]

45. Whether Jefferson's more or less corrupt than his GOP counterparts is not the issue

We should get above the playgroundish behavior of pointing to them and saying "well, they're worse!". Corrupt bastards don't belong to Congress, period.

Aside from that, Foley, DeLay, Ney and Cunningham are no longer in Congress, and at least two are heading to prison, where Abramoff already is. So even in this case, there is not a double standard.

[theHandpuppet]

57. It's those damn gay people again

"Did Jefferson himself think up the strategy that drove church-centric black voters away from Carter based on her social issue positions?"

I'm sure tolerance of gays and a woman's right to choose brought the wrath of God upon the heads of the good citizens of New Orleans. Hey, if all else fails, just blame us gay folk.

:sarcasm:

[Tesha]

58. This will work out *VERY BADLY* for Democrats.

He'll be indicted soon, which will mean that we've handed
the media all that they need to run "DEMOCRAT BRIBE SCANDAL
EXPLODES" as their headline for the next two years.

NPR proved the point yesterday, where the first two extended
stories they ran after the hourly news update were Jefferson
stories, both very negative. A while after that, they finally
got around to a story about Bush and the ISC report.

Once it came down to a Democrat versus a Democrat, Jefferson
should have been gently "counselled out". He apparently rolls
over cheaply so there should have been something someone
could have offered him to ease his retirement from Congress.

Tesha

[Marie26]

62. This gives Republicans an out

to make it look like corruption was a bi-partisan problem - the media will highlight Jefferson in any profile of Congressional corruption to look "fair and balanced."