‘I was threatened’

[donheld]

http://www.thehill.com/news/101304/hefley.aspx

Hefley: ‘I was threatened’
Ethics committee’s actions against DeLay trigger angry response from Republicans
By Alexander Bolton


House ethics committee Chairman Joel Hefley (R-Colo.) said last week that Republican lawmakers have threatened him in the wake of his panel’s recent admonishments of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas).

Asked what response he has received from House Republicans since two ethics committee admonishments were issued in a span of seven days, Hefley said, “I’ve been attacked; I’ve been threatened.”

However, Hefley would not reveal who or how many of his colleagues had threatened him, or what retaliation had been threatened.

Earlier, Hefley had told a group of reporters, “I’m not getting any threats from leadership.”



Rep. Joel Hefley

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Many House GOP lawmakers are incensed over the ethics committee’s handling of the admonishments of DeLay, which have resulted in at least 10 critical editorials of the House Republican leadership by newspapers around the country, some in political battlegrounds such as Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Legislators who criticized the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct said they were upset that it had given DeLay’s enemies so much political fodder less than a month before the election, particularly in response to an ethics complaint filed against DeLay by outgoing freshman Rep. Chris Bell (D-Texas). Bell filed the complaint after he had lost his seat as a result of Republican efforts, spearheaded by DeLay, to redraw Democratic congressional districts in Texas. Many Republicans say Bell’s complaint was motivated by partisan politics and a desire for revenge.

In response to Bell’s complaint, which made several serious charges against DeLay, including bribery, the committee admonished DeLay last week for creating the improper appearance that he granted lobbyists for the energy industry special access during a golf fundraising event and for improperly using his office by contacting the Federal Aviation Administration to track down Democratic state officials embroiled in the Texas redistricting fight. The committee released its letter chastising DeLay and a 44-page report on its investigation to the public.

“There was a lot of excess verbiage,” said Deborah Pryce (Ohio), chairwoman of the House GOP conference.

A week before, the panel admonished DeLay for offering to endorse the House candidacy of retiring Rep. Nick Smith’s (R-Mich.) son in exchange for the lawmaker’s vote on last year’s landmark Medicare bill. The committee also made public its 62-page report of its self-initiated investigation of that incident.

The committee’s admonishments were the lowest form of reprimand they could have given DeLay, so slight that DeLay and House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) interpreted the panel’s action on the Bell complaint as a dismissal of the charges. But because the admonishments were issued so publicly, they sparked a firestorm of criticism.

“The thing that’s disconcerting for people is the ethics committee did a move that gives themselves cover and the standard they applied is a standard that didn’t exist,” said Rep. John Sweeney (R-N.Y.), echoing a sentiment voiced by other Republicans that the committee may have been motivated to admonish DeLay so as to avoid criticism by the press and government watchdog groups. Both had ratcheted up the pressure on the committee in recent months, criticizing it as toothless and disinclined to enforce the ethics rules of the chamber.

Several Republicans said that many members of the House could be faulted for holding fundraisers that appeared to give special access to industry or labor representatives. House fundraising events are frequently attended by lobbyists who must make contributions worth hundreds or thousands of dollars to get in the door.

But Sweeney acknowledged that Republicans would probably not be as angry if the committee made public its findings after Election Day.

“If we were two months from now, the partisan edge would not exist,” he said.

Based on timelines dictated by House ethics committee rules, the panel had to take action on the Bell complaint before Congress adjourned. To extend the investigation until after the election would have likely required the committee to ratchet up the probe by forming an investigative subcommittee.

The panel could have waited to release its findings on the Medicare investigation until after the election.

Sweeney added that the committee “went beyond the scope of what was before them in applying a standard that didn’t exist in the law.”

Rep. Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) questioned the ethics panel’s handling of the admonishments, likening its action to a judge who dismisses drunk-driving charges but nevertheless publicly berates the accused as an obnoxious and odious driver.

“I’m very confused about why Republicans would sign an admonishment,” Feeney said.

He said that by dismissing the charges and chastising DeLay in response to the Bell complaint, the committee had created a gray area in the ethics code instead of painting a bright line for conduct.

Asked if the ethics committee could have better handled the admonishments of DeLay, Rep. Jack Kingston (R-Ga.) replied, “I think the ethics committee could have.”

“It helped feed the tiger instead of saying, ‘Hey guys. …’” said Kingston, who said he believes, like many Republicans, that the committee should have tried to defuse the political time bomb that they believe the Bell ethics complaint was intended to be.

Former Rep. Ed Bethune (R-Ark.), now a lawyer with Bracewell & Patterson LLP who is representing DeLay, said, “A complaint that is grossly overstated results in the lowest form of action or guidance that the committee can give to a member, and yet in having reams of documents and a report issued at the last minute, is something that needs to be thought through.”

“It was a little bit too much, if you will, and uncalled for,” he said. “It was unnecessary to go through all of that, chapter and verse, when, in the end, the allegations the committee.”

[Worst Username Ever]

1. They are imploding n/t

[coreystone]

4. NO! Some of them are realizing that the ethics of politics....

is more important than toting an unscrupulous "albatross" like DeLay around their necks.:kick:

[FlemingsGhost]

2. Which Party will fracture first?

Both are headed for significant infighting and general unrest. Winning in November will only put off the inevitable.

(Btw, I think posts are limited to 4 paragraphs. Might be a rules violation ...)

[acmavm]

3. Phooey. They're just pissed because DeLay may cost the some

numbers in the House.

There hasn't been enough lipstick since the beginning of time to dress up that pig and try to call him anything else.

I think it's funny. Or would be if it wasn't such a sad indicator of what a mess our country has become.