[ad_1]
So the timing for some changes in the rules governing the independent House Congressional Ethics Office couldn’t be worse. The Congressional Ethics Office was set up to handle hot potato cases like the Santos case with precision, but in a much more transparent manner than the House Ethics Committee could ever do. . .
But on Monday night, the House of Commons voted to accept the new package of rules — which it negotiated with members of the Liberal caucuses — that ultimately won Kevin McCarthy’s 15th vote as speaker. The package included what several senior government groups described as an attack on the independence of the Congressional Ethics Office. At the very least, where ever more clarity is needed, the change will wipe out long-standing institutional memory of the Commission and sow the seeds of confusion.
This is due to a party that claims to want to “drain the swamp” of corruption in DC.
The bipartisan committee followed a horrific year in which many members of Congress and high-ranking officials were embroiled in a bribery/corruption scandal that overthrew lobbyist Jack Abramov and the lobbyist, then-Chairman Nancy Pelosi and Minority Leaders. Created in 2008 by John Boehner. Almost everyone he touched.
The independent panel is unique to the Maison. There is no similar body in the Senate.
The Congressional Ethics Office is empowered to investigate accusations of misconduct, such as accepting inappropriate gifts (Rep. being investigated for receiving an “unauthorized gift”). Insider stock trading by congressmen. The delayed disclosure of 157 private stock deals in 2021 by Congressman John Rutherford led to him being investigated. However, the House Ethics Committee later admitted to his willful misconduct.
The Congressional Ethics Bureau’s six directors and two alternates are half appointed by the chair and half by minority leaders. That doesn’t change under the new rules. But three of the four Democrats on the committee, including current chairman Mike Burns, a former Maryland congressman, had to be replaced under rules limiting tenure to eight years for board members. The second provision requires that staff must be hired within 30 days. The ethics watchdog sees the change as a backdoor way to make it harder to hire staff.
Meanwhile, the complaint filed by liberal End Citizens United with the Congressional Ethics Office is one of at least three complaints filed against Santos. It alleges that her nearly 40 payments of $199.99 listed as Santos’ campaign spending constitute an attempt to circumvent federal laws requiring receipts for campaign purchases over $200. . Other complaints have been filed with the Justice Department, the Federal Election Commission, over the source of the $700,000 Santos claim that he loaned his campaign.
His string of lies about his educational background, work history, and religious roots seems to be the least of Santos’ problems. Suppose you have the will to
Recent tweaks by House Republicans to the rules governing the work of the Congressional Ethics Office aren’t the committee’s only handicap. The subpoena has never had the power, so members facing scrutiny can mostly ignore the request.
A report by the Center for Election Law published last summer found that five of the eight members whose investigation was made public by the Congressional Ethics Service in 2022 refused to cooperate with the investigation. bottom.
Nearly a year ago, a report by the Congressional Research Service highlighted the origins and activities of the Congressional Ethics Service and identified many excellent options for “further clarifying the agency’s relationship with the public, members of Congress at large, and members of Congress.” considered. Ethics Committee. These options included creating a statutory Congressional Ethics Office. This is not subject to the semi-annual tinkering that House leadership change can bring. Or you can finally give the power of summons.
The potential of the Congressional Ethics Office has not been fully realized. If McCarthy and his gleeful band of rebels really want a meaningful change in how the House does business, and how they are viewed by an increasingly skeptical public, then a clear It is certainly a good idea to consider how to deal with serious ethical violations. where to start.
Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us on Twitter. @grove opinion.
[ad_2]
Source link
