G.O.P. to Make Ethics Inquiries Harder to Begin

[Jon8503]

By CARL HULSE and KATHARINE Q. SEELYE
Published: December 30, 2004
WASHINGTON, Dec. 29 - In the wake of back-to-back ethics slaps at the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, House Republicans are preparing to make it more difficult to initiate ethics investigations and could remove the Republican chairman who presided over the admonishments of Mr. DeLay last fall.

A House leadership aide said a package of rules changes to be presented to the House when Congress convenes on Tuesday could include a plan that would require a majority vote of the ethics panel to pursue a formal investigation. Now, a deadlock on the panel, which is evenly split between parties, keeps a case pending. The possible change, the aide said, would mean that a tie vote would effectively dismiss the case.

The aide said the change would instill more bipartisanship in ethics cases. But Democrats and outside groups said the proposal would dilute an already weak ethics process.

It remained uncertain whether Representative Joel Hefley of Colorado, the current chairman of the panel, would stay in that post. A spokesman for Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, who would play a chief role in determining the appointment, said no decision had been made.

Many Republicans expressed dissatisfaction with Mr. Hefley after the committee reports critical of Mr. DeLay were issued, saying he had allowed Democrats to score political points against Mr. DeLay for conduct that did not merit such scrutiny.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/30/politics/30delay.html?hp&ex=1104469200&en=733350d129ca6fa4&ei=5094&partner=homepage

[Skittles]

1. a sure sign the bastards will be stealing more elections

nt

[Goldeneye]

2. Is there a point

when their actions become so transparent that even their supporters see through them? I mean what hope is there, if they can't see through shit ike this?

[Ganja Ninja]

3. Their supporters already see through them and don't care.

They're just as corrupt and vile as the politicians they support. They don't care about preserving the democracy or freedom. They justify it all for pseudo-religious reasons and out of pure spite.

[Goldeneye]

4. I think your partially right.

Most of my relatives are pubs, and for the life of me I can't understand what they are thinking. I don't think they corrupt. Maybe brainwashed is the term. They watch fox and live in small towns...that's all I got.

What is the definition of brainwashed? Anyone?

[Supersedeas]

5. don't like the political implications of an Ethics Inquiry--remove the

chair.

[Moderator]

6. duplicate topic

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=1105380