QUOTE
"
Hart picked for hot seat
House member would head DeLay ethics inquiry; Democrats blocking GOP plan
Thursday, April 21, 2005
By Maeve Reston, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
WASHINGTON -- Four House ethics committee Republicans yesterday tried but failed to break a deadlock over controversial new ethics rules by offering to modify them slightly and to initiate an inquiry into House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's controversial foreign trips and relations with lobbyists.
If Democrats had agreed to the GOP compromise, Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Bradford Woods, a new committee member, would have led an ethics subcommittee charged with investigating DeLay, R-Texas.
Hart was appointed to the panel -- formally called the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct -- earlier this year, when House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., replaced its chairman, Rep. Joel Hefley, R-Colo., and two other GOP members. Democrats cast Hastert's action as retribution against party members on the panel. Last year, the panel admonished DeLay three times for his conduct, even though it did not find that he had broken House rules.
The reassignments were widely criticized by Democrats as efforts to stack the panel with DeLay sympathizers. Republicans described them as routine housekeeping.
Two new GOP members have contributed to DeLay's legal defense fund: Texas Rep. Lamar Smith -- who did not appear with other members at yesterday's news conference announcing the prospective inquiry -- gave the majority leader's defense committee $10,000, and Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole donated $5,000.
But Hart has not donated any money to DeLay's fund.
So far this year, Democrats have blocked the committee from formally organizing because they object to three ethics rule changes that the Republican-led House pushed through during the first day of the new Congress.
The committee's new chairman, Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., yesterday said he had hoped that his compromise proposal would let the committee move forward with its work. He said he was publicly stating that the panel would act on a DeLay investigation because there had been so much publicity recently about the allegations.
"The majority leader has said over and over in communications and publicly that he has done nothing wrong," the chairman said. "This is the means by which he could state his case."
But if Democrats don't agree to let the committee officially organize, Hastings said, the committee "would not be able to proceed" on the DeLay matter.
The panel's ranking minority member, Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., yesterday squelched the prospect an hour after the GOP deal was offered, saying it was inadequate.
House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland also blasted the compromise proposal as "a charade." Democrats "reject it out of hand," he said. "It is a calculated attempt to divert attention from the fact that the Republican majority has neutered the ethics committee in the House by imposing partisan rules that hamstring any meaningful inquiry."
"This issue is bigger than the majority leader; it is about the integrity of the entire House now and in the future," Hoyer said.
Democrats want to repeal the three rule changes that GOP leaders brought to the House floor without consulting Democratic committee members.
One rule allows any complaint against a member to be dismissed within 45 days if there is no committee action or if there is a tie vote on whether to proceed. (The ethics committee is the only congressional panel divided evenly; it has five members from each party.)
The second rule lets a lawyer representing a member under investigation also represent any witness testifying during the inquiry.
The third change would let a member under investigation respond directly to allegations, supplement the record during the course of the inquiry and demand an immediate trial, even if the committee had not begun investigating the matter.
Hastings yesterday defended the new rules, stating that House Republicans felt that the package "was valid and was needed." Asked why he had offered a compromise in a memo he sent to Mollohan, instead of calling for a full House vote to modify the new rules, the chairman said he considered it "highly unlikely that the House would be in a mood to change the rules."
Hastings offered as proposed modifications that, while he is chairman, he would extend the new 45-day window to consider an ethics complaint to three months or longer if necessary. He also said he would not let any complaint be dismissed without a full-committee vote.
But Mollohan said such a compromise might not be adhered to -- if, for example, Hastings were removed as chairman. His chief concern, Mollahan said, was that the rules governing House ethics have always been altered by input from both parties. Democrats won't let the panel move forward unless a bipartisan task force reviews the new rules, he said.
Mollohan has co-sponsored a resolution with Hefley to repeal the new rules, and, in addition to the GOP former chairman,, two other Republicans have said they would support it. The House now has 232 Republicans, 202 Democrats and one independent.
(Maeve Reston can be reached at mreston@nationalpress.com or"
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05111/491866.stm
Hart picked for hot seat
House member would head DeLay ethics inquiry; Democrats blocking GOP plan
Thursday, April 21, 2005
By Maeve Reston, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
WASHINGTON -- Four House ethics committee Republicans yesterday tried but failed to break a deadlock over controversial new ethics rules by offering to modify them slightly and to initiate an inquiry into House Majority Leader Tom DeLay's controversial foreign trips and relations with lobbyists.
If Democrats had agreed to the GOP compromise, Rep. Melissa Hart, R-Bradford Woods, a new committee member, would have led an ethics subcommittee charged with investigating DeLay, R-Texas.
Hart was appointed to the panel -- formally called the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct -- earlier this year, when House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., replaced its chairman, Rep. Joel Hefley, R-Colo., and two other GOP members. Democrats cast Hastert's action as retribution against party members on the panel. Last year, the panel admonished DeLay three times for his conduct, even though it did not find that he had broken House rules.
The reassignments were widely criticized by Democrats as efforts to stack the panel with DeLay sympathizers. Republicans described them as routine housekeeping.
Two new GOP members have contributed to DeLay's legal defense fund: Texas Rep. Lamar Smith -- who did not appear with other members at yesterday's news conference announcing the prospective inquiry -- gave the majority leader's defense committee $10,000, and Oklahoma Rep. Tom Cole donated $5,000.
But Hart has not donated any money to DeLay's fund.
So far this year, Democrats have blocked the committee from formally organizing because they object to three ethics rule changes that the Republican-led House pushed through during the first day of the new Congress.
The committee's new chairman, Rep. Doc Hastings, R-Wash., yesterday said he had hoped that his compromise proposal would let the committee move forward with its work. He said he was publicly stating that the panel would act on a DeLay investigation because there had been so much publicity recently about the allegations.
"The majority leader has said over and over in communications and publicly that he has done nothing wrong," the chairman said. "This is the means by which he could state his case."
But if Democrats don't agree to let the committee officially organize, Hastings said, the committee "would not be able to proceed" on the DeLay matter.
The panel's ranking minority member, Rep. Alan Mollohan, D-W.Va., yesterday squelched the prospect an hour after the GOP deal was offered, saying it was inadequate.
House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer of Maryland also blasted the compromise proposal as "a charade." Democrats "reject it out of hand," he said. "It is a calculated attempt to divert attention from the fact that the Republican majority has neutered the ethics committee in the House by imposing partisan rules that hamstring any meaningful inquiry."
"This issue is bigger than the majority leader; it is about the integrity of the entire House now and in the future," Hoyer said.
Democrats want to repeal the three rule changes that GOP leaders brought to the House floor without consulting Democratic committee members.
One rule allows any complaint against a member to be dismissed within 45 days if there is no committee action or if there is a tie vote on whether to proceed. (The ethics committee is the only congressional panel divided evenly; it has five members from each party.)
The second rule lets a lawyer representing a member under investigation also represent any witness testifying during the inquiry.
The third change would let a member under investigation respond directly to allegations, supplement the record during the course of the inquiry and demand an immediate trial, even if the committee had not begun investigating the matter.
Hastings yesterday defended the new rules, stating that House Republicans felt that the package "was valid and was needed." Asked why he had offered a compromise in a memo he sent to Mollohan, instead of calling for a full House vote to modify the new rules, the chairman said he considered it "highly unlikely that the House would be in a mood to change the rules."
Hastings offered as proposed modifications that, while he is chairman, he would extend the new 45-day window to consider an ethics complaint to three months or longer if necessary. He also said he would not let any complaint be dismissed without a full-committee vote.
But Mollohan said such a compromise might not be adhered to -- if, for example, Hastings were removed as chairman. His chief concern, Mollahan said, was that the rules governing House ethics have always been altered by input from both parties. Democrats won't let the panel move forward unless a bipartisan task force reviews the new rules, he said.
Mollohan has co-sponsored a resolution with Hefley to repeal the new rules, and, in addition to the GOP former chairman,, two other Republicans have said they would support it. The House now has 232 Republicans, 202 Democrats and one independent.
(Maeve Reston can be reached at mreston@nationalpress.com or"
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05111/491866.stm
