The House Republicans Are Just Looking Out For Number One

Submitted by: muert 3 months ago News & Politics


I have no words for this one, just the facts...

FOX News: House Republicans on Monday voted to eviscerate the Office of Congressional Ethics, the independent body created in 2008 to investigate allegations of misconduct by lawmakers after several bribery and corruption scandals sent members to prison.

Under the ethics change pushed by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va. (pictured, looking miserable), the non-partisan Office of Congressional Ethics would fall under the control of the House Ethics Committee, which is run by lawmakers. It would be known as the Office of Congressional Complaint Review, and the rule change would require that "any matter that may involve a violation of criminal law must be referred to the Committee on Ethics for potential referral to law enforcement agencies after an affirmative vote by the members," according to Goodlatte's office.

Democrats, led by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, reacted angrily. 
"Republicans claim they want to 'drain the swamp,' but the night before the new Congress gets sworn in, the House GOP has eliminated the only independent ethics oversight of their actions," the California lawmaker said in a statement. "Evidently, ethics are the first casualty of the new Republican Congress."
There are 36 comments:
Male 1,155
why did EVERY news source NOT report on Trump Beating these idiot republicans with a shoe just an hour later, and getting this change thrown out?  Trump wants to drain the swamp, not fill it with more muck.
0
Reply
Male 37,273
Yes, the previous batch of Republicans were PART of the PROBLEM. I've never claimed otherwise. Their kissing Obama's ass and caving in without even a token struggle was disgusting.
This will, I hope, be changed under President Trump :-)
Get used to those words, IAB Liberals, President Trump... President Trump... Preeeesident Truuuump!!
-1
Reply
Male 1,645
5cats canadian. please shut the fuck up. quit stalking us americans with your horseshit
1
Reply
Male 2,709
Hang every last federal and state politician. Seize their wealth and apply it towards the debt THEY accumulated, then maybe the next batch of public servants will behave better.
2
Reply
Male 359
Good news, if you check the link you'll find it was updated to include this:

WASHINGTON –  House Republicans on Tuesday abruptly dropped a proposal seeking controversial changes to the Office of Congressional Ethics after President-elect Donald Trump criticized the plan, as the 115th Congress opened on a contentious note. 

We should definitely keep an eye out for them trying something similar in the future.
4
Reply
Male 6,433
The only reason to gut a committee on ethics is because you plan on or you are considering doing something illegal or unethical.  We may be seeing the most corrupt Government in our lifetimes.  Is this the next Nixon government or is this something else entirely?
2
Reply
Male 6,433
Oh, I missed this submission, I submitted something on this subject as well.  
1
Reply
Male 20,061
normalfreak2 I saw your post NF2, muert got this sub in literally 10 minutes before yours -- I go from bottom to top to make sure the first sub gets first crack, but I def. did see your article.
0
Reply
Male 3,293
Thankfully we have "The Fourth Branch" to keep them honest. On, never mind.
2
Reply
Male 6,433
trimble Looks like the Media did it's job.
0
Reply
Male 3,293
@ normalbutthurt2 Looks like Trump did his to me
0
Reply
Male 6,433
trimble Seeing as the Tweet came after the reports from the Media I'm siding with the Media on this one.  Trump picked up on it, which is good, don't get me wrong but the media blew it's collective shit with this story, it was everywhere, except on Breitbart and right wing sites.  I'm searching drudge report and breitbart can't find a mention of it.  If it's in these sites it's buried so deep people aren't seeing it.
0
Reply
Male 359
President Elect Trump's response tweet - " With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it  ........may be, their number one act and priority. Focus on tax reform, healthcare and so many other things of far greater importance! #DTS"
1
Reply
Male 7,636
Just throwing this out there, but the Office of Congressional Ethics as created by House Resolution 895 of the 110th United States Congress in March 2008 in the wake of across-the-board Democratic victories in the 2006 and 2008 elections. TheBoard of Directors consists of 5 Democrats, 1 Republican, and 1 Independent.  

So, is it any surprise that when a election gives you an across-the-board Republican victories they might want to undo a clearly partisan move that was done by an  across-the-board Democratic vote?
1
Reply
Male 359
megrendel Copied directly from H.Res.895.  Section 1.b.1 "The Office shall be governed by a board consisting of six individuals of whom three shall be nominated by the Speaker subject to the concurrence of the minority leader and three shall be nominated by the minority leader subject to the concurrence of the Speaker."

That looks like it should produce a very bipartisan board.


1
Reply
Male 7,636
muert Did you note the current make up?  5 Democrats, 1 Republican and 1 Independent.  Not quite bipartisan.  

I'm all for a stand-alone oversight to keep all of Congressional ethics in check. I just don't see too big of a problem with a partisan vote to get rid of a committee that was rammed through with a partisan vote.
0
Reply
Male 6,433
megrendel note in the time they've been around they've gone after both Democrats and Republicans and have successful litigation against both.  As long as they do their job and go after corruption I'm all for it.  That shouldn't be a partisan issue.
0
Reply
Male 359
megrendel I saw.  And if that is the makeup, why did a republican choose to put in two democrats if they didn't want to?

I could only come up with (the joke) they couldn't find three "individuals of exceptional public standing"  in the Republican Party.  :P
1
Reply
Male 1,408
megrendel Not a big surprise at all. If Republicans see something they don't like, they just eliminate it or render it useless instead of trying to fix it. 

They could have easily amended the law to ensure that both Republicans and Democrats are equally represented or even stacked it with Republicans. Instead, they just created a law that allows them absolute control over their own Ethics Board.
1
Reply
Male 7,636
bliznik Hmmmm....almost like they got the idea from another party that has done that before....who could that be?


0
Reply
Male 1,408
megrendel ...examples?
0
Reply
Male 7,636
bliznik maybe you missed the "but the Office of Congressional Ethics as created by House Resolution 895 of the 110th United States Congress in March 2008 in the wake of across-the-board Democratic victories in the 2006 and 2008 elections."
0
Reply
Male 1,408
megrendel So you're arguing that Office of Congressional Ethics was a step by the Democrats to eliminate or render useless a law that they didn't like.

I didn't realize that you thought that apples and oranges are identical fruits.
0
Reply
Male 7,636
bliznik So, to you, a partisan majority eliminating a committee that another partisan majority created is somehow apples/oranges?


Do you deem one majority 'right' and the other 'wrong'?  If so, please expound on your reasoning on why each is each.
0
Reply
Male 1,408
megrendel No. 

My original argument was "If Republicans see something they don't like, they just eliminate it or render it useless instead of trying to fix it."

You said that Democrats tried to do the same thing by creating the OCE in the first place.

Democrats created a new law. All laws have flaws. If a lawmaker sees a glaring flaw in a law, they should first try to fix it. If they can't fix it, then they should break the law down and create something better.

Today's Republicans don't create new laws. Today's Republicans don't try to fix broken laws. Today's Republicans just try to eliminate laws or render current laws even more toothless and ineffective than they were before, with the age-old argument "The market will fix everything if there's less government!"

So, yes, creation is different from destruction. My original argument was different from your reply. Apples are different than oranges.
0
Reply
Male 7,636
bliznik sometimes the best solution to a problem is to eliminate it. You say 'creation is different than destruction'. If you create a pile of shit, the destruction is the better of the options.   The fact that both took unilateral action when they got power is apples/apples. (Pretty much horse apples in both cases, but don't claim one is 'superior' because your side did it.)
0
Reply
Male 1,408
megrendel Wow, creation is the same as destruction? Have you ever created anything? Have you ever destroyed anything? It takes far more effort to create than to destroy.

But if you think that it's just as easy to destroy than to create, and that destroying things is always preferred to creating things, well...I guess that explains your political party preference.
0
Reply
Male 7,636
bliznik Ah, now I understand...you have a reading comprehension problem.  I'll make it simple:

Creating/Destruction = Apples/Oranges
Unilateral action/Unilateral action = Apples/Apples

And it's not always harder to create than destroy.
0
Reply
Male 1,408
megrendel I understand your analogy. You are correct, comparing unilateral action against unilateral action is the same. I wasn't addressing that part of your argument.

Aside from body fat, there are very few things in life that are easier to create than destroy. Legislation and governments are definitely much more difficult to create than destroy. Just ask any of the countries that America has "liberated" from their tyrant leaders.
0
Reply
Male 7,636
bliznik I could name a few real world examples (addiction, a tree), but I've also found that bureaucracy is much easier to create than to destroy. 
0
Reply
Male 1,408
megrendel That is an unfortunate truth.
0
Reply
Male 359
Dang LaLa (I am assuming this was LaLa) You made this a much better layout then my original post in just a couple of minutes.  Well done!
1
Reply
Male 1,255
muert Awe nope. It was Monsieur Fancylad. Thanks, for the shout out though!  
0
Reply
Male 359
lalapancakes Ah, mad skills either way. Fancylad Well done!
1
Reply
Male 6,433
muert They do an incredible job of laying submissions out better.  They make mine look way better and make me look good.  Props to lalapancakes and fancylad
0
Reply
Male 1,255
muert Jah. We love our Mr FL.
0
Reply