Clinton Corruption - Everything That Goes Around...
By Tom Fitton
January 30, 2007
Page 2 of 2
Judicial Watch does not endorse nor oppose candidates for public office. Hillary is free to run for president. But Judicial Watch is also free to continue to pursue accountability for her many crimes and ethical transgressions, past and present. Hillary Clinton is the most powerful corrupt politician in the country and much attention should be paid to this corruption, whether or not she is running for office. If you would like more information on our efforts in this regard, be sure to check out the Hillary Watch section of our Internet site.
Mixed Results in Congressional Ethics Reform
Democrats used the issue of corruption in last year's election to seize control of both houses of Congress. So, how are they doing so far in their efforts to clean up corruption on Capitol Hill? The results are mixed. Read on and you'll see what I mean.
Last week the House voted 431-0 to deny tax-funded pensions in the future to lawmakers convicted of felonies. The measure will not be applied retroactively, which means former California Rep. Duke Cunningham will continue to be compensated by taxpayers long after he finishes his eight-year prison sentence for taking bribes. (He is entitled to $36,000 per year for his eight terms in Congress.) The same is true for Ohio Republican Bob Ney, recently sentenced to 2 ½ years for an Abramoff-related scandal. (He'll receive $29,000 per year after the age of 62.)
I'm not thrilled that congressional felons will continue to receive taxpayer-funded benefits. However, this type of measure had been debated for a long time with no movement by Congress, so I guess it's a start. Why deal with the issue now? Arizona Republican Rep. John Shadegg stated the obvious: "...The American people are no longer willing to tolerate corrupt behavior by their elected officials."
While the House of Representatives appears ready to remove privileges from their convicted criminal alumni, they have so far failed to crack down on a serious potential conflict of interest: congressional spouses who work as lobbyists. According to The Washington Post, at least a half-dozen congressional spouses are registered lobbyists, while a few others work for lobbying firms. Yet there has been no movement by the House to address the obvious conflicts of interest. In fact, as it stands, a lobbyist can lobby his or her congressional spouse directly!
This according to The Washington Post: "Democrats made ethics reform a major issue in last fall's congressional elections, but the ethics package the House approved earlier this month didn't address the issue..."
The Senate, meanwhile, recently passed a series of ethics reforms that included an amendment by Louisiana Republican David Vitter that would ban spouses of senators from lobbying the senate, with the exception of spouses who were lobbying one year prior to their spouse's election to office. This proposal jumped the first hurdle. However, it is unknown whether or not it will ever make it to President Bush's desk for signature. The bill would first have to go to conference with the House which is less keen on the idea. Significant changes are likely. Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) predicts the most stringent ethics proposals "...are going to be discarded once we go to conference."
---------
Tom Fitton is President of Judicial Watch, a nonpartisan educational foundation that fights government corruption. Visit www.judicialwatch.org for more information.
--------------------
Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA. >> Back -- Page 1 2
++ Discuss this topic in The Forum
Current rating:  5.0 out of 5.0 (21 total votes)
| 
