Rep. Slaughter says public lacks intelligence to join ethics debate

SMARTER THAN A FIFTH GRADER - U.S. Rep. Louise Slaughter questioned last week whether it was possible to find six people smarter than a member of Congress.

Nearly three years ago, with her party’s prospects of regaining control of Congress still considered a political longshot, U.S. Representative Louise Slaughter, D-NY, assumed the mantle of what would become the Democrat’s signature campaign issue for 2006 – Congressional ethics.

“The ethics of the House should be of concern to every American,” Slaughter told the Capitol Hill newspaper Roll Call in April, 2005.

But with Democrats now in the majority in both the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives, Slaughter seems to be having a change of heart. Last week, she openly rebelled against a proposal that would allow any American - let alone every American - to have a role Congressional oversight.

“I am having a real problem understanding why six people from outside this place will be smarter, more ethical than we are,” an indignant Slaughter said in response to a proposal that would create an independent, six-member panel to investigate ethics complaints against House members.

Under current rules, outside groups can file ethics complaints in the United States Senate; but in the House, only another Member can initiate such an investigation.

Slaughter is not the first Democrat to lose their public enthusiasm for stronger ethics enforcement since the party’s takeover of Congress.

U.S. Representative Mike Capuano, D-MA, tapped by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi last January to chair a special House task force on ethics enforcement, told the Buffalo News in July, 2007, he “isn’t surprised” by the Democrats’ slow pace in overhauling House ethics rules.

"I’ve never thought ethics as a political issue was much of an issue," Capuano said, "So there’s no political need [for reform]."

In some ways, House Democrats’ waning enthusiasm for toughening ethics rules is not surprising. The Democrats rode a wave of public discontent to their first majority in a dozen years, at least in part, by turning the ethical lapses of a handful of Republican Congressman into a mantra of the “Culture of Corruption” against the GOP.

But a closer look reveals the Democrat’s fear of tougher House rules, and the ability of the public-at-large to bring complaints, may be more parochial. Since taking the reins of power, a host of Democrat members have become ethical liabilities.

• U.S. Representative William Jefferson, D-LA, is currently under a 16-count, 94 page federal indictment, following an investigation into bribery, racketeering, obstruction of justice and money laundering allegations against the Louisiana Democrat.

Despite reports that Jefferson is seen on videotape accepting $100,000 in cash from an informant - $90,000 of which was later found in Jefferson’s freezer – House Democrats appointed the embattled Congressman to the sensitive Homeland Security Committee. Jefferson’s appointment was rescinded soon after protests from House Republicans.

Democrat leaders had promised in June a “speedy” internal investigation of Jefferson, despite the reported protest of U.S. Representative Stephanie Tubbs Jones, D-OH, chair of the Standards of Official Conduct, better known as the ethics committee.

• Like Jefferson, U.S. Representative Alan Mollohan was appointed to a sensitive post at the start of the 110th Congress. Pelosi elevated Mollohan to the Chairmanship of the Commerce Justice State Appropriations Subcommittee - the committee charged with funding such agencies as the Department of Justice and Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI).

But Mollohan’s appointment came after he was already reported to be under investigation by the FBI, giving him oversight of the very agency questioning his business dealings. The FBI is looking into millions of dollars in federal funds secured by Mollohan, and funneled to web of non-profit agencies he helped create. A year earlier, Mollohan was forced out as senior Democrat on the House ethics committee after that FBI probe became public.

At the same time he was directing federal money to agencies run by his private business partners, the Washington Post reported that “Mollohan's personal fortunes soared. From 2000 to 2004, his assets grew from no more than $565,000 to at least $6.3 million.”

• Onetime Abscam figure Jack Murtha, D-PA, dodged an ethics investigation after Democrats rallied to prevent a debate in the House of Representatives over whether the Pennsylvania Democrat violated House rules when he threatened a Republican colleague.

Murtha was named an unindicted co-conspirator in the late 1970’s FBI sting operation, where agents posed as Arab sheiks and offered money in exchange for legislative favors. Six members of Congress – all but one a Democrat – were convicted on various charges of bribery and corruption. While neither indicted nor convicted, Murtha is seen on an FBI surveillance video telling agents “we do business for a while, maybe I'll be interested.”

He has been a controversial figure ever since.

• Another House Democrat to avoid an ethics committee investigation was U.S. Representative Bob Filner, D-CA.Filner was set to face trial on assault and battery charges after allegedly shoving an airport worker at Washington Dulles International Airport.Filner was aggravated that his bags had not arrived quickly enough and, according to one report, after shoving a female airport worker, was “grappl(ing) with police” when his luggage arrived.

After Filner pleaded guilty to trespassing in a Loudon County, Virginia Court, the ethics committee halted further investigation.

• Just last week, Roll Call newspaper reported that U.S. Representative Solomon Ortiz, D-TX, and his chief of staff invested thousands of dollars in a Chinese telecommunications project after traveling to the country on a fact-finding mission approved by the House of Representatives.

Ortiz made the investment along with a Texas businessman, who twice paid for the Congressman’s trips to China, and has given Ortiz thousands in campaign donations, Roll Call reported.

• Judiciary Committee Chair John Conyers, R-MI, remains under scrutiny through at least the remainder of the year, following a deal he cut with the House ethics committee in the waning days of the 109th Congress. Conyers faced a host of accusations from former staff members who claimed they were compelled to do campaign work and perform personal errands for Conyers while employed by the House of Representatives.

Conyers “accepted responsibility for his actions,” according to a statement issued by the ethics committee on December 29, 2006, following accusations by at least two staff members they were, among other non-official duties, required to baby-sit for the Michigan Democrat’s children while on the federal payroll.

Among the stipulations agreed to by Conyers is a prohibition against “his personal congressional staff (other than his Chief of Staff) from performing any campaign-related work, including work done on a voluntary basis, during the 110th Congress.”

• Questions about a low-interest loan made by a pharmaceutical lobbyist to U.S. Representative Jim Moran have dogged the Virginia Democrat for several years. In 1999, Moran received a $25,000 low-interest loan from a lobbyist with Capitol Associates Inc., whom Moran described as “a dear, close friend.”

“Five days later,” the Washington Post reported, “Moran signed on as one of more than 70 co-sponsors to a bill sought by (the lobbyist’s) client, drugmaker Schering-Plough, which sought to extend the patent on its allergy product Claritin. Consumer groups were lobbying against the bill, saying it would be costly for consumers and would delay access to cheaper, generic drugs.”

The Post further reported, “Moran also sent a letter to moderate Democrats seeking their support for the bill.”

Ralph Nader’s Congressional Accountability Project sought, unsuccessfully, to have the House ethics committee investigate the loan. The lobbyist, former Maryland State Democrat Chair Terry Lierman, is now chief of staff to House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-MD.

More recently, Moran was criticized for comments he made before a group of Democrat party activists during the 2006 Congressional elections. Moran boasted that if Democrats regained control of the House, he would become chair of the Interior subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, and pledged to steer federal dollars to his Northern Virginia district.

"When I become chairman," Moran reportedly said, "I'm going to earmark the s**t out of it." Moran was passed over for the subcommittee chairmanship in favor of U.S. Representative Norman Dicks, D-WA.

• Freshman Democrat Chris Carney, D-PA, rebuffed a call from a non-partisan citizens group in his district to initiate an ethics investigation of fellow Pennsylvania Democrat Paul Kanjorski.

According to published reports, Kanjorski “helped steer more than $11 million in federal earmarks to (Cornerstone Technologies) founded by his nephews that was supposed to use high-pressure water jets to pulverize coal and other materials. Eight years after Cornerstone was founded, it is bankrupt. The advanced products it was supposed to develop for the Navy never materialized.”

The company, Cornerstone Technologies, has been the center of a public controversy since at least 2002, when it was reported that the FBI was “investigating (Kanjorski’s) alleged role in directing millions of dollars in federal grants to his family-owned businesses.”

The Scranton Times reported that “Kanjorski’s daughter, Nancy, and his four nephews were owners and/or board members at Cornerstone, which rented space in a Wilkes-Barre building co-owned by the congressman before moving to larger quarters in Plains Township.” According to that report, Kanjorski played an active role in the company’s operation.

“Although he was not an owner of Cornerstone, Congressman Kanjorski often took an active role in its operations, former employees and associates say,” the paper reported. “Peter Kanjorski, who was CEO of the firm, made no decision without consulting his uncle. In August 2000, the congressman personally presided over a meeting between Peter Kanjorski, two other Kanjorski nephews and Mr. Conrad to resolve a dispute over offering shares in Cornerstone to several key employees.”

After leaving Cornerstone, Peter Kanjorski went to work for his uncle’s political action committee.

Kanjorski has given varying accounts about his role with Cornerstone. In October, 2002, the Allentown Morning Call reported that “Kanjorski freely admits he arranged federal funding for water jet research but insists it was not for Cornerstone or any other specific company.” Four years later, in October, 2006, he called it a “pet project,” and told the Wilkes-Barre Times Leader that family members “did me a favor in devoting their time” to Cornerstone.

One industry expert described the company’s activities as “the Three Stooges meet anthracite.”

Two freshman Democrats could face also ethics investigations, should new House rules allow members of the public to file complaints.

The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel reported that the panel could be asked to look into $18,400 in campaign donations freshman Democrat Steve Kagen, D-WI, received from his children in September 2006.

Last fall, the paper “first reported the contributions from his kids, all of whom are listed as college students.”

And U.S. Representative Patrick Murphy, D-PA, still faces questions over a controversial book deal that netted him a $100,000 advance.

Murphy has never answered questions on when Holt Publishing agreed to publish the recently released memoir. Murphy garnered the $100,000 advance from a politically-connected literary agent at a time when the Pennsylvania Democrat was heavily in debt, and just days before he would have been prohibited by House rules from accepting the payment.

Murphy has claimed he received “informal guidance” from the ethics committee prior to accepting payment from his agent, but has been unable to provide proof of the ethics committee’s sign-off. It also remains unclear whether Murphy’s deal was actually completed while he was a member of Congress, and subject to House rules.

Murphy’s advance was larger than what U.S. Senator John Kerry earned in actual sales for his Presidential campaign year biography, “A Call to Service.”