Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Democrats want sweeping House ethics investigation
Yahoo ^

Posted on 01/07/2006 9:22:40 AM PST by Sub-Driver

Democrats want sweeping House ethics investigation

15 minutes ago

Democrats seized on a mushrooming scandal involving a disgraced lobbyist on Saturday to call for sweeping ethics probes in the Republican-led House of Representatives.

Rep. Louise Slaughter, a New York Democrat, said lobbyists had multiplied by the thousands in recent years to the point where there were now 63 of them for every lawmaker. She said they were using their campaign donations to influence policy and even write laws.

Slaughter called on the House ethics committee to investigate corruption cases involving lawmakers with links to Jack Abramoff, the lobbyist who pleaded guilty this week in a U.S. corruption probe.

"The House ethics committee, after a year of inaction, must get to work immediately to investigate pending ethics and corruption cases in the House, including those involving members with ties to Jack Abramoff," she said in the Democrats' weekly radio address.

"This is a necessary first step to restore a high ethical standard to the Congress," Slaughter said.

There was no immediate comment from a spokesman for the ethics committee, chaired by Rep. Doc Hastings (news, bio, voting record), a Washington Republican.

But Republicans have sought to cast the Abramoff case as a bipartisan scandal, noting that some Democrats also received donations from Abramoff's clients and associates.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; abramoff; conyers; fundraising; gannon; housedems; hypocrites; louiseslaughter; mediabias; slaughter
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last
To: MurryMom
Rep. Louise Slaughter, a New York RAT...

Who?

Why aren't Pelosi or Murtha calling for ethics investigations? RATS in glass houses? I think so, too...

41 posted on 01/07/2006 3:03:42 PM PST by Libloather (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

LOL.. I reposted this one later, it had me in stitches.


42 posted on 01/07/2006 6:24:10 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NormsRevenge

Pelosi PAC Hit with $21K Fine ^
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1074467/posts

Keyword - 2PAC Pelosi
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=2pacpelosi


43 posted on 01/07/2006 6:24:52 PM PST by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Tax Government

Not when it comes to buying representation in our Gov't. If you believe otherwise I'll sell you that ocean front property in North Dakota.


44 posted on 01/07/2006 9:16:28 PM PST by Almondjoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Typical.

No new news here.

45 posted on 01/07/2006 9:30:59 PM PST by Thumper1960 (The enemy within: Demoncrats and DSA.ORG Sedition is a Liberal "family value".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Almondjoy

Sorry. Elected officials should be able to accept campaign contributions from any source to induce them to perform lawful acts. If the electorate doesn't like how an elected official performs in this area, the recourse is to vote him out.


46 posted on 01/07/2006 9:52:45 PM PST by Tax Government (Defeat the evil miscreant donkeys and their rhino lackeys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Tax Government

For other officials bought with the same money.

We can play this game all night but your words aren't going to change how the system works.

The system must change in order for our politics to.


47 posted on 01/08/2006 6:21:28 PM PST by Almondjoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Vn_survivor_67-68
congress critters and candidates should not be allowed to receive money from any entity that is not a natural person

The whole idea of limiting campaign contributions is a flawed one. People and their money -- organized into any legal entity -- have a right to be heard and to make their influence felt. And the person who wants to put government in charge of how and whose ideas are expressed in the political arena does not have democracy's well being at heart.

48 posted on 01/08/2006 8:55:34 PM PST by Tax Government (Defeat the evil miscreant donkeys and their rhino lackeys.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Brooms aren't very selective about what they sweep.


49 posted on 01/08/2006 9:53:57 PM PST by skr ("That book [Bible], sir, is the rock on which our republic rests."--Andrew Jackson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Libloather
BLITZER: Should Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff, who has now pleaded guilty to bribery charges, among other charges, a Republican lobbyist in Washington, should the Democrat who took money from him give that money to charity or give it back?

DEAN: There are no Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff, not one, not one single Democrat. Every person named in this scandal is a Republican. Every person under investigation is a Republican. Every person indicted is a Republican. This is a Republican finance scandal. There is no evidence that Jack Abramoff ever gave any Democrat any money. And we've looked through all of those FEC reports to make sure that's true.

BLITZER: But through various Abramoff-related organizations and outfits, a bunch of Democrats did take money that presumably originated with Jack Abramoff.

DEAN: That's not true either. There's no evidence for that either. There is no evidence...

BLITZER: What about Senator Byron Dorgan?

DEAN: Senator Byron Dorgan and some others took money from Indian tribes. They're not agents of Jack Abramoff. There's no evidence that I've seen that Jack Abramoff directed any contributions to Democrats. I know the Republican National Committee would like to get the Democrats involved in this. They're scared. They should be scared. They haven't told the truth. They have misled the American people. And now it appears they're stealing from Indian tribes. The Democrats are not involved in this.

BLITZER: Unfortunately Mr. Chairman, we got to leave it right there.

50 posted on 01/09/2006 6:38:00 AM PST by MurryMom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Tax Government
Elected officials should be able to accept campaign contributions from any source to induce them to perform lawful acts.

So maybe the correct answer is term limits. That would limit the influence the lobbyists could exert (if ya can't get re-elected, campaign contributions don't mean much to you.)

51 posted on 01/09/2006 6:45:10 AM PST by Terabitten (Illegal immigration causes Representation without Taxation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: MurryMom
DEAN: There are no Democrats who took money from Jack Abramoff, not one, not one single Democrat.

DEAN: We won't always have the strongest military.

Do you usually hang your hat on what Howie Dean says?

52 posted on 01/09/2006 3:20:08 PM PST by Libloather (Happy New Year!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-52 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson