If You Don't Like the Rules, Change 'Em
House Majority Leader Tom Delay is on the brink of being indicted on state political corruption charges in Texas. Under current House rules, any Majority Leader that is indicted on criminal charges must step down from his/her post until the criminal case is over.
Not so fast, law-abiding citizens.
Republicans in the House have decided to CHANGE the federal rules to allow the Majority Leader to keep his post despite the coming indictment.
Nice.
Too bad Clinton didn't think of changing the rules before he got impeached for getting blowjobs in the Oval Office.
But then, I guess campaign finance violations don't compare to getting extramarital nookie on government time.
Not so fast, law-abiding citizens.
Republicans in the House have decided to CHANGE the federal rules to allow the Majority Leader to keep his post despite the coming indictment.
Nice.
Too bad Clinton didn't think of changing the rules before he got impeached for getting blowjobs in the Oval Office.
But then, I guess campaign finance violations don't compare to getting extramarital nookie on government time.
posted by cvo @ 10:57 AM
4 Comments:
At 12:33 PM,
Unknown said…
My impression of the story, as relayed on NPR this morning, is at least a bit different from yours.
The rules by which the Republican Party governs itself are not "federal rules" but "party rules", and the party may of course change those rules. (It's not as though the Republicans are changing federal law.) In fact, the Republicans ten years ago made the rule that was changed today because at ten years ago there had been prominent scandals involving Democrats, and the Republicans wanted to hold themselves to a standard higher than that to which the Democrats held themselves.
You and I most likely agree that the Republicans should have left the rule in place, and we would probably further agree that the Democrats should establish such a rule if they have not done so already. Still, there is widespread belief, at least among the Republicans, that the charges against Delay spring from a purely political motivation and are without merit. So the Republicans have acted to prevent what they see as a political maneuver from forcing them to change their party leadership structure.
At 12:52 PM,
cvo said…
Point taken, but anything that is a House rule is technically "federal", but I agree that they are not changing federal "law".
Interesting that they want to hold themselves to a higher standard until they actually get caught doing something, then decide to lower the bar again.
At 6:59 AM,
Unknown said…
Your use of "federal" requires, in my opinion, a stretch of the usual meaning.
It is not (yet) clear that the Republicans have been "caught doing something"; it is, however, clear that they realize the political foolishness of the no-leadership-when-under-indictment rule. If, as I suspect, the Democrats have no such rule for themselves, then they will have shown themselves politically wiser than the Republicans. With that rule in place, a local prosecutor with a political axe to grind could have an undue effect on national politics.
After further reflection, I think that neither party should have this rule, and the Republicans were right to rid themselves of it. The Republicans were wrong to establish it in the first place, merely to score some short-term points against the Democrats in the early 1990s.
Because yesterday's action is a big news item, the Republicans have now to take responsibility for what they should never have done. And the circumstances make it look bad, at least on the surface.
At 10:29 AM,
cvo said…
I agree with your analysis. The basic point is that the rule shouldn't have been established in the first place.
File it under "Be Careful What You Wish For".
Post a Comment
<< Home