posted on April 11, 2005 08:58:30 AM new
WASHINGTON (AP) - Private GOP tensions over Tom DeLay's ethics controversy spilled into public Sunday, as a Senate leader called on DeLay to explain his actions and one House Republican demanded the majority leader's resignation.
"Tom's conduct is hurting the Republican Party, is hurting this Republican majority and it is hurting any Republican who is up for re-election." Rep. Chris Shays, R-Conn., told The Associated Press in an interview, calling for DeLay to step down as majority leader.
DeLay, R-Texas, who was admonished by the House ethics committee last year, has been dogged in recent months by new reports about his overseas travel funded by special interests, campaign payments to family members and connections to a lobbyist who is under criminal investigation.
A moderate Republican from Connecticut who has battled with his party's leadership on a number of issues, Shays said efforts by the House GOP members to change ethics rules to protect DeLay only make the party look bad.
"My party is going to have to decide whether we are going to continue to make excuses for Tom to the detriment of Republicans seeking election," Shays said.
Rick Santorum, the No. 3 Republican in the Senate, said Sunday that DeLay needs to explain his conduct to the public.
"I think he has to come forward and lay out what he did and why he did it and let the people then judge for themselves," Santorum told ABC's This Week. "But from everything I've heard, again, from the comments and responding to those, is everything he's done was according to the law."
"Now you may not like some of the things he's done," said Santorum, who is up for re-election next year in Pennsylvania. "That's for the people of his district to decide, whether they want to approve that kind of behavior or not."
DeLay's spokesman, Dan Allen, told AP that the congressman "looks forward to the opportunity of sitting down with the ethics committee chairman and ranking member to get the facts out and to dispel the fiction and innuendo that's being launched at him by House Democrats and their liberal allies."
Responding specifically to Shays' remarks later, Allen added that DeLay's "effective leadership has helped to build and maintain the Republican majority in the House and that's exactly why liberal groups funded by George Soros have set their sights on him."
The majority leader was admonished three times last year by that committee. The committee has been in limbo since March, when its five Democrats balked at adopting Republican-developed rules.
House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said last week that the controversy was distracting DeLay from dealing with more pressing problems before Congress.
Santorum, however, said DeLay is "very effective in leading the House" and "to date, has not been compromised."
A senior Democratic senator, Christopher Dodd of Connecticut, had this advice for the Republicans who control both the House and Senate: "Be careful about how closely you embrace Mr. DeLay."
Dodd cited the new rules for the ethics committee that House Republicans rammed through in the wake of DeLay's difficulties. Those rules require a bipartisan vote before an investigation can be launched. DeLay's office also helped mount a counterattack last fall against Rep. Joel Hefley, R-Colo., who was the ethics committee chairman when it came down against DeLay.
"Unfortunately, in his particular case, there's a process that he's tried to change so they could actually reach a determination as to whether or not he's innocent or guilty of the things he's been charged with," Dodd said. "But this is not going to go away."
DeLay "becomes the poster child for a lot of the things the Democrats think are wrong about Republican leadership. As long as he's there, he's going to become a pretty good target," Dodd said on ABC.
DeLay, who took center stage in passing legislation designed to keep alive Terri Schiavo, also has found that President Bush and congressional colleagues are distancing themselves from his comments, after her death, about the judges involved in her case.
"The time will come for the men responsible for this to answer for their behavior," DeLay said, raising the prospect of impeaching members of a separate and independent branch of government. Later, he complained of "an arrogant and out of control judiciary that thumbs its nose at Congress and the president."
Bush, declining to endorse DeLay's comments, said Friday that he supports "an independent judiciary." He added, "I believe in proper checks and balances."
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist of Tennessee said last week that the judges "handled it in a fair and independent way," although he had hoped for a different result.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 11, 2005 09:02:19 AM new
Question for our far right members.... If DeLays actions and continued presence as House Leader undermines the reputation of the republican party among independants and moderates, should DeLay step down for the benefit of the party?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 11, 2005 09:52:43 AM new
Bear - that's not the question. It's a nice way to avoid the question but it is not the question. Right now, his presence in the minds of many, including conservatives, is undermining the party. He is under numerous ethics violations and has shown a rather staggering lack of understanding of the purpose of the judicial branch of the government. He's become a lightening rod for controversy and example of all that people think is wrong with the republican party (specifically overwhelming arrogance and an "above the law" attitude). Do you think that he can continue to be a beneficial leader for the party?
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
posted on April 11, 2005 11:57:30 AM new
Well Ted Kennedy is still around.
Did Bill Clinton Hurt the party? As Bear says it happens to both parties. It is just going to have to play out and see what happens.
What the democrats have to figure out why did they lose the election was it because someone hurt their party or were the issues the question. The republicans have to look at this and say will he hurt the party so a republican cannot be elected again?
Yes, 1 person can hurt the party but it can be repaired again. I think so.
_________________
posted on April 11, 2005 12:14:09 PM new
Libra - All you have to do is take a look at how many times the Clinton scandal is mentioned on these very boards five years after he left office to see that yes, his actions had a lasting negative effect.
This has nothing to do with last years elections. This is about someone that is in a highly public, high ranking government position that has shown serial disrespect for the office not to mention a rather boggling degree of arrogance as evidenced with his statement that federal judges should be removed because they had the gall to make rulings according to matters of law as opposed to political pressures.
Even the president is backing away from the guy. Haven't you noticed how high ranking party members are distancing themselves from him? The only people you here speaking up for him are the extreme edge of the TV political pundits that would defend anyone of anything as long as they were a republican. Hell, even Fox is having a hard time finding anyone with a name to say anything positive.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
[ edited by fenix03 on Apr 11, 2005 12:19 PM ]
posted on April 11, 2005 01:51:04 PM new
One trip was from 1997. The recent ABC news report is called investigative reporting. Shouldn't that have been investigated back then and now now. See they are bringing up the past also. So I guess what is good for one is good for another.
_________________
[ edited by Libra63 on Apr 11, 2005 01:52 PM ]
posted on April 11, 2005 02:24:17 PM new
Quest to get a Republican to fight DeLay may have crossed a line
April 11, 2005
BY ROBERT NOVAK SUN-TIMES COLUMNIST
On March 24, former Congressman Bob Livingston was sent an e-mail by a New York Times editorial page staffer suggesting he write an op-ed essay. Would Livingston, who in 1998 gave up certain elevation to be House speaker because of a sexual affair, write about how Majority Leader Tom DeLay should now act under fire? In a subsequent conversation, it was made clear the Times wanted the prominent Republican to say DeLay should step aside for the good of the party.
Livingston in effect declined by responding that if he wrote anything for the Times, it would be pro-DeLay. But this remarkable case of that august newspaper fishing for an op-ed piece makes it appear part of a calculated campaign to bring down the single most powerful Republican in Congress. The Democratic establishment and left-wing activists have targeted DeLay as the way to end a decade of Republican control of the House.
Ironically, this campaign's intensity may protect DeLay from Republicans who in their secret hearts would like to see the sometimes-overbearing Texan fall. No GOP politician wants to be the handmaiden of DeLay's Democratic detractors. Last Wednesday's closed-door caucus of House Republicans gave DeLay a standing ovation. Contrary to claims on leftist Web sites, no Republican member has called for the majority leader's resignation.
Accusations of DeLay going on junkets funded by private sources and putting relatives on non-government payrolls reflect common congressional practice. The assault on DeLay did not begin until he redistricted Texas congressional seats, which changed the 2004 election from a net loss to a net gain for House Republicans. That accomplishment, however, makes it much harder to rip holes in DeLay's House GOP support.
At least 18 news organizations now have assigned reporters to cover DeLay, but the quest by The New York Times for a prominent Republican to suggest his resignation may cross a line. Livingston, a Louisiana congressman who was Appropriations Committee chairman, was set to succeed Newt Gingrich as speaker in November 1998, when he stunned Washington by announcing his resignation from Congress after allegations of a sexual affair.
New York Times editorial page staffer Tobin Harshaw sent the March 24 e-mail to Livingston, now a Washington lobbyist. Chris Terrell, a principal in The Livingston Group, declined to give this column a copy of the message but read it to us. Harshaw, reached in New York, confirmed he had a conversation with Terrell, but added: ''We don't comment on assignments, written or unwritten.''
According to Terrell, Harshaw's e-mail suggested Livingston might want to write ''a short op-ed on DeLay's political future.'' Terrell said he telephoned Harshaw, saying his boss would ''write a favorable piece,'' then asked: ''Is that really what you're seeking or is that what you would print?''
It clearly was not. While Harshaw asserted ''we would welcome any thoughts'' by Livingston, Terrell quoted him as saying ''we are seeking those who would go on the record or state for the good of the party he (DeLay) should step aside.''
The importance of such a column by so prestigious a Republican as Livingston would break a solid GOP front supporting DeLay. Potential Republican defectors have stayed loyal to DeLay because of Democratic leaders. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, abandoning traditions of at least minimum courtesy between party leaders, has led the campaign against her Republican counterpart. Rep. Rahm Emanuel (D-Ill.), the aggressive new chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, has made this the cornerstone of efforts to recapture the House in 2006.
The one crack in the pro-DeLay alliance was a March 28 editorial in The Wall Street Journal charging the majority leader with ''betraying the broader set of principles that brought him into office.'' To be accused of imitating the ethical standards of the Democrats he deplored was viewed by DeLay as a ''gut shot.''
The question: Would this editorial start a chain reaction of Republican House members abandoning DeLay, much as Democrats turned against Speaker Jim Wright in 1989? Those defections doomed Wright, whose fall was followed in five years by the Republican capture of the House. Since Bob Livingston would not get the ball rolling, the campaign to get DeLay still needs a major anti-DeLay Republican to go public.
posted on April 11, 2005 02:29:47 PM new
::but the quest by The New York Times for a prominent Republican to suggest his resignation may cross a line.::
I don't disagree with that Bear. The media should report the news, not attept to create it.
~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~ • ~~~
If it's really "common" sense, why do so few people actually have it?
