GOP Abandons Past Principles

GOP Abandons Past Principles for DeLay by Sarah Littman

published 4/19/2005

"And I want to say to you bluntly: You live today with the most corrupt congressional leadership we have seen in the 20th century. You have to go back to the Gilded Age of the 1870's and 1880's to have anything comparable (to) that we've lived through."

Guess the speaker. Nancy Pelosi? One of the those left-wing liberal wackos? (Buzzer) Wrong answer. These stirring words were uttered by none other than conservative Republican Newt Gingrich back in February 1992.

But that was when the Republicans were out of power. Back when Gringich's "Contract with America" called for "the end of government that is too big, too intrusive, and too easy with the people's money." Wow. Did he really say that? Who could reconcile that GOP with the profligate, budget-busting, personal-choice interfering government we have in power today?

The late 19th century British historian Lord Acton observed: "Power tends to corrupt; absolute power corrupts absolutely." That's why the framers of our Constitution called for "separation of powers" and "checks and balances". With the executive branch and both houses of Congress under GOP control, and with ominous calls by the president and his cronies to rein in the judiciary, perhaps it's not surprising that Gingrich's quote (which referred to the Democratic leadership of Congress back in 1992) remains so apt today. Plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose.

Nothing exemplifies this regime's corruption better than the antics surrounding House Majority leader Tom DeLay. This is a guy who was admonished for unethical conduct four times in a mere six years by a unanimous vote of a bipartisan Ethics Committee in a Republican-dominated House. The man who, upon being asked by a government employee not to smoke on government property replied, "I am the federal government." (Can you spell h-u-b-r-i-s?)

So what did his party do about this? Well, last fall it decided to change the ethics rules to virtually guarantee that no new ethics investigations will begin. Then it fired the Ethics Committee chairman, Joel Hefley, and two other members, replacing them with party loyalists including two who have donated money to DeLay's legal defense fund.

Rep. Henry Bonilla, R-Texas, who sponsored H.R. 5, the so-called "DeLay Rule," said it was designed to protect against "crackpot" prosecutors whose indictments might get in the way of House Republicans' ability to choose their own leaders.

Wait a minute. Wasn't it the GOP that made the "no indicted leaders'" rule in the first place, back in 1993? Oh, but that was different. Then, it was a Democrat under attack (Dan Rosenkowski D-Ill.) When Mr. DeLay was busy ramming through the Clinton impeachment proceedings, the Republicans extolled the importance of the "rule of law"; it was Bill Clinton pleading that "we must stop the politics of personal destruction." Now that the "rule of law" is on the other foot, it's Mr. DeLay whining that the Democrats are engaging "in the politics of personal destruction." And his party's changing the rule of law to protect him.

Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Bridgeport, seems confused about this one. "We won the election in '94 because we were going to be different, and what I continue to see is a slow but very consistent erosion in what made us different," he said. But he voted for H.R.5, which changed the ethics rules. Then he was one of the few Republicans who co-sponsored H.R. 131 (the Mollohan bill) which would undo the changes made to the House ethics rules at the beginning of the 109th Congress. However, he voted against H.R. 153 (sponsored by Nancy Pelosi) which would have brought H.R. 131 to the floor and established a bipartisan task force to recommend changes to the House ethics rules. Reminds you of "I voted for it before I voted against it," doesn't it? At a Town Hall meeting April 9th, Mr. Shays, while criticizing Mr. DeLay, was adamant that he wouldn't call for his resignation. Yet two days later, the AP reported Mr. Shays said: "My party is going to have to decide whether we are going to make excuses for Tom to the detriment of Republicans seeking election." Republicans like...himself. Shays won the last election by his smallest majority yet, and holds what's considered one of the most vulnerable seats in the House.

The question I have for Mr. Shays is this: How can a man with no respect for the law be entrusted with the responsibility of being a lawmaker?

Ditch Tom DeLay - without delay.

Sarah Littman, who lives in Greenwich, is author of "Confessions of a Closet Catholic", published by Dutton Children's Books.