Nancy's House unclean

Last Updated: 6:28 AM, March 4, 2010

Posted: 3:06 AM, March 4, 2010

Comments: 24

| More

Kirsten Powers

Oh, the irony.

After claiming that she would preside over the "most ethical Congress in history," Nancy Pelosi is instead presiding over the same kind of shenanigans that cost Republicans their majority in 2006.

Yesterday, iconic Harlem Congressman and key Pelosi lieutenant Charles Rangel was forced to resign his chairmanship of the House Ways and Means Committee after he was reprimanded by the Ethics Committee for travel to the Caribbean.

Later in the day, one-term New York Congressman Eric Massa, a fellow Democrat, announced he would not be seeking re-election, though he claimed it was completely unrelated to charges that he made a sexual advances on a male aide.

It's 2006 redux, albeit at this point, on a much smaller scale.

You will remember that in 2006, what made the scandal involving Rep. Mark Foley extra-explosive was information that indicated the House Republican leadership had been aware of the accusations but did nothing substantive to deal with them.

Turns out House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) knew of the sexual-harassment allegations against Massa.

True, they have been referred to that farce known as the House Ethics Committee -- you know, the one that "admonished" Rangel for his abuse of power and blatant violation of the ethics rules put in place in response to the Republican travel scandals of 2006.

In case you didn't know, "admonish" is another way of saying for "did nothing."

At least Massa read the writing on the wall and is making himself scarce.

Rangel, on the other hand, held on as long as he could -- telling reporters as recently as Tuesday night that he would not step down as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, despite the admonishment.

Pelosi chose as one of her top allies in the House a man who has been under an ethics cloud that is likely going to get much worse.

She was reckless in allowing him to stay in control of a powerful committee rather than dealing with the issue before it got on the national radar.

Now each time the Ethics Committee rules on Rangel's various issues, it will be another bad story about Democratic corruption.

The fact that Republicans had a greater volume of corruption issues is irrelevant. If you run saying you are going to give voters a change to a clean government, then don't make one of your key allies someone who is ethically challenged.

Rangel has been accused of some pretty bad stuff.

The Ethics Committee is looking at a range of issues, including his failure to pay taxes on a villa in the Dominican Republic and his violating rent-control laws in New York City.

Oh, and he also "forgot" to report $500,000, which he has sitting in a bank account.

At least the money wasn't being stored in a freezer.

kirstenpowers@aol.com

Topics

| More

Comments (24)

Post Your Comment

Report Abuse

amstaffbru

03/07/2010 7:48 AM

QUEEN NANCY the P.LEGOSI,DOES NOT CARE FOR ANYONE EXCEPT QUEEN NANCY the P.LEGOSI.......SHE'S THE DEFINITION OF THE WORD ''NARCISSISITC EGOTISTICAL MANIAC''...
ALL SHE DOES IS SIT BEHIND OBI.WANNA.B.PRES.I.DENT,AND SHOW THAT BOTOXED SMILE WHILE OUR GENIUS VICE(SQUAD)PRES.I.DENT,JOE BIDEN,NODS.....SMILES AND NODS,SOUNDS LIKE A PARIS HILTON MOVIE...
Report Abuse

nutJoba

03/06/2010 7:11 PM

Why are the libs so threatened that they will not even let anyone READ THE BILL?
Report Abuse

nutJoba

03/06/2010 7:09 PM

DonOne
Get a job and get your own insurance. I am tired of paying for you and your welfare ilk.
10% of people, citizens, do not have health care. many of those CHOOSE to not get it because they are young and healthy.

What's the libs hidden angenda here is to cover illegals, so they can stay in the country and keep voting the whack job left fringe into office. Otherwise, the centrist lefts/rights will continue to dominate and that threatens the he11 out of you and keith olbermann.
Report Abuse

LiberalsAreFacists

03/06/2010 5:58 PM

DonOne

03/06/2010 1:29 PM

It can also come down to who do you trust with your health more, the government or the insurance companies? I'll take the lesser of two evils.

***

So you're siding with the insurance companies? That's surprising!
Report Abuse

Melssa

03/06/2010 3:13 PM

If you want to read a great article on what our healthcare plan will look like and how it will effect you, read the article on the front page of the Boston Globe today.
Report Abuse

DonOne

03/06/2010 1:29 PM

It can also come down to who do you trust with your health more, the government or the insurance companies? I'll take the lesser of two evils.
Report Abuse

DonOne

03/06/2010 12:21 PM

Let us hope or pray this bill is crammed down the throat of the obstructionists hired by the insurance industry.

We have two choices, pass this bill or do nothing. Anyone disputing this is not a credible part of the debate. The "do nothing" Republicans will once again promise this time they will do something about healthcare. The boy who cried wolf has more credibility than this. So do something or do nothing are the choices.

Do nothing - healthcare costs go up and millions upon millions are added to the ranks of the uninsured.

Do something - healthcare costs go up for some and down for most. 33 million get coverage. That is 33 million middle class citizens. The poor, the old, the disabled, convicted criminals, politicians, rich people and even terrorists have insurance now. The middle class is loosing it fast. Not only that millions more will not loose insurance in the future. Even the non-partisan CBO says this will bring costs down.

It is a no brainer.
Report Abuse

LiberalsAreFacists

03/05/2010 10:59 AM

Melssa

03/05/2010 5:50 AM

These are the some of the same people who think the American people are too dumb to understand the Obamacare Bill they are trying to shove through Congress. I hear it everynight on the news, "once the people understand what they are getting, they will be very happy". Did you realize how stupid we are? God help us all.

***

I have to agree with you on that. And you bring up a good question, If they say "once the people understand what they are getting, they will be very happy" why haven't they made the bill public? Why does Pelosi refuse to let anyone outside her little circle know what exactly is in the bill?

And how can ANYBODY be for this bill when NOBODY knows what's in it?