Editorial: Ethics Investigators

Get a dog with teeth

14 Jan 2008 // When House lawmakers return to Washington tomorrow, they need to strengthen a proposal to enforce their own ethics rules.

It was an entire year ago when Speaker Nancy E. Pelosi (D., Calif.) pledged to get tough with corrupt, unethical lawmakers. But after the applause died down, nothing much happened.

Late last year, a House task force finally gave its recommendations. It proposed creating an Office of Congressional Ethics to investigate complaints against lawmakers and forward its findings to the House Ethics Committee.

This proposal is good, but not good enough. If this new office is to get the attention of wrongdoers, it needs subpoena power. As the proposal stands now, investigators wouldn't have that tool to obtain evidence. The House should allow this new office to go after the truth with the full force of law.

Creating the office will cost tax money. But taxpayers will be well served if public disclosure of the investigation office's findings force the House to finally police itself.

During an embarrassing stretch of nearly two years under Republican rule, the Ethics Committee couldn't even hold meetings, let alone investigate anyone. The panel was paralyzed by partisan feuding.

The Jack Abramoff lobbying scandal turned from smoke to a bonfire while the Ethics Committee yawned. In other cases, lawmakers were convicted of taking bribes while the committee took no meaningful action.

Partisan disagreement over ethics enforcement persists. All Republican members of the task force refused to join their Democratic colleagues in recommending the new office.

Under the new proposal, six members of the ethics office would be appointed jointly by the speaker and the minority leader. No current lawmakers could serve; the intent is to appoint ex-judges or former members of Congress. Only two members would be needed to start an ethics investigation, lasting up to 75 days.

The independent office would send its report to the Ethics Committee, which would have 45 days to act on it. Most reports would be made public.

The task force decided subpoena power isn't needed because lawmakers under scrutiny will feel compelled to cooperate without it.

Fat chance. Where is the leverage to get them to testify, when they know that dodging the initial inquiry will only send them to the coddling lap of the Ethics Committee?

This extra screening is needed, to sort out partisan "gotcha" complaints and to put pressure on the Ethics Committee to take action. House leaders should move swiftly to establish this new office, and to give it real power.