• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

With No Warning, House Republicans Vote to Gut Independent Ethics Office

Nilly

stb
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
6,873
Reaction score
3,809
Location
DC
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Progressive
With No Warning, House Republicans Vote to Gut Independent Ethics Office | NY Times


WASHINGTON — House Republicans, overriding their top leaders, voted on Monday to significantly curtail the power of an independent ethics office set up in 2008 in the aftermath of corruption scandals that sent three members of Congress to jail.

The move to effectively kill the Office of Congressional Ethics was not made public until late Monday, when Representative Robert W. Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, announced that the House Republican Conference had approved the change. There was no advance notice or debate on the measure.

House GOP votes to gut independent ethics office | Fox News

WASHINGTON – House Republicans on Monday voted to eviscerate the Office of Congressional Ethics, the independent body created in 2008 to investigate allegations of misconduct by lawmakers after several bribery and corruption scandals sent members to prison.

Under the ethics change pushed by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., the non-partisan Office of Congressional Ethics would fall under the control of the House Ethics Committee, which is run by lawmakers. It would be known as the Office of Congressional Complaint Review, and the rule change would require that "any matter that may involve a violation of criminal law must be referred to the Committee on Ethics for potential referral to law enforcement agencies after an affirmative vote by the members," according to Goodlatte's office.

Bryson Morgan, who worked as an investigative lawyer at the Office of Congressional Ethics from 2013 until 2015, said that under his interpretation of the new rules, members of the House committee could move to stop an inquiry even before it was completed.

“This is huge,” said Mr. Morgan, who now defends lawmakers targeted in ethics investigations. “It effectively allows the committee to shut down any independent investigation into member misconduct. Historically, the ethics committee has failed to investigate member misconduct.”

Swamp 1 - America 0

Wonder what could possible go wrong with a self regulating congress devoid of ethics oversight and Trump at the helm.

Checks and balances....
 
Last edited:
I suppose we'll find out when Trump is in office. By the way, Trump isn't yet in office. You do know that, right?

Yes. What in my post suggested I didn't?
 
I just spent 15 minutes scouting around....lots of yapping on the internet, not a soul claiming to have knowledge of what is going on beyond assumptions.

I wonder.

Looks to me like the Trump Party is going lean and mean, getting ready to work on a TRUMP schedule, getting ready to get some work done.
 
Last edited:
WTF?

Thier first post election act, is to remove themselves from oversight?

And Trump's Twitter says this:

"I thought and felt I would win big, easily over the fabled 270 (306). When they canceled fireworks, they knew, and so did I."

Wha???

What about draining the swamp, Donald?
 
WTF?

Thier first post election act, is to remove themselves from oversight?

And Trump's Twitter says this:

"I thought and felt I would win big, easily over the fabled 270 (306). When they canceled fireworks, they knew, and so did I."

Wha???

What about draining the swamp, Donald?

It was bureaucracy which was a net negative for the people, which does not fly under the Trump Party so it had to go I think is what happened, but these creeps who pass for journalists these days dont seem to know.
 
With No Warning, House Republicans Vote to Gut Independent Ethics Office | NY Times




House GOP votes to gut independent ethics office | Fox News





Swamp 1 - America 0

Wonder what could possible go wrong with a self regulating congress devoid of ethics oversight and Trump at the helm.

Checks and balances....
Take a look at Trump's agency and cabinet picks. Then tell me which direction the swamp is going. On second thought, no need to tell me anything. We can see the writing on the wall, and so can the GOP. This was a required public vote. Now imagine what they and Trump's picks are doing behind cosed doors!

Between shenanigans like this, and the upcoming SC Justice(s) [all off the Heritage list], America is going to be set back for at least a decade, or more.
 
It was bureaucracy which was a net negative for the people, which does not fly under the Trump Party so it had to go I think is what happened, but these creeps who pass for journalists these days dont seem to know.
Has the party got his Tweets?

Edit: Wait, did I misunderstand? You're saying the Ethics Oversight Committee was a burdensome bureaucracy?

So it had to go?
 
Has the party got his Tweets?

Edit: Wait, did I misunderstand? You're saying the Ethics Oversight Committee was a burdensome bureaucracy?

So it had to go?

That is my working hypothesis.

I am waiting to find a journalist who knows.
 
With No Warning, House Republicans Vote to Gut Independent Ethics Office | NY Times




House GOP votes to gut independent ethics office | Fox News





Swamp 1 - America 0

Wonder what could possible go wrong with a self regulating congress devoid of ethics oversight and Trump at the helm.

Checks and balances....
This is fantastic news. The board served their country and the members can now go back to the private sector. No need to waste tax dollars on a program that's no longer needed. We don't need unnecessary government programs.
 
Your nuts, if you'll except that from your government! :doh

Look here Chomsky , I am pretty sure I remember reading an argument that Congress was taking too many examples from the EU, that body that does not work and has never worked, that this was one of them, and that both parties have been in general agreement that it does not do any good, that on balance it does harm.

Our President Elect Trump would look at that situation and give the order to optimize for getting work done, that the Bull **** gets thrown over-board.

Hold your horses for the facts.

That's my advice.
 
Last edited:
It was bureaucracy which was a net negative for the people, which does not fly under the Trump Party so it had to go I think is what happened, but these creeps who pass for journalists these days dont seem to know.

This is fantastic news. The board served their country and the members can now go back to the private sector. No need to waste tax dollars on a program that's no longer needed. We don't need unnecessary government programs.

One of you will have to explain how the **** ethical oversight is an unnecessary bureaucracy.

This isn't political oversight. It's from a bipartisan committee ensuring ethical standards are heeded. Now, congress can simply stop investigations into their own behaviour midway if they so wish.

I can understand people wanting to remove beurocracy, and I can even understand the want to remove liberal blockers on conservative policies. But can we not all agree that an ethical government is a superior one?
 
I just spent 15 minutes scouting around....lots of yapping on the internet, not a soul claiming to have knowledge of what is going on beyond assumptions.

I wonder.

Looks to me like the Trump Party is going lean and mean, getting ready to work on a TRUMP schedule, getting ready to get some work done.

Mental Gymnastics... do they have a medal above gold?
 
Look here Chomppers (I mean this in a light fun way, cause as we all know I need to have my fun), I am pretty sure I remember reading an argument that Congress was taking too many examples from the EU, that body that does not work and has never worked, that this was one of them, and that both parties have been in general agreement that it does not do any good, that on balance it does harm.

Our President Elect Trump would look at that situation and give the order to optimize for getting work done, that the Bull **** gets thrown over-board.

Hold your horses for the facts.

That's my advice.
With all respect, your cries here remind me so much of the Trump campaign, where we saw Trump do or say something with our own eyes & ears, and then Conway (such a perfect name for her) would make the rounds and say: "Oh, you only think your eyes saw that and your ears heard that, here's what really happened"!

:lamo

These guys don't need less oversight, they need *more* oversight. Civilian oversight. As in "The People watching their government"!

You're falling for this hook, line, and sinker.
 
One of you will have to explain how the **** ethical oversight is an unnecessary bureaucracy.

This isn't political oversight. It's from a bipartisan committee ensuring ethical standards are heeded. Now, congress can simply stop investigations into their own behaviour midway if they so wish.

I can understand people wanting to remove beurocracy, and I can even understand the want to remove liberal blockers on conservative policies. But can we not all agree that an ethical government is a superior one?

All I need to do is tell you to go look at all of the politically motivated legal actions against politicians that have happened in the last years. That and also how poorly our political system works under all of these clean living laws we have enacted over my lifetime (at the start they were call "sunshine" laws).

Dont think for one second I am backing down here, Jedi Mind Tricks will not be working on me.
 
One of you will have to explain how the **** ethical oversight is an unnecessary bureaucracy.

This isn't political oversight. It's from a bipartisan committee ensuring ethical standards are heeded. Now, congress can simply stop investigations into their own behaviour midway if they so wish.

I can understand people wanting to remove beurocracy, and I can even understand the want to remove liberal blockers on conservative policies. But can we not all agree that an ethical government is a superior one?
I can't even imagine the mental masturbation one must go through to come to the conclusion that removing government ethics oversight, will make government better!

:doh

"Now if we could get rid of that pesky Constitution and Supreme Court, we could really be effective!" :mrgreen:
 
With all respect, your cries here remind me so much of the Trump campaign, where we saw Trump do or say something with our own eyes & ears, and then Conway (such a perfect name for her) would make the rounds and say: "Oh, you only think your eyes saw that and your ears heard that, here's what really happened"!

:lamo

These guys don't need less oversight, they need *more* oversight. Civilian oversight. As in "The People watching their government"!

You're falling for this hook, line, and sinker.

Dont worry about me, argue the point.
 
I can't even imagine the mental masturbation one must go through to come to the conclusion that removing government ethics oversight, will make government better!

:doh

"Now if we could get rid of that pesky Constitution and Supreme Court, we could really be effective!" :mrgreen:

Lucky for you, this is all irrelevant.

Argue the point.
 
All I need to do is tell you to go look at all of the politically motivated legal actions against politicians that have happened in the last years. That and also how poorly our political system works under all of these clean living laws we have enacted over my lifetime (at the start they were call "sunshine" laws).

Dont think for one second I am backing down here, Jedi Mind Tricks will not be working on me.

What? No. I don't get it. You'll have to tell me more than that. Sorry.

As for sunshine laws, you disagree with transparency to the public in govt? Ok, fine, but the OP isn't about transparency, it's about ethical oversight. An ethical oversight committee is one that makes me more comfortable with the idea of a less transparent govt (not that I'm comfortable with that but for sake of argument). If you don't like/want a transparent govt, then internal oversight (particularly ethical) is vital.
 
Last edited:
I can't even imagine the mental masturbation one must go through to come to the conclusion that removing government ethics oversight, will make government better!

:doh

"Now if we could get rid of that pesky Constitution and Supreme Court, we could really be effective!" :mrgreen:
Is the ethics oversight necessary amid a slew of other methods of oversight? Maybe an Obama presidency needs a multitude of oversight boards but Trump obviously doesn't.
 
Is the ethics oversight necessary amid a slew of other methods of oversight? Maybe an Obama presidency needs a multitude of oversight boards but Trump obviously doesn't.

Ah so you're of the belief that oversight is only necessary when it's on the other side.

It's little wonder no-one takes you seriously anymore Reinoe.
 
Ah so you're of the belief that oversight is only necessary when it's on the other side.

It's little wonder no-one takes you seriously anymore Reinoe.

Perhaps you should read what I said again. There are already methods of oversight that exist. This oversight board is exactly the type of unnecessary overlap that we should be getting rid of. I'm not going to respond to your personal attacks as they're not relevant.
 
What? No. I don't get it. You'll have to tell me more than that. Sorry.

As for sunshine laws, you disagree with transparency to the public in govt? Ok, fine, but the OP isn't about transparency, it's about ethical oversight. An ethical oversight committee is one that makes me more comfortable with the idea of a less transparent govt (not that I'm comfortable with that but for sake of argument). If you don't like/want a transparent govt, then internal oversight (particularly ethical) is vital.

Has congress worked better or worse since this program was started in 08?

I say worse.

Did you read JONATHAN RAUCH's piece? Do.

How American Politics Became So Ineffective - The Atlantic


I was a great admirer of the Daley Machine when it worked, which was way better than we have now.


I don’t have a quick solution to the current mess, but I do think it would be easy, in principle, to start moving in a better direction. Although returning parties and middlemen to anything like their 19th-century glory is not conceivable—or, in today’s America, even desirable—strengthening parties and middlemen is very doable. Restrictions inhibiting the parties from coordinating with their own candidates serve to encourage political wildcatting, so repeal them. Limits on donations to the parties drive money to unaccountable outsiders, so lift them. Restoring the earmarks that help grease legislative success requires nothing more than a change in congressional rules. And there are all kinds of ways the parties could move insiders back to the center of the nomination process. If they wanted to, they could require would-be candidates to get petition signatures from elected officials and county party chairs, or they could send unbound delegates to their conventions (as several state parties are doing this year), or they could enhance the role of middlemen in a host of other ways.

Building party machines and political networks is what career politicians naturally do, if they’re allowed to do it. So let them. I’m not talking about rigging the system to exclude challengers or prevent insurgencies. I’m talking about de-rigging the system to reduce its pervasive bias against middlemen. Then they can do their job, thereby making the world safe for challengers and insurgencies.

This is the direction that the Trump Party is going in, Given how badly Washington has worked, and for how long, I say full speed ahead.
 
Last edited:
Perhaps you should read what I said again. There are already methods of oversight that exist. This oversight board is exactly the type of unnecessary overlap that we should be getting rid of. I'm not going to respond to your personal attacks as they're not relevant.

Of ethical oversight? Name them.

As to the whole, 'reduce size of govt spiel' they're replacing it with a new office that they will just oversee themselves. So net change to the number of methods of oversight is 0. Oh, and a convenient increase to their power. So no, I don't really understand your point at all.

Has congress worked better or worse since this program was started in 08?

I say worse.

Did you read JONATHAN RAUCH's piece? Do.

How American Politics Became So Ineffective - The Atlantic

I was a great admirer of the Daley Machine when it worked, which was way better than we have now.

This is the direction that the Trump Party is going in, Given how badly Washington has worked, and for how long, I say full speed ahead.

Too late to read the whole thing now but I don't see anything in that article suggesting that surrendering our ethics will make American politics more effective.
 
Back
Top Bottom