{"id":2282,"date":"2007-09-25T16:35:00","date_gmt":"2007-09-25T22:35:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/09\/pearces-failure-to-refute-allegation-arouses-suspicion\/"},"modified":"2007-09-25T16:35:00","modified_gmt":"2007-09-25T22:35:00","slug":"pearces-failure-to-refute-allegation-arouses-suspicion","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2007\/09\/pearces-failure-to-refute-allegation-arouses-suspicion\/","title":{"rendered":"Pearce’s failure to refute allegation arouses suspicion"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Many who find their names on a Washington<\/st1:place><\/st1:state> watchdog group\u2019s list of the most corrupt members of Congress tend to lose their jobs. <\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Perhaps that\u2019s why U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce<\/a> and his staff have so badly botched the response to allegations the group made against the GOP congressman from Southern New Mexico<\/st1:place> last week. Perhaps Pearce is scared.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington<\/a> alleges that Pearce failed to report his sale of the assets of Lea Fishing Tools, Inc. to Key Energy Services<\/a> for more than 540,000 shares of stock in 2003. The group says Pearce was required to report the sale and his failure to do so likely violated the Ethics in Government Act<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The group also alleges that the congressman may have advocated for drilling on the Otero Mesa in exchange for campaign contributions from those with ties to oil companies.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The allegations landed Pearce last week on CREW\u2019s list of the 22 most corrupt members of Congress<\/a>. It\u2019s the third year the group has compiled such a list. As reported in The Hill<\/a>, of the 25 members of Congress the group listed last year, 10 are no longer in Congress and eight others are under federal investigation.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The second allegation made against Pearce, related to the Otero Mesa, was easy to answer, and Pearce did it in a news release sent Friday. Pearce wasn\u2019t even in Congress when the Bureau of Land Management decided to support drilling there. Some of his biggest financial backers stand to gain from drilling on Otero Mesa, but, at worst, that creates an appearance of impropriety. It\u2019s not proof of actual impropriety.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

But Pearce\u2019s response to the first allegation has only helped arouse suspicion. On the day CREW\u2019s list was released, Pearce\u2019s only response was to call the allegations lies. His staff promised a more in-depth response by Friday that would include supporting documents. That never happened, and Pearce instead put out the release again calling the allegations lies.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

He did say in that release that their falsehood could be demonstrated and that he had double-checked with House staffers who keep an eye on this sort of thing. But his office has refused, repeatedly, to explain why the allegations are false. Instead, he tried to turn the attention on CREW, calling the group partisan and saying it is out to get him because he\u2019s a Republican. He provided no evidence to support that allegation. (If you want more detail on Pearce\u2019s response, click here<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

CREW has its own baggage<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

I\u2019ve learned by spending some time on the Internet that CREW is staffed largely by Democrats. Its director is a former assistant U.S.<\/st1:country-region> attorney who has also worked as a staffer for two Democratic members of Congress \u2013 one of them the overly partisan Sen. Charles Schumer<\/a> of New York<\/st1:place><\/st1:state>.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

CREW also has some baggage in its past. The Hill<\/a> slammed the group in a March 2005 editorial for refusing to disclose who sits on its board of directors. The other eight groups that made up the Congressional Ethics Coalition had released such lists.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

\u201cCREW\u2019s secrecy is hypocritical,\u201d The Hill wrote. \u201c\u2026 CREW repeatedly demands greater disclosure by political players. \u2026 If CREW wants clean politics in Washington<\/st1:place><\/st1:state>, it needs to learn that transparency starts at home.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The Hill went on in the editorial to point this out: \u201cIn the overwhelming majority of complaints and critiques detailed in news releases posted on CREW\u2019s website, Republicans or their allies are the targets.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

There is some truth there. Of the 22 members of Congress who made CREW\u2019s list this year, 18 are Republicans. Those 10 from last year\u2019s list who are no longer in Congress are all Republicans.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

But such criticism is not entirely fair. As Carter Bundy<\/a> pointed out last week on this site, CREW\u2019s study of nepotism in Congress listed 41 Democrats and 55 Republicans. And, regardless of the fact that they are Republicans, few would argue that those who left Congress amid scandal last year were unfairly targeted.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Not the way to head into an election year<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

The point? Pearce says the explanation for why his financial report is accurate is simple, but he refuses to provide it. He instead makes allegations he doesn\u2019t substantiate against CREW. I\u2019ve provided evidence about CREW\u2019s ties to Democrats that Pearce could have used, but he did not.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

CREW, meanwhile, has provided a detailed explanation<\/a> and supporting documentation<\/a> to back up its allegations.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

It appears that Pearce is trying to say as little as possible in the hopes this will go away. We\u2019re heading into an election year and Pearce has already drawn two challengers and the eyes of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee<\/a>, so I\u2019m betting the allegations will stick around. In addition to being covered by this site, the situation has also been reported in the Alamogordo Daily News<\/a> and Santa Fe New Mexican<\/a>.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

And the allegations, true or not, are important. We\u2019re talking about a multi-million dollar transaction that gave Pearce a great deal of stock in an oil company that does quite a bit of business in his district, and the fact that he owns the stock doesn\u2019t appear anywhere on his financial disclosure reports. Why?<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Why won\u2019t Pearce explain this, especially given his assertion that the explanation is simple? His failure to do so only fans the flames of suspicion. With Congress\u2019 approval rating in the teens, that\u2019s not the way to head into an election year.<\/p>\n

<\/o:p><\/p>\n

Pearce needs to fully explain the situation.<\/p>\n

\n

\n

Special disclosure: As reported in this site\u2019s ethical guidelines, I am friends with one of Pearce\u2019s 2008 challengers. Click here<\/a> to learn more.<\/p>\n

\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Many who find their names on a Washington watchdog group\u2019s list of the most corrupt members of Congress tend to lose their jobs. Perhaps that\u2019s why U.S. Rep. Steve Pearce and his staff have so badly botched the response to allegations the group made against the GOP congressman from Southern New Mexico last week. Perhaps […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2282","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2282","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2282"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2282\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2282"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2282"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2282"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}