{"id":2972,"date":"2008-03-13T11:22:00","date_gmt":"2008-03-13T17:22:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nmpolitics.net\/index\/2008\/03\/u-s-house-creates-independent-ethics-office\/"},"modified":"2008-03-13T11:22:00","modified_gmt":"2008-03-13T17:22:00","slug":"u-s-house-creates-independent-ethics-office","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/2008\/03\/u-s-house-creates-independent-ethics-office\/","title":{"rendered":"U.S. House creates independent ethics office"},"content":{"rendered":"

\n

\n

The U.S. House of Representatives<\/a> approved on Tuesday the creation of an independent office that has the authority to initiate investigations into allegations of ethics violations by House members and is required to disclose its findings publicly.<\/p>\n

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

\n

It\u2019s a strong move that\u2019s being characterized by the Washington Post<\/a> as \u201cone of the most significant changes to (House) ethics rules in decades.\u201d <\/p>\n

\n

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

\"\"<\/a>U.S. Rep. Tom Udall<\/a>, D-N.M., voted to approve the creation of the independent Office of Congressional Ethics. New Mexico<\/st1:place><\/st1:state>\u2019s GOP representatives, Steve Pearce<\/a> and Heather Wilson<\/a>, voted against it.<\/p>\n

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

The measure was ultimately approved by a vote of 229-182, with 159 Republicans and 23 Democrats opposing it.<\/p>\n

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

\u201cNew Mexicans and people across the nation have called on Congress to end the culture of corruption in Washington<\/st1:place><\/st1:state>, and the House has responded,\u201d Udall said in a news release. \u201cThis new ethics rule truly makes history. For the first time, ethics violations will be reviewed by individuals who are not members of Congress, a system I hope will help ensure that we in the people\u2019s House adhere to strong ethical standards.\u201d<\/p>\n

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

The six members who oversee the office will be jointly appointed by the House speaker and minority leader. I criticized the proposal<\/a> to create the office in November because, at the time, the proposal didn\u2019t allow the office to initiate investigations, leaving that power solely in the hands of House members.<\/p>\n

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

Giving the office the power to initiate investigations goes a long way toward greater accountability and makes all the difference. Allegations against Pearce and Wilson should have been investigated in 2007, but a longstanding truce between House Democrats and Republicans kept anyone from initiating complaints.<\/p>\n

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

There should have been a formal ethics investigation into David Iglesias\u2019<\/a> allegations that Wilson<\/st1:place><\/st1:city> pressured him to speed indictments in a public corruption probe to sway voters in the November 2006 election. In addition, Pearce landed last year on the list of the 22 most corrupt members of Congress<\/a> put out by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington<\/a> because of allegations that he failed to report his 2003 sale of the assets of an oil-well company to another company in exchange for 540,000 shares of stock.<\/p>\n

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

The new office won\u2019t have the authority to discipline members of the House, but will instead refer findings to the House ethics committee<\/a>. The key is that those findings will also be made public, which pressures the ethics committee to take them seriously.<\/p>\n

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

Sunshine is always a necessary check on government.<\/p>\n

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

Critics fear ethics war<\/span><\/p>\n

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

\n

Some critics argue that creation of the new office will result in an ethics war between the two parties. The Senate has twice rejected a proposal to create a similar office.<\/p>\n

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

But consider the alternative: If two of New Mexico<\/st1:place><\/st1:state>\u2019s three members of the House are facing allegations that should be investigated but have instead been ignored, how many across the nation are in similar situations?<\/p>\n

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

In addition, two former House members are currently under indictment, two others were recently jailed and others are under federal investigation.<\/p>\n

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

The new office will have checks intended to keep its work nonpartisan, or at least bipartisan. Its creators intend for the appointees to be retired judges and lawyers. Current members of Congress and lobbyists are not allowed to serve. Three members will be appointed by the speaker and three will be appointed by the minority leader.<\/p>\n

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

Ethics investigations by the committee can only be initiated if at least one Democrat and one Republican appointee agree to start the process. The office will have staff but not subpoena power.<\/p>\n

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

Office will help ensure compliance with other rules<\/span><\/p>\n

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

I criticized House Democrats in June<\/a> for breaking a promise of openness by not adding earmarks to spending bills until the fall, when it was too late for a thorough debate on their merits. Democrats had approved a new rule, as part of sweeping ethics changes when they took control of the House last January, requiring them to add earmarks earlier to allow time for debate. There was no check to ensure they didn\u2019t break their own rule, so they did.<\/p>\n

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

To their credit, Pearce, Udall and Wilson later voluntarily released lists of their earmarks. Pearce went a step further and helped the public track the progress of his earmarks.<\/p>\n

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

The new office created this week by the House, because of its independence and the public nature of its work, will help ensure that other ethics rules can\u2019t be broken. It is one of the most significant reforms in decades because it will help ensure compliance with other reforms that have been or will be approved.<\/p>\n

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

Udall should be commended for voting for creation of the new office. Pearce and Wilson should have followed his lead.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The U.S. House of Representatives approved on Tuesday the creation of an independent office that has the authority to initiate investigations into allegations of ethics violations by House members and is required to disclose its findings publicly. It\u2019s a strong move that\u2019s being characterized by the Washington Post as \u201cone of the most significant changes […]<\/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-2972","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2972","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=2972"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2972\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2972"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2972"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nmpolitics.net\/index\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2972"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}