Category Archives: DeLay

Texas Democrat Nails DeLay

Democratic Texas Representative Chris Bell filed a 187-page complaint to the House Ethics Committee charging Majority Leader Tom DeLay with major crimes.

WASHINGTON, June 15 – A seven-year-old unofficial truce discouraging House members from filing ethics complaints against one another disintegrated Tuesday when a freshman Democrat accused one of the most powerful members of Congress, the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, of “bribery, extortion, fraud, money laundering and the abuse of power.”The Democrat, Representative Chris Bell of Texas, who is leaving Congress because he lost a primary election, filed a 187-page complaint against Mr. DeLay, also of Texas, with the House ethics committee. The complaint accuses the majority leader of illegally soliciting campaign contributions, laundering campaign contributions to influence state legislative races and improperly using his office to influence federal agencies.

Mr. DeLay said “there is no substance” to the accusations.

Sure there is. Delay has been involved in sleazy schemes from pyramiding to using a children’s charity as a front for political fund-raising. He’s a cockroach (name-calling again but I can’t help it, that’s what he is).

Separated at birth?

Separated at birth?

This will vanish, of course. The HEC will do nothing and the chicken press will drop it like the hot potato it is, but you and I know–it’s all true.

DeLay is claiming that it’s bound up with Texas politics and nothing but sour grapes.

Mr. Bell, who called Mr. DeLay “the most corrupt politician in America today,” said that he had been preparing the complaint for months and that his defeat at the polls had nothing to do with it.”Tom DeLay,” Mr. Bell said, “has created a climate of fear and retribution inside the people’s House, and it must come to an end.

What? ‘The Hammer’ did that? Bell is just accusing DeLay of the very behaviour DeLay has been bragging about for years.

The Republicans, of course are outraged by such ‘partisan’ behaviour. Hastert said, ‘The worry I have is that you again politicize the process, and it denigrates what ethics is all about.’ Yeah, protecting a creep like DeLay is the meaning if the word ‘ethics’, Denny. Meanwhile, Republican party flack Rep Ray LaHood said he’s ‘contemplating proposing a rule to prevent “lame-duck members” from filing ethics complaints and said Democratic leaders should tell Mr. Bell “to back off.” ‘ SOP for the Pubs: if you can’t stop criticism, make it illegal.

These guys just get worse every day.

The Most Powerful Cockroach in the Country

The Baltimore IMC (Independent Media Center), an alternative news site, has a long report on the shady–not to say criminal–history of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, also known as “The Hammer”, a name he earned with the brutal, dictatorial tactics he used to keep members in line in the House. If you thought Tom DeLay was bad, you were wrong–he’s much, much worse than you thought. Reporter Cheryl Seal, who has compiled a long list of his activities since 2000 for your edification and disgust, introduces it this way:

[I]f you want to get a taste of the sort of people the corporate media routinely protects, check out this ongoing history of Tom Delay’s criminal activity. After reading it, you’ll ask yourself: “WHY IS THIS MAN STILL IN OFFICE?” Followed by: “WHY IS THIS MAN NOT IN PRISON?”

Indeed. A few of the highlights…uh, lowlights:

Delay Tries to Intimidate Supreme Court Judges to Fix Election Outcome”Those who cherish the idea of judicial independence can only be chilled by Mr. DeLay’s utter contempt for it. Listen to him, as quoted in The Washington Post in September 1997: “The judges need to be intimidated. They need to uphold the Constitution.” If they don’t behave, he said, “we’re going to go after them in a big way.” –Bob Herbert, NYT

******************************

Nov 28 2000:
Tom Delay Finances Trip of ‘Rioters’ to Florida to Disrupt the Presidential Election Recount

The Miami-Dade thugs included 200 Capitol Hill aides rounded up by Tom DeLay’s staff and sent on an all-expenses paid trip, paid for by the Bush campaign. Right up front on television images were Thomas Pyle, an aide DeLay, and Michael Murphy, who works for a DeLay fund-raising committee. That evening, the vigilantes received a congratulatory call from George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, who joked about the riot. Then Wayne Newton sang to them – unbelievably – in German.

******************************

April 27 2001:
Delay Scam Targets Small Business Owners

In a recorded phone message, “the House Republican whip, Tom DeLay, is promising meetings with top Bush officials to small business owners whose donations would underwrite a GOP ad campaign promoting the president’s [sic]tax plan… People familiar with the fund drive say it is part of an effort to raise up to the maximum $20,000 in donations to the party from each donor.” DeLay has been behind several shady fundraising schemes, including the Triad shell corporation, and a Nixonian townhouse operation. Said Larry Noble, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, “They’re selling access.” Will any of these donors get to drive a nuclear submarine, like the Republicans on the USS Greeneville?

****************************

May, 2001:
Tom Delay Brags That His Strategy Is To Kick People When they Are Down

“He’s lied under oath, admitted to a pathological hatred of Clinton, tries to destroy any who oppose him, has cheated business associates of thousands at least twice, has callously cut off all contact with his mother (who watches C-SPAN every day just to catch a glimpse of her son), wants to force a fundamentalist Christian model on American society, and has an approach to politics that one of his top staffers summed up in a memo: “This whole thing about not kicking someone when they are down is BS – Not only do you kick him – you kick him until he passes out – then beat him over the head with a baseball bat – then roll him up in an old rug – and throw him off a cliff into the pounding surf below!” But Tom Delay goes to church regularly, so that makes it all OK.”

*********************************

July 2001:
Tom Delay, Former Exterminator, Wants to Allow Extensive and Undisclosed Use of Pesticides in Elementary Schools

According to the Washington Post, “House Republicans vowed yesterday to eliminate a proposal, which the Senate added to President Bush’s education bill, that would require school districts to regularly disclose to parents the use of pesticides on school grounds. Senate Democratic and Republican leaders crafted the measure last month in consultation with representatives of the pest control and chemical industries, school officials and environmentalists. Supporters said it was designed to protect students, teachers and staff from excessive exposure to potentially dangerous pesticides. But Republicans attacked the provision during a hearing of the House Agriculture Committee.” First they put arsenic in our water, now they want to put RAID in our kids’ school lunches. Who’s evil idea is this? Obviously Tom DeLay, whose pre-Congressional career was – you got it! – an EXTERMINATOR

************************

January 2002:
Tom Delay Used Enron Money to Fund Political Racketeering

Tom DeLay, the vicious Republican who organized the criminal Miami-Dade election riot, was on Enron’s payroll big-time. Besides taking $28,900 in over-the-table bribes (i.e. campaign contributions), DeLay also took vast untold sums in secret bribes through his racketeering enterprise, the Republican Majority Issues Commission. (In April, RMIC settled a racketeering suit filed by the DCCC, after running up $450,000 in legal fees.) RMIC, a notorious “527” organization, was finally forced to report its donors in 2000, revealing $75,000 from Enron execs that year alone…Tom DeLay only know[s] how much was laundered through those accounts previously. DeLay’s PAC, Americans for a Republican Majority, got another $57,250.

***************************

May 16, 02:
Tom Delay Financial ‘Godfather’ Implicated in Mob Murder

In part three of his Tom DeLay expose, Stephen Pizzo writes in AlterNet that “supporting any form of legalized gambling was not without its risks for DeLay. After all, his public persona was that of a devoted evangelical Christian who supports all that is wholesome and opposes all that is evil. His church-going constituents back in Texas believed that gambling was destructive to families and communities. But thanks largely to Abramoff, the amount of money flowing to DeLay and his PAC from tribes with gambling operations swamped any potential contributions from the Christian right. The risks involved in backing gambling interests came home to roost for DeLay’s friend [and finiancial god father, Jack Abramoff], when he and Tom DeLay’s former aide, Mike Scanlon, suddenly found themselves smack in the middle of an alleged mob assassination in Miami, Florida.”

There’s lots more–Mr DeLay has been a very busy little hypocrite. Check it out for yourself.

The Republican One-Party State

In a piece for The American Prospect, Robert Kuttner backs up a lot of what I said Republicans were planning in my Cult of Personality series. He even agrees with the reasons and goals I suggested, though he says it a lot better. He doesn’t say anything about how important it is for the Republicans to tie their effort to control the country to a dominant political personality, but the rest of his analysis is frightening enough.

Today the electorate remains closely divided, and actually prefers more Democratic policy positions than Republican ones. Yet the drift toward an engineered one-party Republican state has aroused little press scrutiny or widespread popular protest.We are at risk of becoming an autocracy in three key respects. First, Republican parliamentary gimmickry has emasculated legislative opposition in the House of Representatives (the Senate has other problems). House Majority Leader Tom DeLay of Texas has both intimidated moderate Republicans and reduced the minority party to window dressing, rather like the token opposition parties in Mexico during the six-decade dominance of the PRI.

Second, electoral rules have been rigged to make it increasingly difficult for the incumbent party to be ejected by the voters, absent a Depression-scale disaster, Watergate-class scandal or Teddy Roosevelt-style ruling party split. After two decades of bipartisan collusion in the creation of safe House seats, there are now perhaps just 25 truly contestable House seats in any given election year (and that’s before the recent Republican super gerrymandering). What once was a slender and precarious majority — 229 Republicans to 205 Democrats (including Bernie Sanders of Vermont, an independent who votes with Democrats) — now looks like a Republican lock. In the Senate, the dynamics are different but equally daunting for Democrats. As the Florida debacle of 2000 showed, the Republicans are also able to hold down the number of opposition votes, with complicity from Republican courts. Reform legislation, the 2002 Help America Vote Act (HAVA), may actually facilitate Republican intimidation of minority voters and reduce Democratic turnout. And the latest money-and-politics regime, nominally a reform, may give the right more of a financial advantage than ever.

Third, the federal courts, which have slowed some executive-branch efforts to destroy liberties, will be a complete rubber stamp if the right wins one more presidential election.

Taken together, these several forces could well enable the Republicans to become the permanent party of autocratic government for at least a generation. (emphasis added)

The third leg–controlling the judiciary–is the most problematic for the Publicans at this point. As I have pointed out on this site, an otherwise way-too-often spineless Democratic minority has been doing journeyman work in delaying, if not stopping, the Publican Congress from filling the Federal bench with whacko ultraconservative judges who can be counted on to back radical Publican policies in their courts–an absolute necessity if the take-over Kuttner–and I–foresee is going to happen peacefully. Just yesterday, before flying to Georgia to “honor” MLK by having his picture taken laying a wreath on King’s tomb, Junior used a recess apointment to make Charles Pickering, an open racist, a Federal judge. He had to use the recess appointment because thje Democrats had succesfully blocked Pickering’s nomination in the House, and had promised a filibuster in the Senate if his name came up.

The recall in California, the naked power grabs through unethical if nor illegal gerrymandering in Colorado and Texas, and what Kuttner rightly calls the “reduc[tion of] the minority party to window dressing” in the Congress are all parts of a plan hatched in conservative think tanks starting in the late 70’s for Publicans to take control of all the political machinery of the country in order to force through their agenda against the wishes of the population, who they know don’t agree with them in any great numbers.

But they may have overplayed their hand. As I pointed out in an earlier post, Solicitor General Ted Olson’s brief to the SCOTUS that it had no right to decide an issue of law (the legality of the Gitmo imprisonments) seemed destined to piss off the very judges whose legal sleight-of-hand made Junior President in the first place. A couple of weeks ago, the SCOTUS agreed to hear two more cases dealing with the lack of legal representation allowed to the inmates at Gitmo, this in the face of more strenuous objections from the Admin and the SG that they had no right to do so. I don’t think we’ve reached the point where the Admin and the SCOTUS are deadly enemies, but they are clearly no longer the bosom buddies they were 3 years ago. If the Democrats can continue to waylay Publican plans to invade the Federal judiciary and pack the Federal courts with mindless right-wing puppets like Pickering, democracy in America still has a chance to survive their onslaught.

Read the rest of Kuttner’s article. He details the tricks and parliamentary tactics DeLay uses to maintain what Kuttner calls his “dictatorship”–

Extreme Centralization. The power to write legislation has been centralized in the House Republican leadership. Concretely, that means DeLay and House Speaker Dennis Hastert’s chief of staff, Scott Palmer, working with the House Committee on Rules. (Hastert is seen in some quarters as a figurehead, but his man Palmer is as powerful as DeLay.) Drastic revisions to bills approved by committee are characteristically added by the leadership, often late in the evening. Under the House rules, 48 hours are supposed to elapse before floor action. But in 2003, the leadership, 57 percent of the time, wrote rules declaring bills to be “emergency” measures, allowing then to be considered with as little as 30 minutes notice. On several measures, members literally did not know what they were voting for.Sorry, No Amendments. DeLay has used the rules process both to write new legislation that circumvents the hearing process and to all but eliminate floor amendments for Republicans and Democrats alike. The Rules Committee, controlled by the Republican leadership, writes a rule specifying the terms of debate for every bill that reaches the House floor. When Democrats controlled the House, Republicans complained bitterly when the occasional bill did not allow for open floor amendments. In 1995, Republicans pledged reform. Gerald Solomon, the new Republican chairman of the committee, explicitly promised that at least 70 percent of bills would come to the floor with rules permitting amendments. Instead, the proportion of bills prohibiting amendments has steadily increased, from 56 percent during the 104th Congress (1995-97) to 76 percent in 2003. This comparison actually understates the shift, because virtually all major bills now come to the floor with rules prohibiting amendments.

****************************************************

One-Party Conferences. The Senate still allows floor amendments, but Senate-passed bills must go to conference with the House. Democratic House and Senate conferees are increasingly barred from attending conference committees, unless they are known turncoats. On the Medicare bill, liberal Democratic Senate conferees Tom Daschle and Jay Rockefeller were excluded. The more malleable Democrats John Breaux and Max Baucus, however, were allowed in. [See Matthew Yglesias, “Bad Max,” page 11.] All four House Democratic conferees were excluded. Republican House and Senate conferees work out their intraparty differences, work their respective caucuses and send the (nonamendable) bill back to each house for a quick up-or-down vote. On the Medicare bill, members had one day to study a measure of more than 1,000 pages, much of it written from scratch in conference.

Legislation Without Hearings. Before the DeLay revolution, drafting new legislation in conference committee was almost unknown. But under DeLay, major provisions of the Medicare bill sprang fully grown from a conference committee. Republicans got a conference to include a weakened media-concentration standard that had been explicitly voted down by each house separately. Though both chambers had voted to block an administration measure watering down overtime-pay protections for workers, the provision was tacked onto a must-pass bill in conference. The official summary of House procedures, written by the (Republican-appointed) House parliamentarian and updated in June 2003, notes: “The House conferees are strictly limited in their consideration to matters in disagreement between the two Houses. Consequently, they may not strike out or amend any portion of the bill that was not amended by the other House. Furthermore, they may not insert new matter that is not germane to or that is beyond the scope of the differences between the two Houses.” Like the rights guaranteed in the Soviet constitution, these rules are routinely waived.

–the effort of the Publicans to produce a “permanent legislative majority”–

Here are the numbers: With 229 Republicans and 205 Democrats (counting Sanders), it would take a net Democratic pickup of just 13 seats (that’s 13 Democratic gains equaling 13 Republican losses for a net swing of 26 seats) for the House to change control. Historically, that’s a small swing. In the nine elections between 1968 and 1984, the median swing was 42 seats. In the nine elections since 1986, the opposition party enjoyed a swing of 26 or more only once (the Gingrich landslide of 1994), and the median swing was just 10 seats. So normally the current Republican majority would be vulnerable to a below-average election-year swing. Today, however, with only about 25 effectively contestable seats, Democrats would have to win about three-quarters of the contestable races to take control, i.e., 19 Democratic wins to just six Republican wins, which in turn would require a tidal shift of public opinion.All told, there are as many as 60 swing seats. But many potentially competitive seats become contestable only after the current incumbent retires or dies. Conversely, swing seats often become safe seats once an incumbent is re-elected and entrenched. Because not all incumbents retire at once, at any given time the number of effective contestable seats does not exceed about 25.

Note also the interplay between the legislative dictatorship and the dwindling number of swing districts. In previous eras, a majority leader with a margin of just 26 seats would have to carefully broker compromises both with his own moderates and with the opposition party. But the DeLay dictatorship and the ever fewer swing districts have combined to produce the opposite result. Individual legislators with safe seats needn’t worry about swing voters, and DeLay needn’t worry about losing swing districts because so few are left. Accordingly, the congressional Republican Party has become more militantly conservative. Like Bush, who also had no real mandate for radical change, DeLay is governing as if his party had won by a landslide. The country may be narrowly divided, but precious few citizens can make their votes for Congress count. A slender majority, defying gravity (and democracy), is producing not moderation but a shift to the extremes.

–the potential abuse of electronic voting machines–

In the aftermath of the Republican theft of Florida’s electoral votes and the 2000 presidential election, Congress passed the Help America Vote Act. Many states are using HAVA funds to shift from now-prohibited punch cards or old-fashioned voting machine systems to ATM-type computer terminals. However, the three biggest makers of such computerized voting systems have financial ties to the Republican Party, and there is already evidence that the biggest manufacturer, Diebold, has had trouble designing tamper-proof systems. Some Democrats, led by Rep. Rush Holt of New Jersey, have proposed that all such machines be backed up by “verifiable paper trails,” but this suggestion has gotten almost no Republican support. Moreover, millions of the poorest Americans have no experience with ATMs, and could well be deterred from voting.A second potential for mischief is the provision put into HAVA, at Republican insistence, requiring voters who register by mail to show a government ID at the polls. This sounds innocent enough. Republicans, however, have a long and sordid history of “ballot security” programs intended to intimidate minority voters by threatening them with criminal prosecution if their papers are not technically in order. Chief Justice William Rehnquist got his political start running a ballot-security program for the Republicans in the 1962 elections in Arizona. Many civil-rights groups see the new federal ID provision of HAVA as an invitation to more such harassment. The Department of Justice’s rights division was once a bulwark against these tactics, but that division currently reports to an attorney general named John Ashcroft.

–and the all-out assault intended to produce “rubber stamp courts”.

The most predictable public-policy result of extended one-party rule would be the completion of the Bush/radical-right project: the dismantling of social investment, regulation, progressive taxation, separation of church and state, racial justice and trade unionism. The administration’s opportunistic version of federalism would continue to preempt the ability of states and localities to enact progressive policies of their own.Even more insidiously, the radical right would likely use its wall-to-wall control of government to reduce liberties, narrow electoral democracy and thereby minimize the risk that it would ever lose power. Republican one-party rule would also strategically target progressive habitats, changing laws that currently tolerate or incubate oases of progressive political power and build liberal coalitions, such as the labor movement, universal social insurance, and an effective and valued public sector.

Do yourself a favor and read the whoile thing. Email it to your friends. Quote it to your enemies. People need to know what’s going on before it’s too late–and if Junior wins a second term, it almost certainly will be. This isn’t conspiracy theory, it’s conspiracy fact.

Republicans Find Depths To Sink To That You Never Imagined Existed

I could almost offer this without comment since it speaks so eloquently for itself:

It is an unusual charity brochure: a 13-page document, complete with pictures of fireworks and a golf course, that invites potential donors to give as much as $500,000 to spend time with Tom DeLay during the Republican convention in New York City next summer — and to have part of the money go to help abused and neglected children.Representative DeLay, who has both done work for troubled children and drawn criticism for his aggressive political fund-raising in his career in Congress, said through his staff that the entire effort was fundamentally intended to help children. But aides to Mr. DeLay, the House majority leader from Texas, acknowledged that part of the money would go to pay for late-night convention parties, a luxury suite during President Bush’s speech at Madison Square Garden and yacht cruises.

And so campaign finance watchdogs say Mr. DeLay’s effort can be seen as, above all, a creative maneuver around the recently enacted law meant to limit the ability of federal officials to raise large donations known as soft money.

“They are using the idea of helping children as a blatant cover for financing activities in connection with a convention with huge unlimited, undisclosed, unregulated contributions,” said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a Washington group that helped push through the recent overhaul of the campaign finance laws. (emphasis added)

And other Repugs think this is such a good idea that they’re copying it:

Already Senator Bill Frist, the majority leader, is planning to hold a concert and a reception in conjunction with the convention as a way of raising money for AIDS charities

Marvelous. What can you say? Without throwing up, I mean. Here are the advantages (as if you couldn’t guess):

Mr. DeLay’s charity, Celebrations for Children Inc., was set up in September and has no track record of work. Mr. DeLay is not a formal official of the charity, but its managers are Mr. DeLay’s daughter, Dani DeLay Ferro; Craig Richardson, a longtime adviser; and Rob Jennings, a Republican fund-raiser. Mr. Richardson said the managers would be paid by the new charity.************

But because the money collected will go into a nonprofit organization, donors get a tax break. And Mr. DeLay will never have to account publicly for who contributed, which campaign finance experts say shields those who may be trying to win favor with one of the most powerful lawmakers in Washington. (emphasis added)

Beautiful, ain’t it? A bloody work of art–rip-off art. Amazing. Just when you think they’ve hit bottom, they dig down to a new substrata. At this rate, they’ll break into the Fires of Hell in about a week.

But here’s a bonus: Michael Slackman, the NYT reporter who wrote the piece, characterizes DeLay’s brainstorm with breathtaking understatement. After listing the various charitable activities DeLay promises–

Mr. DeLay, among other things, is offering donors private dinner with himself and his wife; the chance to participate in a golf tournament; a late-night party with a rock group; access to a luxury suite for elected officials and donors; as well as the yacht cruise, tickets to Broadway shows and more. Other elected officials are welcome at all of these events.

–he characterizes the scheme this way:

But by holding events at the convention — and working under the auspices of a charity — Mr. DeLay has stepped into an ethical gray area, election law and tax law experts said. (emphasis added)

“Ethical gray area”? Um, yeah, that’s one way of putting it. Another is “an unethical, midnight black area, a nightmare of depravity, greed, and arrogance, an area running with plague and pus, and a disgraceful display of cold-hearted selfishness worthy of Ebeneezer Scrooge.”

But I understate.