Congress has lost its mind...

[TheMercenary]

What?!?!? no comment to support the criminal elements of the Demoncrats in Congress??? WtheFuck? over?

[TheMercenary]

Just for Reflex, another "gottcha moment" or just another double standard for the Demoncrats on the Hill?

Democrats defeat GOP attempt to remove Rangel
By LARRY MARGASAK (AP) – 2 hours ago

WASHINGTON — House Republicans failed Wednesday for a third time to oust Rep. Charles Rangel as chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee, but they kept the political spotlight on his ethical problems.

The House voted 246-153 along mostly partisan lines to refer a GOP resolution to remove Rangel to the House ethics committee. The Democratic maneuver rendered the Republican effort meaningless, since Democratic leaders have said they have no intention of removing Rangel while the ethics committee is conducting a long-term investigation of his conduct.

The ethics committee's investigation of Rangel's financial and fundraising activities has been under way for about a year, and that has provided Democrats political cover to avoid taking action.

"We ought to allow that work to continue and to be completed and receive their recommendation, and we will do that," Majority Leader Steny Hoyer said Tuesday, when asked how Democrats would respond to the Republican effort.

It is unclear how long the ethics investigation will continue, but the closer it gets to the 2010 elections the bigger problem for Democrats. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has promised to drain the swamp of unethical conduct that plagued Republicans several years ago — and helped cost the GOP control of the House in the 2006 elections.

Rangel, a New York Democrat, faces allegations of financial improprieties, including failure to pay taxes on investment income and neglecting to report assets and income on his congressional financial disclosure forms.

House GOP leadership spokesman Michael Steel said the attempt to remove Rangel "highlights the Democrats' broken promises" for an open and ethical Congress.

"Obviously, given that House Democratic leaders haven't chosen to do the right thing, an important part of our strategy is to make sure the American people know they're trying to sweep these matters under the rug," Steel said. "The American people will certainly remember the Democrats' broken promises on these issues."

The ethics committee is conducting investigations of six Democrats besides Rangel and one Republican. The committee also is reviewing the practice of lawmakers steering money and contracts to favored companies, and then receiving campaign contributions in return for the "earmarks."

Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., chairman of a subcommittee that dispenses defense dollars, is the most prominent figure in that review, although members of both parties used the same fundraising practices.

A review determines whether an investigation will be initiated.

Conservative Republican talk radio hosts have been using Rangel's case to attack the conduct of Democrats and ridicule Pelosi's promises to clean house.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...AKF2wD9B6FKQ80

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Just for Reflex, another "gottcha moment" or just another double standard for the Demoncrats on the Hill?

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...AKF2wD9B6FKQ80

As far as I know, in 200+ years, there is no precedent for the House to formally remove a committee chair unless he/she has been charged with a crime.

The ethics rules provide a process for dealing with any potential ethical violations by any member of the House.

The attempt to remove Rangel from the chairmanship is purely political theater on the part of the Republicans.

Should he step down voluntarily? I would recommend it, but that is for him to decide.

Where is the double standard?

Dont let the facts get in the way of your "gotcha!"

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Redux

Where is the double standard?

They are your team, Redux, and you love and root for them beyond all reason. You believe that because they are Democrats they inherently can do no wrong. This is magical thinking beyond all magical thinking. You can't see the double standard in play even when it is as plain as the dong in your crotch, to say nothing of the nose on your face and the zits on your nose.

And I call BS. You ought to be ashamed of yourself. You haven't the standing to ask where the double standard is. Your party of choice does not accord with your actual intellectual powers, and you repeatedly, habitually, utter the silliest things in Team Rocket's, uh, Team Democrat's support. Your allegiance to the Dems keeps you from using your native intelligence, Redux -- and that's a shame.

Not being enmeshed with the Democrats allows me to think much more clearly.

Your team, sir, is an institutionalized monster of unfairness, as evinced by Rep. Grayson's (D-FL) recent remarks. Let one example stand for one thousand -- and none apologized for nor repented from, like good people would do and your boys don't. YOUR damfool boys have launched a frontal assault on one fifth of the world's economy and are bent on its destruction by socialist redistributionism, economic illiteracy, and buying one helluva cycle of inflation with their inventing budget dollars out of thin air.

The Democratic Party's actions shall prevent me from voting for any Democratic candidate for any office for the rest of my days -- on the grounds of institutional incompetence.

The facts, dear boy, are why there's a "gotcha." Charlie Rangel's "explanation" of the matter -- well, he's stupid enough to think Americans are going to buy it, or shouldn't see any problem with it. Arrogance meets thickheadedness, and thickheadedness is a disqualification for office. Team Democrat, "blasting off agaiiiiiinnnnn...."

[TheMercenary]

Rangle is a criminal. He should be removed.

[TheMercenary]

Stossel hits the nail on the head...

It's the Spending, Stupid
By John Stossel

"The government who robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul," George Bernard Shaw once said.

For a socialist, Shaw demonstrated good sense with that quotation. Unfortunately, America has become a laboratory in which his hypothesis is being tested.

John Stossel RealClearPolitics
taxes economy

[b]The theory of government I was taught says that government provides benefits, primarily security, to the entire population. In return we pay taxes. But lately the government has been a distributor of special privileges, taking money from some and giving it to others. America is now about evenly split between those who pay income taxes and those who consume them.[//b]

The Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center recently disclosed that close to half of all households will pay no income tax this year. Some will pay less than zero -- that is, they'll get money from those of us who do pay taxes.

The Tax Policy Center adds that this year the average income-tax rate for the bottom 40 percent of earners will be negative and that their cash subsidy will equal 10 percent of the total amount the income tax brings in, thanks to the Earned Income Tax Credit and President Obama's "Making Work Pay" program.

The view from the top also shows the lopsidedness of the tax system. The top 20 percent of earners makes about 53 percent of the income in America but pays 91 percent of the income tax. The top 1 percent pays 36 percent. The IRS says the bottom half of earners pays less than 3 percent.

This presents a serious problem because government has such vast powers to dispense favors. As Shaw suggested, people who pay no tax will not hesitate to vote for politicians who promise big spending. Why not? They will get stuff without having to pay for it.

Yes, working people who pay no income tax still pay taxes: sales tax and payroll (Social Security and Medicare) taxes. But the income tax is big and visible, so it's a problem that a growing number of people don't pay, but get benefits from those who do.

Frederic Bastiat, the great 19th-century French economist, defined the state as "that great fiction by which everyone tries to live at the expense of everyone else." I don't know if he envisioned one half of the population living off the other half.

It's important not to confuse the interests of the taxpayers with the interests of the politicians and other tax consumers. Yet that is done all the time. When the government bought toxic assets (of zero market value) from the banks, it said taxpayers would profit when the economy recovered and the assets once again commanded a positive price in the market. Even if we make the dubious assumption that the government is savvy enough to buy low and sell high, it's not the taxpayers who would benefit from any profits. The politicians will spend every penny, rather than cutting taxes.

To put it bluntly, we are not the government.

The built-in unfairness of the tax system has prompted a range of tax-reform proposals, such as a flat tax and replacing the income tax with a sales tax. These alternatives are better, but they have their drawbacks, too. For that reason, there is something more urgent than tax reform: spending reform.

The true burden of government, the late Milton Friedman said, is not the tax level but the spending level. Taxation is just one way for the government to get money. The other ways -- borrowing and inflation -- are also burdens on the people. The best way to lighten the tax burden is to lessen the spending burden. If government spends less, it takes less. And if it takes less, the tax system will weigh less heavily on us all.

Once again, we find wisdom in Adam Smith: "Little else is requisite to carry a state to the highest degree of opulence from the lowest barbarism but peace, easy taxes, and a tolerable administration of justice: all the rest being brought about by the natural course of things."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...ine_98601.html

UG...if I recall, it was the Republicans who controlled the House for 12 years from 95 through 06 and did absolutely nothing in the way of proposing tougher ethics rules for members.

And instead, created the greatest revolving door between Congress and lobbyists in recent history -- the K Street Project.

The K Street Project is an effort by the Republican Party (GOP) to pressure Washington lobbying firms to hire Republicans in top positions, and to reward loyal GOP lobbyists with access to influential officials. It was launched in 1995 by Republican strategist Grover Norquist and then-House majority whip Tom DeLay.

Shortly after the 1994 elections which gave a majority of seats to Republican candidates, DeLay called prominent Washington lobbyists into his office. He had pulled the public records of political contributions that they made to Democrats and Republicans. According to Texans for Public Justice, "he reminded them that Republicans were in charge and their political giving had better reflect that—or else. The "or else" was a threat to cut off access to the Republican House leadership."

And, now, want to change the rules in the middle of the game because it provides great political theater. That, IMO, is the double standard in play.

I would like to see stronger ethics rules; I have said that repeatedly. The Democrats took a first crack at it in 07 when they took control, but it doesnt go far enough.

But until such time, you play by the current rules.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

UG...if I recall, it was the Republicans who controlled the House for 12 years from 95 through 06 and did absolutely nothing in the way of proposing tougher ethics rules for members.

Oh well that is good to know, that makes all of Rangles criminal acts just ok.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Oh well that is good to know, that makes all of Rangles criminal acts just ok.

No...I didnt say Rangel's acts (questionable reporting to IRS/ questionable campaign contributions) are OK.

Personally, I dont think they rise to the level of criminality under the law, but I said that I would recommend that he step down voluntarily until the ethics process plays out as currently dictated by the rules of the House.

And forcible removal from a committee chairmanship is not part of that process currently in place.

Again, its changing the rules in the middle of the game for political purposes.

[TheMercenary]

Makes good sense to me....

"Raising a question of the privileges of the House.

Whereas the gentleman from New York, Charles B. Rangel, the fourth most senior Member of the House of Representatives, serves as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, a position of considerable power and influence within the House of Representatives;

Whereas clause one of Rule XXIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives provides, “A Member, Delegate, Resident Commission, officer, or employee of the House shall conduct himself at all times in a manner that shall reflect creditably on the House.”;

Whereas The New York Times reported on September 5, 2008, that, “Representative Charles B. Rangel has earned more than $75,000 in rental income from a villa he has owned in the Dominican Republic since 1988, but never reported it on his federal or state tax returns, according to a lawyer for the congressman and documents from the resort.”;

Whereas in an article in the September 5, 2008 edition of The New York Times, his attorney confirmed that Representative Rangel’s annual congressional Financial Disclosure statements failed to disclose the rental income from his resort villa;

Whereas The New York Times reported on September 6, 2008 that, “Representative Charles B. Rangel paid no interest for more than a decade on a mortgage extended to him to buy a villa at a beachfront resort in the Dominican Republic, according to Mr. Rangel’s lawyer and records from the resort. The loan, which was extended to Mr. Rangel in 1988, was originally to be paid back over seven years at a rate of 10.5 percent. But within two years, interest on the loan was waived for Mr. Rangel.”;

Whereas clause 5(a)(2)(A) of House Rule 25 defines a gift as, “…a gratuity, favor, discount, entertainment, hospitality, loan, forbearance, or other item having monetary value” and prohibits the acceptance of such gifts except in limited circumstances;

Whereas Representative Rangel’s acceptance of thousands of dollars in interest forgiveness is a violation of the House gift ban;

Whereas Representative Rangel’s failure to disclose the aforementioned gifts and income on his Personal Financial Disclosure Statements violates House rules and federal law;

Whereas Representative Rangel’s failure to report the aforementioned gifts and income on federal, state and local tax returns is a violation of the tax laws of those jurisdictions;

Whereas the Committee on Ways and Means, which Representative Rangel chairs, has jurisdiction over the United States Tax Code;

Whereas the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct first announced on July 31, 2008 that it was reviewing allegations of misconduct by Representative Rangel;

Whereas Roll Call newspaper reported on September 15, 2008 that, “The inconsistent reports are among myriad errors, discrepancies and unexplained entries on Rangel’s personal disclosure forms over the past eight years that make it almost impossible to get a clear picture of the Ways and Means chairman’s financial dealings.”;

Whereas the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct announced on September 24, 2008 that it had established an investigative subcommittee in the matter of Representative Rangel;

Whereas after the Ethics Committee probe was underway, The New York Times reported on November 24, 2008 that, “Congressional records and interviews show that Mr. Rangel was instrumental in preserving a lucrative tax loophole that benefited Nabors Industries an oil drilling company last year, while at the same time its chief executive was pledging $1 million to the Charles B. Rangel School of Public Service at C.C.N.Y.”;

Whereas the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct announced on December 9, 2008 that it had expanded the jurisdiction of the aforementioned investigative subcommittee to examine the allegations related to Representative Rangel’s involvement with Nabors Industries;

Whereas since then, further serious allegations of improper and potentially illegal conduct by Representative Rangel have surfaced;

Whereas during the recently completed August district work period, Representative Rangel acknowledged his failure to publicly disclose at least half a million dollars in cash assets, tens of thousands of dollars in investment income, and his ownership of two pieces of property in New Jersey;

Whereas corrected financial disclosure statements filed by Representative Rangel on August 12, 2009 now reveal his net worth to be nearly twice as much as he had previously revealed;

Whereas The New York Times newspaper reported on August 26, 2009 that, “United States Representative Charles B. Rangel, whose personal finances and fund raising are the subject of two House ethics investigations, failed to report at least $500,000 in assets on his 2007 Congressional disclosure form, according to an amended report he filed this month. Among the dozen newly disclosed holdings revealed in the amended forms are a checking account at a federal credit union with a balance between $250,000 and $500,000; three vacant lots in Glassboro, N.J., valued at a total of $1,000 to $15,000; and stock in PepsiCo worth between $15,000 and $50,000.”;

Whereas Roll Call newspaper reported on August 25, 2009 that Representative Rangel’s corrected filings also revealed “at least $250,001 in a fund called ML Allianz Global Investors Consults Diversified Port III.”;

Whereas the aforementioned Roll Call story reported that “Rangel also originally misreported that his investments in 2007 netted him $6,511-$17,950 in dividends, capital gains and rental income. In his revised filing, that range jumped to between $29,220 and $81,200.”;

Whereas these most recent revelations by Representative Rangel have resulted in heightened national news media coverage of alleged impropriety and potentially criminal conduct by one of the most senior Members of the House;

Whereas an editorial in The Washington Times newspaper on September 1, 2009 noted, “Charlie Rangel is one lucky guy. The Democratic congressman from Harlem, N.Y., just discovered that his net wealth is twice what he thought. That’s a pretty good day at the office for a public servant. Mr. Rangel also realized that he made tens of thousands of dollars more than he reported in many different years over the past decade. This is the most recent string in a series of financial bonanzas for Mr. Rangel, who last year admitted he had forgotten about $75,000 in rental income on his Caribbean resort property.”;

Whereas the same editorial also noted, “The congressman has failed to pay property taxes on two lots in New Jersey, according to the New York Post. That’s not all. In order to avoid taxes and get lower mortgage rates, Mr. Rangel simultaneously claimed three ‘primary residences’.”;

Whereas an editorial in the September 17, 2009 edition of the New Haven Register stated, “The ethics and tax complaints keep piling up against U.S. Rep. Charles B. Rangel, who as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee controls writing of the nation’s tax laws. The New York Democrat may write those laws, but he apparently feels no obligation to obey them. The investigation appears to have a long way to go. The man who is in charge of writing the nation’s tax laws doesn’t pay his federal income or local property taxes. He has such a poor grasp of his own finances that he neglects to list half his assets on a disclosure form intended to keep members of Congress accountable and honest. We can already hear the defense of the next tax deadbeat called into court. If Charlie Rangel doesn’t have to pay his taxes, why should I?”;

[TheMercenary]

Whereas, an article in The Washington Post on September 15, 2009 stated, “Rangel is now the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and a man of immense importance in Washington. Nonetheless, he has been busy of late revising and amending the record, backing and filling, using buckets of Wite-Out as he discovers or remembers properties he has owned in New York, New Jersey, Florida, the Dominican Republic and God only knows where else. Rangel recently even discovered bank accounts that no one in the world, apparently including him, knew he had. One was with the Congressional Federal Credit Union; another was with Merrill Lynch – each valued between $250,000 and $500,000. He somehow neglected to mention these accounts on his congressional disclosure forms, which means, if you can believe it, that when he signed the forms, he did not notice that maybe $1 million was missing. Someone ought to check the lighting in his office.”;

Whereas the same article in The Washington Post stated, “There is something wrong with Charlie Rangel. Either he did not notice that he was worth about twice as much as he said he was – which is downright worrisome in a congressional leader – or he thinks he’s above the law, which is downright worrisome in a congressional leader.”;

Whereas it has been more than one year since an editorial in The New York Times on September 15, 2008 stated, “Mounting embarrassment for taxpayers and Congress makes it imperative that Representative Charles Rangel step aside as chairman of the Ways and Means Committee while his ethical problems are investigated.”;

Whereas at various times during the past twelve months Representative Rangel and Speaker Pelosi have made public statements asserting that the ongoing investigation of Representative Rangel by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct would soon be concluded;

Whereas the Committee has to date issued no public statements concerning any expected timeline for conducting or concluding its investigation of Representative Rangel;

Whereas major daily newspapers, including The New York Times, The Washington Post , and The New York Post have called for Representative Rangel’s removal from his powerful position at least until the House Ethics Committee has completed its ongoing probes of allegations against him;

Whereas, Representative Rangel’s powerful position as chairman permits him to participate in high level decisions about critically important issues such as reform of the nation’s health care system;

Whereas an October 1, 2009 story in The New York Times stated, “Mr. Rangel is one of a small group of House leaders now meeting almost daily behind closed doors with Speaker Nancy Pelosi to distill from the three bills produced in separate committees the one package that will go to the House floor.;

Whereas an Associated Press story on September 20, 2009 stated, “The ethics committee’s investigation of Rangel is almost a year old. It’s as much a problem for House Democratic leaders as for Rangel himself. Later this year, when Rangel’s committee considers estate tax legislation that could expand into other matters, the headlines will be a version of this message: ‘Tax scofflaw presiding over tax changes.’”;

Whereas the New York Post newspaper reported on September 2, 2009 that, “A review of property records for the borough of Glassboro revealed at least six tax liens levied against Rangel’s property during the past 16 years. Just last year, two separate liens were levied against both properties owned by Rangel.”;

Whereas on May 24, 2006, then Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi cited “high ethical standards” in a letter to former Representative William Jefferson asking that he resign his seat on the Committee on Ways and Means in light of ongoing investigations into alleged financial impropriety by Representative Jefferson;

Whereas Speaker Pelosi took the aforementioned action while Representative Jefferson was under investigation and the subject of considerable controversy in the news media, but prior to any indictment Whereas on May 24, 2006, then Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi cited “high ethical standards” in a letter to former Representative William Jefferson asking that he resign his seat on the Committee on Ways and Means in light of ongoing investigations into alleged financial impropriety by Representative Jefferson;

Whereas in April of 2007, Republican Leader John Boehner successfully urged several Republican Members to relinquish their committee assignments after learning that each had become the subject of investigations into possible criminal activity; Whereas Leader Boehner took the aforementioned actions while the Members in question were under investigation and the subjects of widespread media controversy, but prior to any indictments;

Whereas in the wake of the most recent allegations against Representative Rangel various editorials and articles in major national newspapers criticizing Speaker Pelosi’s continued refusal to remove Representative Rangel as chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means after promising she would preside over “the most ethical Congress in history” have held the House up to public ridicule; Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, that upon adoption of this resolution and pending completion of the investigation into his affairs by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, Representative Rangel is hereby removed as chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means."

Please point to the section of the House rules that provides for members of Congress introducing resolutions to forcibly remove another member from the chairmanship of a committee.

It doesnt.....simple as that.

The process is clear and it works through the Ethics Committees, in part, to avoid purely partisan reactions/responses like the above.

Yesterday, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct voted unanimously to expand the jurisdiction of the committee's investigation of Rangel.

http://ethics.house.gov/Media/PDF/Ra...Oct_8_2009.PDF

IMO, that is how the process should work...and in the meantime, there is nothing in the current rules/standards that allow for removal from a chairmanship during that process.

What is so wrong about following the rules?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Yesterday, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct voted unanimously to expand the jurisdiction of the committee's investigation of Rangel.

http://ethics.house.gov/Media/PDF/Ra...Oct_8_2009.PDF

IMO, that is how the process should work...and in the meantime, there is nothing in the current rules/standards that allow for removal from a chairmanship during that process.

What is so wrong about following the rules?

Oh nothing at all. Funny that it took others to twist their arms, make a big public display, leak information to the press, draft resolutions, all but jump up and down and hold their breath to get the Demoncrats to deal with this criminal who is Chairman of the very committee, of the House Ways and Means Committee, which deals with tax issues. The Double Standards continue to abound. And more than 2 years ago that scumbag Pelosi promised change... pfffft.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Meanwhile... Comix!

The overall fight will grow increasingly bitter, I fear.

I think we conservatives will win, but there will be bleeding, and that saddens me. Still, I'd be sadder under socialism, regardless of the fair words it might get in under.