The Story Never Ends. . .

As we all know, Mr. Tiahrt has recently been mired in ethics violations and accusations that he pushed through earmarks for the clients of a lobbying firm (PMA) that had donated to his campaigns. While Tiahrt and his aides were recently exonerated from wrongdoing by the Ethics Committee (despite the fact that the OCE recommended Tiahrt and Representative Peter Visclosky (D-IN) be further investigated); the situation is continuing to rear its ugly head.

Yesterday afternoon it was reported that House lawmakers had passed a resolution demanding the Ethics Committee reveal details behind its investigation into the subject. Earlier this month it was reported that the ethics committee did not subpoena or interview anybody, and they apparently did no further research than the OCE; this despite the fact that the OCE recommended Tiahrt and Visclosky be further investigated.

It now appears that members of Congress want more answers after public backlash against the process (and similarly the decision) from watchdog groups and writers from both ends of the political spectrum. Making matters worse for Mr. Tiahrt, is that this is clearly NOT a matter of partisan politics as Republican Representative Jeff Flake (AZ) is leading the charge for greater transparency and answers about the actions of the ethics committee. This isn’t one party trying to take down members of another; this is a bipartisan effort to find answers about the potentially corrupt activities of Mr. Tiahrt and his Democratic colleague (Visclosky).

What is even more troubling for the Tiahrt camp is that his staffers are continuing to pretend that nothing is wrong here, and are going out of their way to portray this never-ending ethics inquiry into a simple issue of partisan politics.

In the wake of backlash against the non-action of the Ethics Committee, Mr. Tiahrt’s Communications Director Sam Sackett wrote a letter to the Wall Street Journal defending Tiahrt. While it is completely understandable that Sackett would write such a letter claiming that Tiahrt “did the right thing,” what is troubling is that the communications director attacks the editorial board of the Journal (probably the most highly respected newspaper in the country, as well right-leaning) and then attempts to link all of Tiahrt’s critics to Nancy Pelosi and partisan politics. Sackett writes:

"Nancy Pelosi’s mistakes in this Congress are too many to list. It is surprising the Journal would defend her creation of yet another government bureaucracy to oversee congressional ethics.

"Despite Rep. Pelosi’s desire to bloat House governance, along with every other part of government, when the dust settled on these inquiries, no complaint, allegation or negative finding was ever found to justify the Office of Congressional Ethics’s review of Mr. Tiahrt. It is all there in black and white."

First, nowhere in the original Journal Editorial does the newspaper actually defend the creation of the OCE. We can argue the merits of the OCE all day long, but when push comes to shove this is not about Nancy Pelosi or the merits of the OCE. This is about whether or not there was wrongdoing, and the original Journal Editorial clearly takes the position that there was.

Second, Tiahrt’s staffer’s attempt to change the story from Ethics violations to partisan disputes reeks of a staff that knows they have messed up and that they dodged a bullet with the Ethics Committee. Again, if this was a partisan issue, than why is the other Congressman that is under fire with Tiahrt from the Democratic Party? This is clearly not a partisan issue, and Sackett’s attempts to pawn it off as so are disingenuous and just another instance of Tiahrt’s slimy political rhetoric.

Third, Sackett claims that there was never anything to justify the OCE review, when the OCE itself believes that there was wrongdoing to justify this review. If we want to talk about what is in ‘black and white’ Sackett should actually read the OCE report which requests the Ethics Committee do a further review. Furthermore, this recent resolution proves that other members of Congress (from both parties nonetheless) believe that there is still more to the story. They have apparently read what is all there in black and white in the OCE report.

What does all this mean for Kansan voters?

I believe that Mr. Tiahrt and his staff are continuing to be disingenuous about these issues of ethics. Even if they did nothing wrong, their attempts to turn this into a political issue reek of the same old Washington politics that voters around the country have had enough with.

Furthermore, Sackett’s letter shows that Tiahrt isn’t committed to cleaning up Congress. They dismiss inquiries into ethics violations as “wasteful government spending”. Shouldn’t taxpayers be willing to pay the cost to get a clean and ethical government? This view of ethics investigations as wasteful is highly troubling.

Finally, the congressional resolution shows me that Tiahrt and Visclosky are not even seen to be innocent by their own peers. This begs us to ask questions about whether Todd Tiahrt is actually so corrupt that other members of Congress want to bring him down.

This story just continues to get more interesting.

Ethically yours,

Publius