Now that Tom DeLay is sidelined, will someone start digging into House Speaker Dennis Hastert's dealings with lobbyists? That's the buzz from watchdog groups and echoed in yesterday's Washington Post. Jonathan Weisman's article quotes Republican congressman Jeff "We Simply Have Too Much Power" Flake as musing that—with DeLay gone—"people will start focusing on Hastert now."
Hastert is making news this week for suggesting Congress come down hard on politicians who go out to lunch or dinner with a lobbyist. Wonder how many lobbyists are quaking in their boots over that one? As Lee Drutman argues today on TomPaine.com , the real influence-peddling isn't accomplished with free steak dinners. And Hastert's proposal to regulate such activities should be viewed as the diversionary tactic that it is. It's the big-money campaign contributions that dirty the political process. And you're not going to find Hastert denouncing the undue influence of campaign contributors any time soon.
Hastert, remember, just over a year ago approved the implementation of a rule change in the House ethics code to protect Tom DeLay. Although later overturned, the rule allowed a leader indicted by a state grand jury to retain his post. But Hastert has been not only the aider and abetter of ethical misdeeds committed by DeLay and others. As a cog in the DeLay political machine, his ties to Abramoff may now get more scrutiny. Yesterday, the liberal group American Family Voices pointed out why:
While the focus has largely been on Reps. Tom DeLay and Bob Ney, Hastert has largely been ignored - despite his high profile, and the fact that he held a fundraiser at Jack Abramoff's restaurant. A week after the event (which raised $21,500), Hastert sent a letter to Interior Secretary Gale Norton asking that she reject a casino bid from a rival to Abramoff's tribal clients.
In November of last year, Democracy 21's Fred Wertheimer called on the Ethics Committee to look into Hastert's actions as part of a larger investigation ''to determine whether a number of House Members engaged in official acts to influence a case-specific regulatory matter at the Interior Department that benefited lobbyist Jack Abramoff's clients, and received contributions and financial favors from Abramoff and these clients, in violation of House ethics rules.''
It's unlikely any investigation will be launched. But that shouldn't stop public interest groups from making hay out of the facts that are known. And reminding anyone who doubts it that Hastert's efforts at reforming the business of Washington are for appearances only.
--Alexandra Walker |
Wednesday, January 18, 2006 12:51 PM
