NationStates Jolt Archive


House Republicans take doublespeak to a whole new level

The Nazz
01-03-2006, 00:02
I've got to give them credit--this is a creative charge to make against the Democrats (http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/022806/news7.html).
The House Republicans’ campaign operation is charging that a recently released Democratic report on Republican corruption violated ethics rules.

The 103-page report, “America for Sale: The Cost of Republican Corruption,” was compiled by the Democratic staff of the House Rules Committee and released by the panel’s ranking Democrat, Rep. Louise Slaughter (N.Y.), last week.

The report reiterates repeats many of Democrats’ long-held concerns about Republicans’ actions on healthcare, energy, the environment, homeland security and Hurricane Katrina.

“It’s a political document through and through. The headline is all you need to know it’s a political document,” said Ed Patru, a spokesman for the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). “It’s nothing more than Democrats using official resources to promote political talking points.”

House ethics rules prohibit members of Congress from using official resources to fund campaign activities. Democrats, however, counter that chronicling Republican ethical abuses is well within the rules.

“It is … deeply ironic that the NRCC would have the audacity to suggest that a detailed, fact-based report documenting the collapse of our legislative system would constitute unethical behavior,” Slaughter said in a statement, “while at the same time, top Republican officials … have willingly undermined ethical behavior in our House.”

....

Ethics experts said it is unlikely that Slaughter’s report would be ruled an ethics violation because it does not contain overt references to campaigns, calls for fundraising or other red flags.

“I can’t recall any ethics ruling that condemned something that vague,” said Brett Kappel, an ethics expert at Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease. “If that were the standard, then members would hardly be able to talk about the other party at all.”

What will they come up with next?
Gauthier
01-03-2006, 00:05
Probably a Constitutional Amendment to make opposition parties illegal. :D
The Nazz
01-03-2006, 00:07
Probably a Constitutional Amendment to make opposition parties illegal. :D
There's not that much difference between them as it is.
Ritlinana
01-03-2006, 00:10
Notice Her Last Name Is Slaughter?
Cannot think of a name
01-03-2006, 02:40
To be fair, however, they had to have given it that title to get under thier skin, it really is a dig. I'm a little torn in that respect, because it supports the "Nyah nyah" politics, which I'm not a fan of no matter who is doing it. But at the same time, one party unfettered for six years is going to rack up a great deal of abuses without any checks. I'm trying to avoid any comparisons to things the republicans have done in this vien because I don't ever accept that as an excuse from thier supporters.

I guess what I'm saying is report:good, title:a little much. But it's really a small point.