"Politicians must set their aims for the high ground and according to our various leanings, Democratic, Republican, Independent, we will follow. Politicians must be told if they continue to sink into the mud of obscenity, they will proceed alone." Maya Angelou
The conduct of our legislators has reached an all time low in terms of ethics. The issue is as much what is being done, as it is how it is being done. The issue at point here is the conduct, or if you will, the "tactics" used by the individuals involved. What started out as an downward spiral into extreme bipartisanship more divisive than the Berlin Wall, has now devolved into something that more closely resembles a rabid sports team bent on "fixing the game." Worse yet, it resembles a bunch of sleazy lawyers bent on winning "by any means necessary" so their client will pay them. And here is a news flash: "We the People" are not their clients.
The conduct seems to continue and get more and more outrageous, and appears to be one-partied: Republican. First, they attached a bill that repealed Section 716 of Dodd- Frank Financial Reform Act to the 2015 Federal Spending bill, without a formal vote,
two days before the Federal Government funding ended, thus forcing all members of the House of Representatives and the Senate to either approve the passage of the spending bill with the attachment or the government would be shutdown. In that same “gun to your head” spending bill they attached a policy rider dramatically expanding the amount of money that wealthy political donors could inject into the national parties to ten times the current limit. They funded the Department of Homeland Security with a short-term continuing resolution ending in February, then threatened to fund the department only if Congress overturns the deferred action program for so-called Dreamers and passes legislation to block Obama’s November executive actions affecting illegal immigrants. Now, I don’t have visions of “Mr. Deeds Goes To Washington” dancing in my head when it comes to Congress, but this is reprehensible. These are tactics and conduct worthy only of thugs or mobsters – not members of Congress.
And the influence of money on the conduct of Congress is undeniable and violates every ethical rule about avoiding even the appearance of being influenced in the performance of their governmental duties by donors and contributors. Anyone who has even a rudimentary understanding of human nature, knows simply that the larger the sum of money given to a person or cause, the more the donor is going to expect (or demand) a specific outcome in return. And any human being knows that if the recipient doesn’t produce that specific outcome, they will cease to be the recipient of this donor. Now, with the ten-fold expansion of the amount a donor can give, they have ensured that Congress is bought and paid for, and will act only in accordance with the wishes of the big money donors.
Yes, I'm going to say what we all know: This didn't happen overnight. Politics and politicians have been a relatively ethics-free zone since long before your or my time. We’ve been asleep at the wheel, doing nothing, giving them the message year after year, administration after administration, that this way of doing things was acceptable. "Just win the game for my side, boys". But by treating it as a game without any rules or ethics, we have all lost “our side.” And Congress has clearly gotten the message that now there are no rules or ethics.
I am convinced that incidents such as the ones illustrated above will occur again and again, largely because it has worked for them. You don't have to be a Skinnerian behaviorist to understand that. They are operating on what the law tells them they can do, not on any moral or ethical sense. They are operating on what they can legally get away with, and there is no law or rule against them conducting themselves this way.
But how can we just sit back and watch this moral free-for-all devolve even more? We must find our voice and let politicians know that, if they continue to "sink into the mud of obscenity," they will proceed alone.
I did some research, and found that there are ethical standards and rules of conduct for members of the legislature. That's good news and bad news as the fox is guarding the henhouse: The United States Constitution (Article 1, Section 5, clause 1) provides each House of Congress with the sole authority to establish rules, judge membership requirements, and punish and expel Members. Only since the 1960s has each chamber systematically undertaken self-discipline related to conduct.
However, both the Senate Select Committee on Ethics and the House of Representatives
Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) accept complaints about members from any source, including the public. Additionally, there is another, lesser known Code of Ethics that does govern their conduct in the workplace. It is the "Code of Ethics for Government Service," and was adopted by both the Senate and the House of the 85th Congress in 1958 during the Eisenhower Administration, with the preamble reading “That it is the sense of the Congress that the following Code of Ethics should be adhered to by all Government employees,
including officeholders.” Both the Senate's Select Committee on Ethics and the House's Office of Congressional Ethics claim their jurisdiction under this little known code of ethics, and state that members of Congress should adhere to the general ethical guidelines provided by this code of ethics. While this code of ethics has not, to date, been cited by the Senate as a basis for recommending discipline of a Senate Member, the House has used violations of this Code as a ground for discipline of its Members.
I plan to start using this pathway to submit allegations of misconduct by members of Congress, but know that one person submitting allegations would do nothing. However, a petition bearing the names of hundreds, if not thousands of citizens may have an effect. And as members of both the House of Representatives and the Senate are under caution to not bring discredit upon their particular legislative branch, the more times substantive and credible allegations are submitted to the ethical decision-makers in the House or Senate bearing the names of constituents (i.e., voters), the more likely it will be that some semblance of civilized and/or ethical conduct will be restored to our legislative branch of government.
Next stop? John Boehner.
I have prepared and posted the first such petition and have posted it on MoveOn.org Petitions at http://petitions.moveon.org/...
There really is strength in numbers. Add your voice to the complaint to be filed with the House Office on Congressional Ethics (an independent, non-partisan entity composed of private citizens who cannot serve as members of Congress or work for the federal government and charged with reviewing allegations of misconduct against Members) by signing the petition and passing it on to all you know. Demand that this unethical conduct stop.
COMPLAINT AGAINST KEVIN YODER, (R, KANSAS) , TO THE HOUSE OFFICE ON CONGRESSIONAL ETHICS
(The conduct complained of herein is a matter of public record.)
The House Ethics Manual, produced by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, states clearly that Members of the House of Representatives “should conduct themselves at all times in a manner that reflects creditably on the House” and “adhere to the broad ethical standards expressed in the Code of Ethics for Government Service.”
The signers of this petition formally complain to the House of Representatives Office of Congressional Ethics of the following conduct of Kevin Yoder (R, Kansas) which discredits and degrades both the honor and dignity of the House of Representatives and betrays the public trust placed in his office and the House of Representatives:
1. Rep. Yoder failed to adhere to the adhere to the highest moral principles by forcing the passage of a bill using conduct that was tantamount, in both manner and method, to blackmail or extortion: Rep. Yoder attached HR 992 (which was introduced in a previous session of Congress and was passed by the House on October 30, 2013 but was never passed by the Senate), to the 2015 Federal Spending bill, without a formal vote, two days before the Federal Government funding ended, thus forcing all members of the House of Representatives and the Senate to either approve the passage of the spending bill with the attachment of HR 992 (which repealed Section 716 of Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act) or the government would be shutdown.
2. Rep. Yoder discriminated unfairly by the dispensing of special favors under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing the performance of his governmental duties: As noted above, Rep. Yoder attached the bill which repealed Section 716 of Dodd-Frank Financial Reform Act to the 2015 Federal Spending bill without a formal House vote and two days before government funding ran out, forcing the bill to pass under threat of government shutdown. After its failure in the 112th Congress, the bill could have been re-introduced in the 113th Congress (which it had not) or in the 114th Congress. There was no legitimate reason for Rep. Yoder to force the passage of the bill, or even to pass it, in the unethical manner in which it was done, except as a “gift” or special favor to big banks, who had lobbied so heavily for its passage.
3. Rep. Yoder was party to the evasion of a legal regulation and forced (or allowed) all members of the House and Senate to be party the evasion of a legal regulation: According to the federal Office of Comptroller of Currency, more than 90 percent of swaps are held by just four banks: Citibank, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and Bank of America. These major banks and others had requested not one but two delays in having to comply with the requirements of Section 716, which was enacted in 2010, gaining a compliance delay until 2017. In the first three quarters of last year, the securities and investment industry spent nearly $74 million on lobbying — on 704 registered lobbyists — according to the Center for Responsive Politics. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the bill which Rep. Yoder attached contained seventy-one lines (of a total of 80) that were written with the assistance of lobbyists from Citibank, one of the five major banks most benefitted by the bill. These major banks clearly sought to evade this lawful regulation that prohibits public (taxpayer) support for derivatives dealing, which includes access to the Federal Reserve discount window as well as FDIC deposit insurance, and thereby reportedly increased their trading costs.
4. Rep. Yoder engaged in conduct that exhibited a betrayal of the public trust placed in him by the government, the American people and his constituency: Rep. Yoder forced the repeal of a legal regulation that resulted in his government, the American people and his constituency being forced to provide public (taxpayer) support for derivatives dealing, against their best interests or the will of the people expressed in the lawful regulation to the contrary. Requiring public (taxpayer) support through the evasion of a lawful regulation places the interests of major banks over the interests of the government and the American people and runs contrary to the general ethical standard embodied in the Henry Clay quote (and cited in the House Ethics Manual) “Government is a trust, and the officers of the government are trustees; and both the trust and the trustees are created for the benefit of the people.”
From:
Metaphsyical Outlaws In America