Whatever the watchwords
For those who missed this fiasco, here’s the short version. Meeting privately in the dark of night on the eve of the new Congress being convened, Republicans in the U.S. House, contrary to the advice of their leaders, voted without notice to essentially neuter the Office of Congressional Ethics, an independent body established in 2008 after House lawmakers became enmeshed in a series of scandals. Predictably — although they apparently did not predict it — by the next morning this bold initiative had ignited a firestorm of criticism from the public and from both liberal and conservative watchdog groups. After President-elect Donald Trump took to Twitter to question their priorities, and by inference their sanity, the Republican caucus beat a hasty retreat and dropped the plan.
This debacle has been characterized by some observers as a classic case of overreach by the majority party newly emboldened by November’s election results. To others, it seemed less explicable. “Mr. Trump campaigned that he was going to drain the swamp (in Washington), and here we are on Day 1 trying to fill the swamp,” said Rep. Walter B. Jones, Republican of North Carolina, once his colleagues had reversed course. “That is not a good way to start.” From this we conclude that Jones is a master of understatement.
But how, after the election of Trump, could Republican lawmakers so completely misread the public’s disgust with business as usual? Well, here’s one possible explanation. They have correctly inferred from Trump’s appointments to date that far from draining the swamp, his administration is about to make lobbyists for corporate interests the most powerful alligators in that swamp. Businesses certainly understand that there is a lot of opportunity to make money as Trump pursues such priorities as deregulation, a major infrastructure improvement program and repealing Obamacare. That being the case, lawmakers wanted to lose no time in freeing themselves to accept the lobbyists’ largesse without worrying that the services they perform in return would continue to be subject to the scrutiny of an independent ethics watchdog.
What is ironic is that the Office of Congressional Ethics is, according to The New York Times, loathed by many members of both parties because of its aggressive investigations of ethics violations, which they deem to be unfair. Had the Republicans bided their time, they might have been able to eviscerate the ethics office without such intense public backlash and perhaps with some bipartisan support. But by taking the lead and making it their first order of business, the Republicans handed Democrats a cudgel with which to batter them. Some of the outrage on the other side of the aisle appeared genuine, though. “Evidently, ethics are the first casualty of the new Republican Congress,” said Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., the House Minority leader, who helped to create the ethics office.
Only time will tell whether this mess presages another two years of Republicans in the House taking careful aim at their own feet and hitting the target with regularity. That rank-and-file party members continue to ignore their own leaders’ advice and create distractions from their sworn intention to undo eight years of progress under President Obama suggests that that might be the case, which would be good news in our view. On the other hand, perhaps Trump’s tweets will be enough to keep them in line.