=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+=+

In researching a letter to the local paper I came across this and
sent the following response to the authors.

Hi,

Regarding '"Delay Rule" A Good Thing'

> We haven't said anything about the change in House rules to allow
> leaders to stay in their posts in the event that they are indicted;
> the reason is that we haven't been especially interested in the
> subject. But here is what is going on. Ronnie Earle, the Democratic
> District Attorney in Travis County, Texas, is a notorious partisan
> who has a history of bringing politically-motivated indictments. His
> most infamous indictment was when he charged Kay Bailey Hutchison,

Really? Tell that to the 11 Democratic elected officials he's
prosecuted since he became Travis County DA in 1976 [1].

Austin is a pretty laid back town (which you'd know if you've lived
here since 1985 as I have) and I find it astonishing to find this
previously unknown rabid partisan in our midst outed by citizens of
St. Paul, Minnesota and Washington DC.

> In September, Earle indicted three aides to Tom DeLay, accusing them
> of financial improprieties in connection with the Texas legislative
> elections in 2002. Earle alleges that the aides engaged in "money
> laundering." What happened is that a number of corporations,
> including Sears, made contributions to the Republican National
> Committee. The RNC made contributions to Republican legislative
> candidates, which corporations are not permitted to do.
>
> That's it. That's the purported "crime." Needless to say, these sorts
> of contributions are

Hmm, I guess you haven't been following the articles in the Austin
American-Statesman over the last two years.

I'm not a lawyer which you three gentleman are so I have no idea if
Earle can prove in a court of law that a crime occured, we shall see.
As a layman however my perception of the events as I have seen them
reported is that this prosecution has merit. That alone should
refute any Republican claim to speak from a higher moral authority
than Democrats and others who do not agree with them.

> Douglas Athas writes:
>
> I was listening to NPR yesterday. I was very upset when the reporter,
> Andrea Seabrook, handled the Republican rule change story without any
> depth, not even a hint of the partisan hacks that Ronnie Earle has
> practiced many times and the real basis for the Republican house
> members going on the defensive.

Perhaps you should direct Mr. Athas to this, an NPR segment on
Thursday which provides some perspective on the Mr. Earle's alledged
partisanship.

Continuing Mr. Athas writes:

> But I was most upset by Nanci Pelosi being given a sound bite that
> the Republicans were “lowering their ethical standards.” Now if she
> had been able to say that the Democrats had such a rule, I would have
> been happy to give her a soapbox to stand on. Only they have no such
> rule.

I refer to our own (lives right here in Austin) Molly Ivins [2]:

"The rule was passed in 1993, when Rep. Dan Rostenkowski, chairman of
the powerful Ways and Means Committee, was being investigated for
ethics violations. And who helped lead the floor fight to force him
to resign his powerful position? Why, Tom DeLay, of course.
(Actually, it's sort of a funny story. The D's already had a caucus
rule that you had to resign from any leadership position if indicted.
The R's changed their rules to match the D's, except they
deliberately did not make their rule retroactive, so the highly
indicted Rep. Joseph McDade, senior Republican on the House
Appropriations Committee, could, unlike Rostenkowski, retain his
seat.)".

Regards,
Brendan

1. Inquiry by Travis DA irks state's Republicans
http://www.tpj.org/page_view.jsp?pageid=473&pubid=293

2. Republican ethics, Tom DeLay works to bullet-proof his House dictatorship; Molly Ivins; Creators Syndicate
http://www.workingforchange.com/article.cfm?itemid=18112