House Republicans this week again showed their knack for releasing dubious news about ethical matters at moments perfectly timed to draw minimal attention. A few hours before President Bush's State of the Union address Wednesday night -- an event that always dominates the news -- GOP leaders announced they were ousting the independent-minded chairman of the ethics committee, Joel Hefley (R-Colo.), and adding two committee members who had donated to Majority Leader Tom DeLay's legal defense fund.
The timing reminded some of Sept. 30, when the committee waited until nearly 9 p.m. to release a letter admonishing DeLay (R-Tex.) for offering a political favor to a Michigan lawmaker in exchange for a crucial vote. A week later, the panel again waited until almost 9 p.m. -- when most reporters and cameras had left the Capitol -- to chastise DeLay for asking federal aviation officials to track an airplane involved in a Texas political spat, and for conduct that suggested political donations might influence legislative action.
And on Jan. 3, House GOP leaders coupled a controversial change to ethics rules with a more dramatic announcement, which diminished coverage of the change. Republicans reversed a party rule that would have let DeLay keep his post even if indicted. That drew big headlines, but some watchdog groups were more troubled by the other change: requiring a majority vote to investigate a complaint filed with the evenly divided ethics committee, which allows either party to kill any inquiry by voting as a bloc.
Coincidences? No way, says Melanie Sloan, head of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. "They totally wanted it buried because they're embarrassed," she said of the rules and committee personnel changes. "But they should be ashamed."
Ethics committee officials say they release reports the moment they are completed. As for Hefley's ouster, John Feehery, spokesman for House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.), said: "We released it as soon as we could."
. . . Then There Were Three
Another candidate for Democratic National Committee chair fell by the wayside yesterday as former Vermont governor Howard Dean's campaign team claimed he now has more than enough votes to guarantee a first-ballot victory when party leaders meet here next Saturday.
Simon Rosenberg, founder of the centrist New Democrat Network, folded up his operation and said he was endorsing Dean. "While we have not always agreed on every issue, I believe his passion for our party, his remarkable fighting spirit, his direct and powerful way of speaking, and his commitment to bringing regular people back into our party will allow him to revitalize our party and help us win again in the 21st century," Rosenberg said.
Rosenberg played down the ideological implications of Dean's likely takeover of the party leadership, saying his rival had the most effective campaign among the 447 DNC members who will pick the successor to outgoing chairman Terence R. McAuliffe. "He was always the strongest candidate in the race and he ran a remarkable race," Rosenberg said.
Democrats, he said, are united in spite of ideological differences because they have come to realize that, as the minority party, they must band together to fight President Bush and the Republicans if they hope to improve their standing in the 2006 and 2008 elections.
Dean's campaign claimed support from 250 members of the DNC as of yesterday morning, but officials said they were continuing to focus on gaining additional support. Two others remain in the race: former Indiana representative Timothy J. Roemer, whose campaign has been stymied by his antiabortion position, and strategist Donnie Fowler, who claimed Thursday that he had at least 70 votes among the DNC membership.
