WaPo has an article about how the dems in the house intend to tackle ethics. They intend to include the new freshmen entering (some of whom ran on ethics issues) and they seem to want to actually have debates on the issues and open up the various blots up to the public.
I think that bills that are freely debated and aired in public beat the heck out of the midnight specials engineered by the repubs the last 6 years. I know that we have talked often on these pages about what we would like to see happen but I just can’t get enough of the current whiff of hope.
What if the dems actually include ideas and debates from the newcomers (and maybe even the newly minted minority)? Would the airings get airing on the air? Or would it just be more “DEMS IN DISARRAY”?
Options for invigorating the ethics committees include: independent oversight, ethic committee alone, and independent oversight that sends egregious behaviour to the ethics committee. I would wish they would add one: ethics committee sends egregious behaviour to the independent oversight, but maybe they have the right of it.
more on the flip
Other options for ethics were listed as pulling apart various behaviours that need spelling out in ethics bills such as lobbyists gifts and travel. Nothing was said of the continual need for fund raising by the members of the house since they run every two years. Abramoff got some of his clout by helping out with fund raisers and with giving spouses work through third party avenues. I still think we need to address 1)free air time for candidates, 2)revisiting the fairness doctrine 3)opening up venues for debates of all sorts.
If the MSM isn’t going to give enough coverage and enough background to the various issues to help people determine what is needed then blogs will have to step up to the plate in some fashion. We have done so in the past with limited means and resources. Maybe with the new freshmen looking to increase their own clout, they will find common cause with the blogs?