Busy, but this deserves attention.
Nov. 18th, 2010 01:30 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
redneckgaijinEarlier this week Charles Rangel was convicted by the House Ethics Committee of unethical behavior in not reporting income on several rental houses, on holding four rent-controlled apartments in New York, and other financial corruption.
Today they recommended a sentence, to be voted up or down by the whole House: censure.
Imagine, if you will, a thief having been caught climbing out a window with a sack full of jewelry and a flatscreen TV under one arm. Now imagine that, after conviction, the judge recommended to the jury... that the thief be told, "You're a naughty, naughty boy," and then be released.
That's censure. And that's a joke. It's quite literally no punishment at all. It does no harm whatsoever to the political career of the convicted.
Last week, when I read that the Republicans intend to abolish the Ethics Committee altogether, I was annoyed. Obviously, I thought, Republicans are all in favor of corruption.
But now I've come round to their way of thinking. If you're not willing to punish a criminal, don't waste our time with the goddamn show trial. Don't pretend that you're not just as corrupt and greedy as the person you're investigating.
In fact, how about we abolish congressional investigations altogether? Can anyone name me one instance in the past twenty years where a congressional investigation has led to any policy being changed, any criminal being prosecuted, any net benefit to society whatsoever?
Because I sure can't think of any. Congressional inquiries have just become yet another opportunity for politicians to bloviate in front of cameras. It's a waste of time and money- and further an affront to the idea of the rule of law.
It's long since time we had an independent Justice Department- not one that serves solely at the pleasure of the President and takes his orders. Then maybe- MAYBE- we could get investigations AND prosecutions AND convictions AND punishments that amount to more than shaking a finger at a fat old rich man and saying, "Shame, shame, shame."
Today they recommended a sentence, to be voted up or down by the whole House: censure.
Imagine, if you will, a thief having been caught climbing out a window with a sack full of jewelry and a flatscreen TV under one arm. Now imagine that, after conviction, the judge recommended to the jury... that the thief be told, "You're a naughty, naughty boy," and then be released.
That's censure. And that's a joke. It's quite literally no punishment at all. It does no harm whatsoever to the political career of the convicted.
Last week, when I read that the Republicans intend to abolish the Ethics Committee altogether, I was annoyed. Obviously, I thought, Republicans are all in favor of corruption.
But now I've come round to their way of thinking. If you're not willing to punish a criminal, don't waste our time with the goddamn show trial. Don't pretend that you're not just as corrupt and greedy as the person you're investigating.
In fact, how about we abolish congressional investigations altogether? Can anyone name me one instance in the past twenty years where a congressional investigation has led to any policy being changed, any criminal being prosecuted, any net benefit to society whatsoever?
Because I sure can't think of any. Congressional inquiries have just become yet another opportunity for politicians to bloviate in front of cameras. It's a waste of time and money- and further an affront to the idea of the rule of law.
It's long since time we had an independent Justice Department- not one that serves solely at the pleasure of the President and takes his orders. Then maybe- MAYBE- we could get investigations AND prosecutions AND convictions AND punishments that amount to more than shaking a finger at a fat old rich man and saying, "Shame, shame, shame."
