Ethics updates

by

Rep. Maxine Waters wants her ethics trial to be held without delay:

“So my message to the committee is simple: schedule my hearing before the end of the session or tell me, my constituents, and the American public the real reason for this delay,” Waters added. “There is no legal, rules-based or common sense reason to delay this hearing any longer. I want this issue resolved immediately, and I want my constituents to know the person the re-elected with about 80 percent of the vote on November 2nd is doing exactly what they sent her here to do, and that is fight for them.”

Waters has been charged with violating House ethics rules for her actions in 2008 on behalf a minority owned bank where her husband owned more than $350,000 worth of stock.

Meanwhile, Rep. Charlie Rangel pleads for leniency after the full ethics committee ruled that he should be subject to a censure by the full House. Rangel is asking that the House consider a reprimand as opposed to censure:

The 80-year-old Democrat from New York’s Harlem neighborhood wants his punishment for ethics violations downgraded to a reprimand, according to congressional and nongovernment sources who are in touch with Rangel but are not authorized to be quoted by name.

Rangel will ask the House ethics committee chairman, Rep. Zoe Lofgren, D-Calif., for time to plead his case on the floor of the House, where he has served for 40 years, including a stint as chairman of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee.

Categorized in:
Share This:
  • A censure requires the punished member to stand in the well of the House while the Speaker reads the censure aloud and rebukes the member before the whole House. It’s basically a public, verbal flagellation.

    A reprimand does not involve this particular shaming exercise.

  • John Wonderlich

    what’s the difference between a reprimand and a censure?