Tag Archives: ethics

Tom DeLay Cleared — N.Y. Times Puts the Story on Page A-18 (Behind Organic Golf Courses)

When former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay announced that the Justice Department was dropping its six-year investigation of his relationship with convicted lobbyist Jack Abramoff, The Washington Post put the news on the front page Tuesday. The New York Times decided that this story was best put on page A-18. The front page of the Times covered flooding in Pakistan, Team Obama’s tough evaluation of offshore drilling permits, and a chilling Rod Nordland story on new public executions by the Taliban in northern Afghanistan. But the front page also offered “Walking in New York? Beware Men Turning Left” and “Exclusive Golf Course Is Also Organic, So a Weed or Two Get In.” At least the Times covered the DeLay story. To date, the newspaper “of record” has not mentioned Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s exclamation last Tuesday that “I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican.” The Times was quick to note that DeLay still faces the indictment of Democratic Travis County prosecutor Ronnie Earle from 2005. The caption under DeLay’s picture read “Tom DeLay still faces a trial in Texas on unrelated charges of money laundering and conspiracy.” Reporter Charlie Savage elaborated: Mr. DeLay’s legal troubles are not yet over. He still faces a trial in Texas on unrelated state charges of money laundering and conspiracy in connection with campaign donations during the 2002 election. A trial on those charges, for which he was indicted in 2005, was delayed for years because of an appeal by co-defendants, but a hearing on pretrial motions is scheduled for next week. Savage made no attempt to calculate how much money the federal government has spent investigating DeLay, which was standard operating procedure for the media during Clinton investigations. Instead, Savage reminded the reader of all the prosecutors’ successes: The scandal, which helped Democrats win majorities in Congress in the 2006 election, led to convictions or guilty pleas by two of Mr. DeLay’s former aides; former Representative Bob Ney, Republican of Ohio; two former White House officials; Mr. Abramoff himself; and several other former Congressional aides and lobbyists. Mr. Abramoff was released from prison in June. There were no conservative groups to complain about the partisanship of the process, but Savage did bring in a liberal group (without a label) to lament how it was a malodorous outrage that DeLay hadn’t been jailed: Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a government watchdog group, sharply criticized the Justice Department’s decision to close the investigation into Mr. DeLay’s role without charges. “It’s a sad day for America when one of the most corrupt members to ever walk the halls of Congress gets a free pass,” Ms. Sloan said. “The Justice Department’s decision not to prosecute Mr. DeLay for his actions sends exactly the wrong message to current and future members.” The only supporter of DeLay in the Times piece was DeLay: But Mr. DeLay said that he had done nothing wrong and that his political enemies had spent more than  “criminalization of politics and the politics of personal destruction” that he contended his case exemplified. “The new politics — it’s a decade coming up with “frivolous” ethics charges against him. He denounced the “criminalization of politics and the politics of personal destruction” that he contended his case exemplified. “The new politics — it’s no longer good enough to beat you on policy,” he said. “They have to completely drown you and put you in prison and destroy your family and your reputation and finances, then dance on your grave.”

Read more:
Tom DeLay Cleared — N.Y. Times Puts the Story on Page A-18 (Behind Organic Golf Courses)

Ohio Dems Try to Revive Debunked Smear Against Hannity-backed Charity

The Democratic Party of Ohio has recycled a thoroughly debunked smear against Fox News host Sean Hannity and Freedom Alliance, a charity he works with regularly that raises money to educate the children of American servicemen. A release  from the Ohio Dems claimed that Rep. John Kasich, Republican candidate for governor, “promote[d] Hannity’s scandal-ridden ‘Freedom Alliance’ concerts that are under investigation for misappropriating charitable donations.” The Ohio Dems cited a complaint by the technically non-partisan, but ideologically liberal group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington. CREW claimed that the charity, Freedom Alliance, had “awarded $2,147,750 in scholarships,” only half of what they spent on salaries, and a quarter of what they spent on shipping expenses, according to their complaint to the Federal Trade Commission. But this line of attack on Freedom Alliance is bogus. CREW fails to note that since most servicemen are relatively young, most of money Freedom Alliance raises is put in a trust fund until soldiers’ children are old enough to take advantage of it. Hence, while the charity raised roughly $2.1 million for scholarships in 2008 alone, according to its 990 form ( pdf ), it only spent about $800,000 that year, putting the rest into the trust. CREW’s claim that the charity only spent $2.1 million on scholarships over five years is disingenuous. While the number is technically correct, the scholarship fund contained $15,919,391 as of 2008, according to the 990 linked above, all slated to be spent on educating the children of servicemen when they reach the appropriate age. Jon Soltz, chairman of the left-wing advocacy group VoteVets.org, which according to Politico “is backing CREW,” claimed “80 to 90 percent” of funds raised should benefit veterans and their families. But there is no indicator that Soltz was referring to any funds other than the money spent directly on scholarships the year they were raised. As noted above, that number does not tell the full story. Also noted in the Democratic release is Freedom Alliance’s “F” rating from the American Institute of Philanthropy. But the release does not delve into AIP’s criteria for that grade. According to the organization’s website , top-rated charities “generally spend 75% or more of their budgets on programs, spend $25 or less to raise $100 in public support, do not hold excessive assets in reserve, and receive ‘open-book’ status for disclosure of basic financial information and documents to AIP.” Accorfing to its 990 form for 2007 (the year it got that rating, according to the release – pdf ), Freedom Alliance spent $1,011,501 on fundraising, and raised $10,762,256 in public support. That means it spent less than $10 on fundraising for each $100 it raised, well below the $25 threshold set by AIP. Of Freedom Alliance’s $7,461,350 budget that year, $6,084,474, or roughly 81.5 percent, was spent on programs. The remaining two criteria – a charity’s open-book status and the size of its reserves – are the only factors that could have earned it the “F” rating. But as discussed above, Freedom Alliance keeps massive reserves (compared to the amount it pays out annually) so that it can afford to pay for scholarships when the young children of currently twenty-something servicemen come of age (the average soldier is in his mid-twenties). So either the nature of the Freedom Alliance charity earned it the “F” rating – a completely benevolent reason – or AIP does not enjoy “open-book” status with it (or both). In any case, it hardly seems that Freedom Alliance is deserving of the “scandal-ridden” label given it in the Ohio Democrats’ release. In all, the release contains nothing more than baseless accusations against Hannity and Freedom Alliance. The Democratic Party is apparently trying to revive it in an effort to damage a political opponent. It’s a shame that Hannity and Freedom Alliance are caught in the middle of this political game.

See the article here:
Ohio Dems Try to Revive Debunked Smear Against Hannity-backed Charity

Our Rangel Game: Which Eugene Robinson Is It?

On August 5, 2010, The Washington Post published a short editorial by Eugene Robinson with the title “Charlie Rangel’s no crook.” But on October 9, 2009, the same Eugene Robinson penned a column titled ” Charlie Rangel’s Cloud: An Ethics Case Could Drag Democrats Down.” The closer we get to elections, Robinson seems to get progressively less impressed with the case against Rangel. This is his new Rangel-name-is-cleared line: Charlie Rangel’s no crook. He’s right to insist on the opportunity to clear his name, because the charges against him range from the technical all the way to the trivial. All right, there’s one exception: On his federal tax returns, Rangel failed to declare rental income from a vacation property he owns in the Dominican Republic — a mortifying embarrassment for the one-time chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, which writes the tax code. But certain facts about this transgression rarely get mentioned. For one thing, Rangel’s so-called “villa” can’t be very palatial, since it cost only $82,750 when he bought it in 1987. For another, Rangel has already filed amended tax returns and paid everything he owed, plus penalties and interest. The remaining charges are yawn-inducing. Even assuming that the allegations, as presented to the House Ethics Committee, are wholly true, the case against Rangel has a Gertrude Stein problem: There’s no there there. Compare that mistakes-were-made line to what Robinson wrote last fall:  House Democrats had better start taking the ethics allegations against Rep. Charlie Rangel seriously. I know it’s difficult for those steeped in Capitol Hill’s hermetic culture to understand, but a verdict of “mistakes were made” — which a lot of Democrats would like to reach — doesn’t cut it in the real world. Strange as it seems. Seriously. Welcome to Eugene vs. Eugene. He is seriously beating himself up. There’s more from last year: If you win big majorities in both the House and Senate by railing against a “culture of corruption” in Washington, as the Democratic Party did, voters tend to get the wacky notion that you actually mean what you say. The violations that Rangel is alleged to have committed are, inconveniently for him, easy for anyone to understand. The most serious, perhaps, is the allegation that he failed to pay taxes on about $75,000 in income from renting out a beach house that he owns in the Dominican Republic. For the chairman of the House committee that writes tax legislation not to pay his fair share in taxes would be as bad as, say, for the secretary of the Treasury not to pay his fair share in taxes. (Hold it, maybe that’s a bad example .) The most stunning alleged violation is more of a technicality: That on required financial disclosure forms, Rangel failed to list more than $500,000 in assets. The average citizen isn’t likely to have half a million bucks somehow slip his mind, since the average citizen doesn’t have anything near half a million bucks. And we’re not talking easily overlooked “Antiques Roadshow” assets — a dusty painting in the attic that turns out to be the work of a second-tier Old Master, or a rickety chair in the basement that experts date as 18th century. What Rangel failed to declare were liquid assets — a credit union account worth more than $250,000 and an investment account also worth more than $250,000 — plus some real estate he owns in New Jersey and assorted stock holdings. If you quoted this column back to New Eugene, he might accuse you of being a partisan Republican hack. New Eugene also had this to say on MSNBC’s Morning Joe (as MRC’s Rachel Burnett found). Scarborough said the messes around Rangel and Maxine Waters aren’t good for the Democrats as a whole, even though Joe likes Maxine “very much.” Robinson replied that Rangel’s replies were changing his formerly tough journalistic mind: On the other hand, it is what happens if you run against culture of corruption; you actually crack down and ramp up the ethics committee and, you know, look for the stuff you find it. I think my assessment of the two cases would actually be a bit different from yours, actually. I haven’t read that deeply into the Waters case but that really sounds pretty bad. I mean, on its face it sounds like there should be a refusal by her and stayed away from that. I have, however, gone through Charlie Rangel’s 32-page response to the charges against him. And it’s still very bad for him politically . I think he’s not without any legs to stand on, however. We keep saying 13 ethics charges. It really boils down to three or four incidents and when you actually look at them, you know, some of them are not all that troublesome. So I actually understand why he wants to have his day in court. PS: In 2005, Robinson giddily looked forward to Tom DeL:ay in jail in a piece titled “Immoral Majority.”   So pardon me for going way beyond schadenfreude to outright giddiness at the prospect that the Hammer will finally get nailed. It may be too much to hope that the former House majority leader — and how good it feels to write “former” — will actually be convicted and do jail time. The indictment for criminal conspiracy returned by a Texas grand jury on Wednesday is for alleged campaign finance violations that are the rough equivalent of money laundering, which is not the easiest crime to prove in court. Five years later, and Eugene’s still waiting for that conviction. 

Read this article:
Our Rangel Game: Which Eugene Robinson Is It?

‘If I Had a Hammer’: WaPo Hippie Columnist Would Like to Pummel GOP Folk Singer

Washington Post Magazine humorist Gene Weingarten reacted badly in his Sunday column to the discovery that folk singer Arlo Guthrie is now a registered Republican: “By becoming a Republican, Arlo Guthrie has shredded the last remnants of my faith that our hippie principles had any lasting meaning. How can he do this to us? I’m a peaceable man, but if I had a hammer…” Guthrie didn’t become one of those warmongering neocons. He endorsed Ron Paul for president in early 2008. But Weingarten began with his marijuana-baked enthusiasm for hippiedom, which he clearly still loves dearly: Like many middle-age people, I wear more than one hat. I’m a husband, a father, a journalist, a role model to a generation of idealistic young Americans, etc. But one of my favorite hats, the floppy felt one that still smells faintly of the sweet smoke of a controlled substance, is “former hippie.” We children of the ’60s tenaciously hold on to this self-image, even though our mirrors tell us that in terms of sheer hipness, we look more like Arlen Specter than Arlo Guthrie. Weingarten — who is not simply a yuk-yuk man, but a man who used to edit the Post’s influential Style section — discovered that Arlo Guthrie’s “iconic, self-deprecating, darkly comic, anti-war counterculture masterpiece” of a song “Alice’s Restaurant” didn’t make complete sense as nonfiction. The song no longer seemed to “speak truth to power.” So he called Guthrie up: Me: So, you were arrested for illegally dumping a half-ton of garbage that you scooped up from the floor of Alice’s home, and took away to dispose of as a favor, right? Arlo: Right. Me: And you were nailed by the fuzz because Officer Obie found your name on an envelope in that half-ton pile of garbage and phoned you. And in the funniest line of the song, you solemnly admitted to Officer Obie that you had put that envelope under that half-ton of garbage, right? Arlo: Right. Me: Why was your name in the garbage from Alice’s restaurant? Wasn’t that all Alice’s garbage? Arlo: In 40 years, no one ever asked me that. Me: Well, someone is asking now. Arlo: Bravo. I will hate you forever for this. Me: [Pause] Arlo: Okay, we have to attribute that line to creative license. Obie actually found a paper with Ray’s name — Ray was Alice’s husband — and Ray directed them to me. But it worked better in the song the other way. Me: So, no biggie? A misstatement is okay because it “worked better”? Guthrie didn’t answer, but Weingarten compared his worship of Guthrie’s “counterculture masterpiece” to the miracles of Jesus: Me: I don’t want to overstate my disillusionment here. But this is like hearing Jesus say, “Okay, I didn’t turn the water into wine, exactly. Actually, I just added some Kool-Aid powder and turned it into a nice, refreshing beverage.” Weingarten learned Guthrie’s party affiliation by further complaining: “Did you learn your ethics from your dad [socialist folk singer Woody Guthrie]? Might it be that this land was really made for him and just a few of his cronies?” Arlo responded: “You know, it’s possible. I’ve heard that song sung at Republican conventions.” This means that Arlo Guthrie is actually more light-hearted about his politics than the humor writer is.

Read more from the original source:
‘If I Had a Hammer’: WaPo Hippie Columnist Would Like to Pummel GOP Folk Singer

Louisiana Woman Sounds Alarm Over Looming Gulf Health Disaster

Forget BP and their spin doctors, here's the low down from a very brave Louisiana woman, Kindra Arnesen, who isn't willing to to be sacrificed to big money and big business… added by: afloyd60

Illegal Sarah Palin defense fund must give back donations

A legal defense fund for former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin was illegal and must repay nearly $400,000 to donors, according to a settlement with a state-appointed lawyer announced on Thursday. But Palin, the feisty former Republican vice presidential candidate who has become a fixture of the conservative Tea Party movement, probably violated a state ethics act without knowing she was doing so, independent counsel Tim Petumenos said. While governor, Palin faced some two dozen ethics complaints, which she said left her with a legal bill of more than $500,000. Her political action committee raised a fund to pay for her defense. A preliminary ruling by another independent counsel last year said the fund was illegal because it used her official position as governor to raise money for her personal gain. Petumenos confirmed the decision and said no such legal defense fund had ever been set up before for a state official in Alaska. Palin violated the ethics rules because she was a beneficiary of the fund but probably relied on bad advice from out-of-state lawyers to conclude it was above board, Petumenos said at a news conference. He added that Palin should have checked with the state attorney general before pursuing the fund. “It is the responsibility of every public official to make sure they are personally compliant with the (Alaska Ethics) Act,” he said. The deal requires Palin's fund to give back to donors $386,856 collected while she was in office. A further $33,546 collected after she resigned will not be affected by the deal. Palin, no longer a public official, has launched a new defense fund. She is now independently wealthy but her lawyer, Thomas Van Flein, told reporters he still believed she ran up the legal costs in her capacity as governor and so a new fund was justified. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE65O0AG20100625 added by: Stoneyroad

Doctors Without Borders, With a Film Crew

By Emily Wilson Mark Hopkins, the director of the new documentary “Living in Emergency,” about the international humanitarian organization Médecins Sans Frontières—Doctors Without Borders—compares the group to the Special Forces. Not many people get accepted to the program, and of those who are, few go on to do a second mission. Related Entries May 31, 2010 What’s Not to Like About Civil Rights? May 31, 2010 Memorial Day and Our Discontents

Here is the original post:
Doctors Without Borders, With a Film Crew

Big Apple? More Like Big Brother

Citing the specter of terrorism, an appeals court overturned a decision that would have forced New York City to turn over documents detailing the surveillance of demonstrators, street performers and other ne’er-do-wells who may have threatened the 2004 Republican convention … and our national security, of course. New York Times: More than 1,800 people were arrested and fingerprinted during the convention, but lawyers for the civil liberties group, representing some of those arrested, were seeking the documents to see how and why arrests were made and what information the police may have had before they made the arrests. In recent years, the city has paid millions of dollars to many of those who sued after their arrests, asserting that they had been improperly taken into custody. Many were herded into pens at a West Side pier in Manhattan that was dubbed Guantánamo on the Hudson. Read more Related Entries May 31, 2010 What’s Not to Like About Civil Rights? May 31, 2010 Memorial Day and Our Discontents

Read more:
Big Apple? More Like Big Brother

NBA Leads Sports in Diversity

Professional sports have long had a disconnect between the players and management where diversity is concerned, so hats off to the NBA for setting an example for baseball, football and that weird boring ice game. The basketball league scores an A in both racial and gender diversity, with women sitting at 44 percent of the desks in league offices. AP via ESPN: The NBA was again the only men’s professional sports league to receive a combined “A” for race and gender in the annual report released Wednesday by the University of Central Florida’s Institute for Diversity and Ethics in Sport. Women made up 44 percent of professional employees at the league offices. That increased by one percent from last year, higher than any other men’s professional league in any previous study but still below the NBA’s high of 49 percent in the 1995-96 season. There also were 34 women in vice president positions in the league office, an increase of three. And while the league received high marks for gender again, Lapchick said that might be the area the NBA can make the biggest strides. Read more Related Entries May 31, 2010 What’s Not to Like About Civil Rights? May 31, 2010 Memorial Day and Our Discontents

See the original post here:
NBA Leads Sports in Diversity

Nun at St. Joseph’s Hospital (Phoenix) "Rebuked" Over Abortion Decision to Save Woman

Nun at St. Joseph's Hospital rebuked over abortion to save woman by Michael Clancy – May. 15, 2010 12:00 AM The Arizona Republic Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/articles/2010/05/15/20100515phoenix-catholi… A Catholic nun and longtime administrator of St. Joseph's Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix was reassigned in the wake of a decision to allow a pregnancy to be ended in order to save the life of a critically ill patient. The decision also drew a sharp rebuke from Bishop Thomas J. Olmsted, head of the Phoenix Diocese, who indicated the woman was “automatically excommunicated” because of the action. Neither the hospital nor the bishop's office would address whether the bishop had a direct role in her demotion. He does not have control of the hospital as a business but is the voice of moral authority over any Catholic institution operating in the diocese. The actions involving the administrator, mostly taken within the past couple of weeks, followed a last-minute, life-or-death drama in late 2009. The patient had a rare and often fatal condition in which a pregnancy can cause the death of the mother. Sister Margaret McBride, who had been vice president of mission integration at the hospital, was on call as a member of the hospital's ethics committee when the surgery took place, hospital officials said. She was part of a group of people, including the patient and doctors, who decided upon the course of action. The patient was not identified, and details of her case cannot be revealed under federal privacy laws. The Catholic Church forbids abortion in all circumstances and allows the termination of a pregnancy only as a secondary effect of other treatments, such as radiation of a cancerous uterus. The hospital defended the ethics committee's decision. In a statement, Suzanne Pfister, a hospital vice president, said that the facility adheres to the Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services but that the directives do not answer all questions. “In this tragic case, the treatment necessary to save the mother's life required the termination of an 11-week pregnancy,” Pfister said. Pfister issued the four-paragraph statement on behalf of the hospital, its parent company Catholic Healthcare West, and the Sisters of Mercy, McBride's religious order. McBride was part of the discussion about the surgery, described as urgent. It involved a serious illness, pulmonary hypertension. The condition limits the ability of the heart and lungs to function and is made worse, possibly even fatal, by pregnancy. In a statement issued to The Republic late Friday, the diocese confirmed that Olmsted learned of the case after the surgery. “I am gravely concerned by the fact that an abortion was performed several months ago in a Catholic hospital in this diocese,” Olmsted said. “I am further concerned by the hospital's statement that the termination of a human life was necessary to treat the mother's underlying medical condition. “An unborn child is not a disease. While medical professionals should certainly try to save a pregnant mother's life, the means by which they do it can never be by directly killing her unborn child. The end does not justify the means.” Olmsted added that if a Catholic “formally cooperates” in an abortion, he or she is automatically excommunicated. Excommunication forbids the person from participating in church life. Remedies are available through an appeal to the Vatican or confession. “The Catholic Church will continue to defend life and proclaim the evil of abortion without compromise, and must act to correct even her own members if they fail in this duty,” the bishop said. It is unknown whether the bishop took action against the others who were involved in the matter, and Pfister would not answer questions about the physicians involved in the surgery. Neither Olmsted nor his spokesman at the Phoenix Diocese would answer additional questions. Although Olmsted does not have direct control of the hospital, his authority as bishop over Catholic institutions is substantial. For one thing, religious orders work in the Valley at his invitation. In an e-mail, Pfister said McBride has been transferred “to another position in the hospital to focus on a number of new strategic initiatives.” According to the medical directives that the hospital follows, abortion is defined as the directly intended termination of pregnancy, and it is not permitted under any circumstances – even to save the life of the mother. On the other hand, a second directive says that “operations, treatments and medications that have as their direct purpose the cure of a proportionately serious pathological condition of a pregnant woman are permitted . . . even if they will result in the death of the unborn child.” A letter sent Monday from Catholic Healthcare West, signed by Sister Judith Carle, board chairwoman, and President and CEO Lloyd Dean, asks Olmsted to provide further clarification about the directives. Agreeing that in a healthy mother, pregnancy is “not a pathology,” it says this case was different. The pregnancy, the letter says, carried a nearly certain risk of death for the mother. “If there had been a way to save the pregnancy and still prevent the death of the mother, we would have done it,” the letter says. “We are convinced there was not.” James J. Walter, professor of bioethics at Loyola Marymount University in Los Angeles, a Catholic university, said that is a tough argument to make. He said a pregnancy may be terminated only in limited, indirect circumstances, such as uterine cancer, in which the cancer treatment takes the life of the fetus. Catholic teaching, he said, is that a pregnancy cannot be terminated as a means to an end of saving the life of a mother who is suffering from a different condition. Asked if the church position prefers the mother and child to die, rather than sparing the life of one of them, Walters said the hope is that both would survive. Not all faith groups see things the same way. The Jewish tradition, the Mormon Church and the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America are among the groups that frown on abortion on demand but permit it when the life of the mother is at stake or if the mother is impregnated by rape or incest. McBride declined to be interviewed. She was the highest-ranking member of the Sisters of Mercy at the hospital, which the order founded in 1895. Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/articles/2010/05/15/20100515phoenix-catholi… http://www.stjosephs-phx.org/Who_We_Are/188732 added by: EthicalVegan