Boehner Opposes Sweeping Changes In Lobbyist Work

Boehner Opposes Sweeping Changes In Lobbyist Work

By Dana Milbank Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, February 6, 2006; A04

"Newly elected House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said he opposed efforts to ban privately funded travel for members of Congress and provisions in spending bills that fund lawmakers' pet projects."

So much for the efforts to effect reforms in the way things are done in congress. The House leadership opposes the reforms. Earmarks will soon be taken off the table as well. We should not be surprised... the "lucrative favors" offered by those powerful moneymakers that seek to manipulate the legislative process are too "good" to pass up. So for those voters in Ohio that voted for "family values" and "honest Republican leadership" it might be time to reconsider their efforts at the ballot box.

"The views of Boehner, elected by his GOP colleagues on Thursday to succeed Rep. Tom DeLay (R-Tex.), make it less likely that the more far-reaching proposals to restructure lobbying will become law. In interviews on a pair of television talk shows, Boehner amplified his earlier concerns about such broad responses to the Jack Abramoff scandal, including proposals offered by House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.)."

Less likely???? How about not likely at all? Do we not see how deep this corruption goes in our legislators? They are so entrenched in their efforts to control, bask in the benefits of wealth and power, that they have forgotten that they were elected to represent US, not their own interests and wallets.

"'In the past, when these scandals have erupted, what's happened is Congress has overreacted, and two days later nobody knew what happened," he said on "Fox News Sunday.' He said he would favor more disclosure of dealings with lobbyists but would not seek complete bans on travel or "earmark" provisions. 'Bringing more transparency to this relationship, I think, is the best way to control it. But taking actions to ban this and ban that, when there's no appearance of a problem, there's no foundation of a problem, I think, in fact, does not serve the institution well.'"

Overreaction???? The response to Duke Cunningham's millions in "lucrative favors" was an overreaction? The reaction to the Abramoff lobbying scandal is an overreaction? Is Boehner unaware that Delay, Hastert and MANY others are involved in not one, but many scandals? Does Boehner understand history? Has he read, "Showdown At Gucci Gulch"? There is no overreaction, there is a lack of adequate reaction. There is a lack of applied ethics. There is a screwing of the public at public expense... which is twice the amount of dishonesty and fraud. Yes, it is fraud. It may not rise to the criminal definition of fraud, but when someone is elected to represent the people, and serves only their own interests, that is a form of fraud. Voters of Ohio wake up and smell the cow dung this man is shoveling. Voters of America, start re-evaluating who it is that we are sending to congress, the White House and to the court.

"In his Sunday morning debut as majority leader on the talk-show circuit, Boehner also voiced some concern that troubles in Iraq could hurt Republicans at the polls in November, and he said he would not necessarily surrender his new post if DeLay were cleared of charges against him in a Texas money-laundering case."

In other words, "I have the powerful position and am not willing to give it up." We cannot blame him for this kind of entrenchment and self-interest, can we? We cannot expect honesty, fair and faithful representation, full faith and execution of the Constitution or even common decency from our leaders, even those that proclaim from the loudest towers that family values, honest government, and fiscal responsibility are the measures by which we should live. We cannot hold Boehner or any of the Republicans, the conservatives or the ultra-conservatives... after all they are against abortion and for restoring prayer in government-sponsored places, and pushing ultra-conservative Christianity as the only religion allowed in America... we cannot blame them. We have no right to honest representation because it is not specifically spelled out in the Constitution... just ask Justice Alito, Justice Thomas, Justice Scalia, Chief Justice Roberts and the rest of the entrenched conservative judiciary that serves on the federal bench.

I do not ask for a sweeping change of ideology. I seek only a fair representation of all the values and voices that is the United States of America. I seek only fairness of access and representation of what is good for all Americans, not just the majority or those that have power, wealth and influence.