Tom Delay's Ace in the Hole

24 May 2005 // How is it possible, I ask myself again and again, that a key figure in the House of Representatives, such as the Majority Leader, Tom Delay, has managed to survive this long where others such as his colleague Newt Gingrich, and Democrat Jim Wright went rather quickly once their ethics violations were became public?

Jim Wright became the subject of an House Ethics investigation in early 1989 that implied he had used bulk purchases of a new book he had written, 'Reflections of a Public Man,' to amass speaking fees in excess of what was allowed by House rules. By late May of that year, Wright sensed he had lost his effectiveness and resigned as Speaker, and in June also resigned from the House.

Newt Gingrich, who had brought the original charges against Wright, faced poetic justice in 1996 when he was fined $300 by the House Ethics Committee for violating House rules for accepting a $4.5 million book advance also in excess of what House members considered to be within the spirit of the rules. And even though he paid back the fines, this together with the perception that he was implicated in Democratic victories that year, led to his exit from the House.

By contrast, Tom Delay has been under investigation for the past three years, was scolded three times last year by the House Ethics Committee which this year issued a report citing violations of House rules when it found that lobbyists paid for some of his travel. So powerful is Delay that he caused the Republican Ethics Committee chairman and some members to be fired and the rules to be changed. But the Democrats pushed back by refusing to attend Committee meetings, causes Speaker Hastert to give in and change the rules back. The rules change would have made it more difficult for the Republican majority in the House to reject an Ethics Committee charge because if it were not decided conclusively after 45 days, it would be dismissed.

Delay carries around an unmistakable air of boldness and arrogance that he earned, by the way, pumping millions of dollars into Republican campaigns. His infamous alliance with Washington lobbyists Jack Abramoff has found former Delay staffers participating in Abramoff's bilking of $66 million from Chippewa Indians and others over their attempt to stabilize their gaming rights. Delay staffers also played a role in raking in $200 millions more from Hawaiian interests. The link to Delay through his former staffers has not yielded a dedicated money trail, but the inference is strong that they did not keep the money, it went where it could influence legislation – which was the point.

This money has had the effect of insulating Delay from punishment for some obvious ills and even though Jack Abramoff is under federal investigation for his role in these cases, it is highly unlikely that he will be punished because he is Delay's cash cow. Proof of it is that right in the midst of the myriad investigations, conservative law makers threw a party for Tom Delay at which they thumbed their collective noses at the allegations against him, further indicating that they plan to let him walk. This, even though 51% of the voters in Delay's own Congressional district disapprove of the job he is doing, while 42 per cent approve, in a poll taken by Houston's KPRC-TV station in April.

Partly because of the linkage between Tom Delay and lobbying interests, the attention of the public has been drawn to Congressional travel. And in that, some journalist have sought to change the subject by pointing to the fact that members of the Congressional Black Caucus are high up on the list of those whose travel has been sponsored. However, a look at the data yields a different picture. The White members of Congress who are high on the list have enjoyed perks paid for by corporate lobbyists in the main, while the travel of Black lawmakers has been paid for by nonprofits who have sponsored them on speaking engagements. To compare them just doesn't wash.

At this moment in history, Tom Delay is to the Congress what Karl Rove is to the White House, he is the keeper of the conservative flame, who rolls the political dice to keep winning, who is brash enough to use the strength of ideology against their enemies, and to brag about their intention to change the course of the country to fit the narrow interests. The power he has amassed is a frightening spectacle, but it is doubtful that it can be disciplined because those whom he has empowered are his protection now and are empowering him in return.