Jeffersonian corruption
By Michael J.W. Stickings
When I saw this vague headline at The Hill -- "CBC digs in for Jefferson" -- I immediately wondered, being a good Canadian, what the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation had to do with some guy named Jefferson.
Ah, but of course, it's the the Congressional Black Caucus, not the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and, well, that CBC, as the article states, "dug in its heels yesterday in defense of indicted Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) and expressed concerns that a House ethics investigation on the lawmaker’s alleged corrupt activities could influence, even poison, a future jury trial". And that's pretty stupid, if predictable, when you think about it.
Jefferson, as many of you might know, is at the center of a major scandal. Last year, the FBI found $90,000 in cash at his house in Washington -- in the freezer, of all places, wrapped in aluminum foil and stashed in frozen-food containers. He was indicted this past Monday. Here's the story:
In other words, Jefferson is pretty much the personification of political corruption. As the Post put it in an editorial, the indictment is "is staggering in the scope and audacity of the bribery schemes it portrays [him] as having peddled". On Tuesday, the House launched an ethics investigation of Jefferson. Meanwhile, Jefferson resigned from the House Small Business Committee, the last committee seat he held. Yesterday, a federal judge froze Jefferson's assets. He will be arraigned today in federal court.
Though he continues to deny his guilt, Jefferson hardly has any support left. The key exception is the CBC. While the House moved to investigate and his major hometown newspaper, The Times-Picayune (New Orleans), said he had become "a liability for his district and Louisiana," a key concern for Democrats was whether the indictment would "rekindle a smoldering dispute between [Speaker Nancy Pelosi] and black lawmakers who were once pillars of her power. Indeed, the CBC has "stood by Jefferson and against the Democratic leadership" throughout this scandal.
What is evident is that the CBC is not pursuing justice but defending one of its own. (Those of you who have read Plato's Republic would be right to suspect that Polemarchus would likely side with the CBC on this, so flawed is his understanding of justice.) If Jefferson were white (or Hispanic, or whatever), the CBC likely wouldn't be in his corner holding firm on such principles as the presumption of innocence, which is precisely what it is doing now. The problem, of course, is that Jefferson is no ordinary citizen. He is a member of Congress and, as such, subject to certain ethics rules. The presumption of innocence is indeed a noble principle, one of the foundations of the American justice system (not to mention of liberal democratic justice systems generally), and is is one that must to be defended vigorously, not least in this time of peril for habeas corpus. But this is not about putting Jefferson on trial in "the chambers of public opinion," as the CBC chair, Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-Mich.), put it, rather than in "a court of law". Jefferson's day in court -- many days, one imagines -- will come.
For now, what is at issue is his conduct as a member of Congress, conduct that has been, in a word, appalling. It shouldn't matter that he is black (and a member of the CBC), nor that he is a Democrat. Whatever he has done to himself, his family, and his party, not to mention to the public, he has shamed the institution of which is a member, and that institution, such a vital one at the very core of American democracy, should have no place for him. The two parties continue to play politics, of course, and are hardly pure, individually or collectively, when it comes to ethical behaviour. But the right thing to do is what is being done, which is investigating Jefferson's conduct internally prior to, and irrespective of, a future trial.
Jefferson's conduct has been appalling, but it also appalling that the CBC continues to stand by him just because he is one of its own.
When I saw this vague headline at The Hill -- "CBC digs in for Jefferson" -- I immediately wondered, being a good Canadian, what the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation had to do with some guy named Jefferson.
Ah, but of course, it's the the Congressional Black Caucus, not the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, and, well, that CBC, as the article states, "dug in its heels yesterday in defense of indicted Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.) and expressed concerns that a House ethics investigation on the lawmaker’s alleged corrupt activities could influence, even poison, a future jury trial". And that's pretty stupid, if predictable, when you think about it.
Jefferson, as many of you might know, is at the center of a major scandal. Last year, the FBI found $90,000 in cash at his house in Washington -- in the freezer, of all places, wrapped in aluminum foil and stashed in frozen-food containers. He was indicted this past Monday. Here's the story:
Federal authorities accused Rep. William J. Jefferson yesterday of using his congressional office and staff to enrich himself and his family, charging the Louisiana Democrat with offering and accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars in bribes to support business ventures in the United States and several West African nations.
The 16-count indictment also accused Jefferson, a former co-chairman of congressional caucuses on Nigeria and African trade, of racketeering, money laundering and obstruction of justice. The indictment was handed up by a federal grand jury and capped a long and tumultuous FBI investigation.
The grand jury said Jefferson, 60, had solicited a bribe for himself and family members in a congressional dining room, falsely reported trips to Africa as official business, sought to corrupt a senior Nigerian politician and promoted U.S. financing for a sugar factory in Nigeria whose owner paid fees to a Jefferson family company in his home state.
In other words, Jefferson is pretty much the personification of political corruption. As the Post put it in an editorial, the indictment is "is staggering in the scope and audacity of the bribery schemes it portrays [him] as having peddled". On Tuesday, the House launched an ethics investigation of Jefferson. Meanwhile, Jefferson resigned from the House Small Business Committee, the last committee seat he held. Yesterday, a federal judge froze Jefferson's assets. He will be arraigned today in federal court.
Though he continues to deny his guilt, Jefferson hardly has any support left. The key exception is the CBC. While the House moved to investigate and his major hometown newspaper, The Times-Picayune (New Orleans), said he had become "a liability for his district and Louisiana," a key concern for Democrats was whether the indictment would "rekindle a smoldering dispute between [Speaker Nancy Pelosi] and black lawmakers who were once pillars of her power. Indeed, the CBC has "stood by Jefferson and against the Democratic leadership" throughout this scandal.
What is evident is that the CBC is not pursuing justice but defending one of its own. (Those of you who have read Plato's Republic would be right to suspect that Polemarchus would likely side with the CBC on this, so flawed is his understanding of justice.) If Jefferson were white (or Hispanic, or whatever), the CBC likely wouldn't be in his corner holding firm on such principles as the presumption of innocence, which is precisely what it is doing now. The problem, of course, is that Jefferson is no ordinary citizen. He is a member of Congress and, as such, subject to certain ethics rules. The presumption of innocence is indeed a noble principle, one of the foundations of the American justice system (not to mention of liberal democratic justice systems generally), and is is one that must to be defended vigorously, not least in this time of peril for habeas corpus. But this is not about putting Jefferson on trial in "the chambers of public opinion," as the CBC chair, Rep. Carolyn Kilpatrick (D-Mich.), put it, rather than in "a court of law". Jefferson's day in court -- many days, one imagines -- will come.
For now, what is at issue is his conduct as a member of Congress, conduct that has been, in a word, appalling. It shouldn't matter that he is black (and a member of the CBC), nor that he is a Democrat. Whatever he has done to himself, his family, and his party, not to mention to the public, he has shamed the institution of which is a member, and that institution, such a vital one at the very core of American democracy, should have no place for him. The two parties continue to play politics, of course, and are hardly pure, individually or collectively, when it comes to ethical behaviour. But the right thing to do is what is being done, which is investigating Jefferson's conduct internally prior to, and irrespective of, a future trial.
Jefferson's conduct has been appalling, but it also appalling that the CBC continues to stand by him just because he is one of its own.
posted by Michael J.W. Stickings at
12:39 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home