No Controlling Legal Authority

You know, every time I hear or read some conservative or pundit explain that Tom DeLay has done nothing technically illegal, I cast my mind back to the days of Al Gore's statement that there was "no controlling legal authority" to come down on him for any fundraising violations he may have committed. And I remember the chorus of howls and wails from the punditocracy and the right-wing bloviators over that comment, and how they drudged it up during his run for the White House in 2000.

Three important things to remember: One, there is indeed a difference between what's legal and what's right. Was it legal for Bill Clinton to be serviced by someone not his wife in the Oval Office? Yes. But was it right? (It was illegal to lie about it later.)

Two, if Tom DeLay did break the law, there are institutions that will ferret out that truth (district attorneys, a free press--theoretically). Until then, we have only the evidence before us that Tom DeLay did some pretty shady--if pretty common--things.

Three, though, the mechanism supposedly in place for addressing shady behavior on the part of Representatives like DeLay is the House Ethics Committee, which has been made toothless by those who benefitted from DeLay's generosity over the years. As Barney Frank (no stranger to ethics violations he!) pointed out, "I, 15 years ago, had a problem because I behaved inappropriately. The ethics committee stepped in. Newt Gingrich had a problem. He was reprimanded; the ethics committee stepped in. The difference between us and Mr. DeLay is, I think, we changed our behavior. Mr. DeLay changed the ethics committee."

Indeed. Cigar, Mr. DeLay?