The House censured Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) Thursday evening, a dramatic downfall for the once powerful chairman of the Ways and Means panel.
In an overwhleming vote of 333-79, the House handed down its steepest form of punishment short of expulsion to one of the most senior and beloved members of the House.
Rangel, a 40-year veteran of the House, is only the 23rd lawmaker to be censured in the history of the House and the fifth in the last 100 years.
Rangel spoke to his colleagues, reassuring them he will not let the punishment damper his outlook.
“I am fully aware that this vote reflects the political tide and .... the constituency of this body,” he said. “I know in my heart that I'm not going to be judged by this Congress ... but by my life, my activities and my contributions to society.
Before the censure vote, an amendment to reduce the punishment to a reprimand was set aside in a 146-267 vote. More Democrats, 143-105, supported reducing the punishment to a reprimand.
Before Thanksgiving an ethics adjudicatory committee convicted Rangel of 11 counts of violating ethics rules. The charges include: improperly using his office to solicit donations for a school of public policy in his name at the City College of New York (CCNY), using a rent-stabilized apartment in Harlem for his campaign office, failing to report more than $600,000 on his financial disclosure report, and failing to pay taxes on rental income from a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic.
In his written statement submitted by his attorneys in July, Rangel said the investigative subcommittee that brought charges against him “acted beyond the scope of its authority” and did not give him enough time to provide a defense, violating the Fifth Amendment’s due process clause. He called their findings “deeply flawed.”
Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), who chairs the ethics committee, and Republicans on the panel would not back down, arguing that Rangel had several chances to handle the matter differently and agree to settle for a reprimand, which the panel offered him back in July. Instead, Rangel chose to fight and opt for public trial.
Lofgren dismissed claims by Rangel supporters that history and precedent did not support such a severe punishment, noting that some censures in the House’s early history were leveled for insulting the Speaker and for using “unparliamentary” language.
“It’s important to hold members to a higher standard [than the House has done in recent years],” she said. “Mr. Rangel himself has said we need higher standards.”
“It’s a sad day but a necessary day…,” she said. “It’s an important vote for this institution and how we are seen by our employers, the American voters.”
More
DelMarVa's Premier Source for News, Opinion, Analysis, and Human Interest Contact Publisher Joe Albero at alberobutzo@wmconnect.com or 410-430-5349
just censure? fire him and throw his ass in jail! someone that "competes" at this level of thuggery should not be anywhere near his contacts again!
ReplyDeleteYou do the crime, you do the time. I can't believe he whined like he did. Politicians make me sick. They hold themselves above the rest of us.
ReplyDeleteHe made it perfectly clear to all of us that while accepting the censure (he had no choice of course) he was not actually "guilty" of anything at all.
ReplyDeleteHe was quite smug and believes he (like others in Congress) are entitled to certain benefits above the rest of us little people.
He has spent his life taking care of the little people and there is no way we little people could ever understand his sacrifices and services to us. He is an elite of the human race.
He should be going to jail for tax evasion.
ReplyDeleteWhat about all the other Democrats not paying taxes ?
ReplyDeleteAnother PUBLIC MASTER. Let you or me not pay our taxes, or even worse, evade our taxes...OUR paycheck would already be garnished, our banks accounts frozen, liens put on our home and all this guy gets is a "censure"? Which is exactly nothing. Its not even a slap on the wrist. And I must also wonder, where is the IRS on this?? WHAT are THEY doing about it? Or is this PUBLIC MASTER'S power STILL so great that the IRS won't dare cross him....must be nice to be a king, and not a serf. Respect for our government and the people who lead it evaporates more each day....the sad thing is they don't see it or even think its possible....to them, they are loved, admired, and indispensible...
ReplyDelete12:01 PM
ReplyDeleteAnd here is that kid again. Get an education. You are embarrassing yourself.
PUBLIC MASTER
ReplyDeleteWhat?!
PUBLIC MASTER---- someone in a governmental capacity, who, by their authority, position, power, tenure or a combination of the these, believes that they are above the rules and laws that apply to the rest of the citizens and that they answer to no one and no one should be able to question their authority, power, or decisions. Rangel is a great example of the above definition.
ReplyDelete12:01...being so woefully "uneducated" and immature, I'll need someone of your towering and intimidatingly powerful intellect to point out the errors of my thinking. Did Rangel believe he was above the law? Would the IRS have "dropped the bomb" on any other citizen guilty of the same offenses? Are they doing anything to him, as they surely would be doing to a mere citizen without his "pull"? And is "censure" Congress's way of saying "we DID something" so as to avoid the appearance of not doing ANYTHING? Did Rangel lose any benefits or pay or pension at all? I'm humbly awaiting your biting critique or refutation of any of these points. Of course, being just 12 and not that smart, please don't overwhelm me with too much logic or disappoint me with casual generalizations. But I'll be thirteen real real soon, so hurry up before I graduate and become a threat to people with such high IQ's.
ReplyDelete