Are congressional leaders trying to kill the OCE

United States
December 30, 2012 10:17pm CST
Going into 2013 the Office of Congressional Ethics is facing an uncertain future. This is an independent office that is headed by appointees from both parties. Their job is to investigate congressmen and women, and if their finds warrant they send their reports to congress. Their funding has been threatened by members of both parties, and some feel it should be eliminated. The office was created in 2008 after all of the scandals, and has had some success. But, the office can not investigate anything without the appointees, and congressional leaders on both sides have put off appointing new members. Without this office the only people to police our leaders are other leaders. Our elected officials do things to get elected that we all know are wrong. How do we expect them to police themselves when we know they can't police themselves. Do you think this office should be eliminated. http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/29/politics/congressional-watchdog-group-threatened/index.html?hpt=hp_c1
1 person likes this
4 responses
@Adoniah (7515)
• United States
31 Dec 12
There should be an independent Ethics Board put in place by the Judicial Branch of the Government to handle the unethical practices of elected officials...People in office should have NO part in this Board. It should be made up of citizens not politicians. Then there should be set guidelines for the Judicial Branch to follow when someone is found in violation. Of course this is a pipe dream...It will never happen...It makes too much sense and someone might actually be punished for being a crook in office.
• United States
31 Dec 12
I hate to agree with you, but you are correct. As sad as it is, the judicial branch is become as corrupt, if not more corrupt than our legislative branch. It is sad to see how our politicians use judges to get what they want, and then take care of them. Our nation is becoming so corrupt, and we have very little that we as citizens can do about it.
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13925)
• United States
31 Dec 12
I really wish that I could care, but you and I both know that the OCE is useless. They have no teeth and their findings accomplish absolutely nothing. Barney Frank can run a pot farm and gay wh0rehouse out of his home and it doesn't matter to his constituents. Charles Rangel... well I don't think I have to go into all the crap he's done and the findings have been VERY clear on his violations yet he's still in office. I could go on and on about people like Maxine Waters, Roland Burris, etc., but my point is simple. The worst they can do is say that someone has been unethical. That is all. They can't remove anyone from office. They can't press criminal charges. They can't do anything that matters. What people need to do is push for legislation that allows them to recall elected officials in the house and senate if they've violated ethics rules or laws, or just blatantly broken campaign promises. That's all done at the local level though, and most people are too stupid to realize that local politics are very important.
1 person likes this
• United States
31 Dec 12
Taskr, I agree this office has no teeth, and really can't do anything to stop our corrupt representatives. But, instead of eliminating the office, and allowing our corrupt representatives from becoming more corrupt with no fear of repercussion, we should give this office teeth. This office is exactly what we need as a country; A bipartisan group lead by people appointed by both parties, who don't make judgements, but just investigate our representatives. What should change is their reports should become presented to the media, along with our representatives. This way we the people can see what our representatives are doing, and then we could move along with recalling them like you have suggested. The problem with just having the ability to recall members is that we have no facts to go on. Right now they bury poison pills in bills and send them out for a vote. If I tell you on the campaign trail that I will support farm subsidies, and not raising taxes, then a bill comes up that does both; What do I do. If I vote for it, I have violated one of my campaign promises, if I vote against it, I violate one of my campaign promises.
1 person likes this
@anniepa (27241)
• United States
31 Dec 12
No, I don't think this office should be eliminated, I think it should be strengthened considerably instead. I see in the article you linked to both Nancy Pelosi and John Boehner said they want the office to continue and they intend to appoint new members, but does anyone really believe anything Boehner says at this point? I do take Pelosi at her word since she was instrumental in getting the office started in the first place. Annie
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
2 Jan 13
I see them as nothing more than the FOX guarding the hen house. There should be and independent, non Congressional, non political board set to oversee the antics of Congress and White House. Perhaps appointed by BOTH leaders in Congress but not FROM Congress' ranks?
• United States
3 Jan 13
This is actually how this office is built. The problem, as many other have pointed out, is that they don't have any teeth. All of their information they gather from these investigations end up at the feet of the ethics committee, who then ignore just about everything.
@debrakcarey (19924)
• United States
3 Jan 13
Why don't they have 'any teeth'? Could it be that Congress doesn't want them to have any teeth? Simple solution, demand they be given 'some teeth'. That is to simple though. Maybe Harry Reid should be asked WHY? How about Boenher, let's replace him with someone like Bachmann who once demanded accountability on background checks and was shot down by her peers? Look and see WHO demands accountability in Congress and put THEM in charge.
• United States
11 Jan 13
Of course it doesn't have teeth because it would lead to the removal of the vast majority of representatives. Bachmann has had her share of issues that have been, and still should be investigated. But, how many representatives haven't?