Accusations against DeLay flimsy, misguided

It’s that time of the political season again. As the nation’s leaders adapt to governing in a post-Hurricane Katrina climate, many politicians in Washington, D.C. have diverted their attention to a matter of grave importance. What might I be talking about? If you guessed tax reform, the energy crisis or the nomination of Harriet Miers to the U.S. Supreme Court, try again. While all these issues are significant, many politicos inside the Beltway have honed in on something far more pressing: Tom DeLay.

DeLay, the Congressman from Sugarland and former majority leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, is under fire from Democrats who think they’ve finally nailed “The Hammer.” They claim DeLay helped funnel corporate donations to candidates for office in Texas, which is illegal. Yet the case against him is dubious at best, and the extent to which the Democrats are harping on it shows just how low they have sunk.

It is unclear how involved DeLay was with Texans for a Republican Majority Political Action Committee (TRMPAC), the committee that sent the donations to the Republican National Committee, which sent the money back to Texas. We know he personally organized and made fundraising calls for the group, but evidence that he authorized or was even aware that $190,000 was being sent to statewide candidates is indirect.

Prosecutor Ronnie Earle recently trumpeted the two indictments against DeLay, despite the fact that one grand jury voted against indicting the congressman, illustrating the flimsy nature of the case. Even worse, Earle recently acknowledged he lacked key physical evidence — a list of the beneficiaries of the $190,000 — and only had a “similar” copy of the list.

Most embarrassing of all to Earle and the Democrats is that DeLay was initially charged with “conspiracy to commit money laundering,” a statute codified in 2003. Earle was undeterred by the fact that the conspiracy statute didn’t come into effect until a year after DeLay allegedly committed the crime. Realizing people cannot be found guilty for crimes that don’t exist, Earle rushed back to a grand jury to indict DeLay on different charges, in what I can only see as a politically motivated “do-over.” “Do-overs” used to be delightful in kindergarten kickball, but they seem just a little out of place in a high-profile prosecution.

Despite the missteps and obfuscations, Democrats appear unfazed. Earlier this month, the top headline on the Democratic National Committee’s Web site was a mean-spirited attack on DeLay, politicizing the illegitimate conspiracy indictment while ignoring the fact that one grand jury rejected Earle’s case against DeLay altogether.

But we should not be surprised, since the DNC is lead by Howard Dean, who claimed DeLay was “guilty” before he was indicted — even though he once said, “I’ve resisted pronouncing a sentence [for Osama bin Laden] before guilt is found.” Obviously Dean does not prefer terrorists to Republicans, but his remarks tell us that he is so eager to attack DeLay and politicize the issue that he is willing to violate his own principles of innocent until proven guilty. More crucially, the Democrats’ obsession with the faulty attacks on DeLay reveal that the party has no message and must rely on the politics of negativity to score political points.

The Republicans have chosen a different path. They have presented a wide array of policies they want to pursue, rather than harp on ethics questions. For instance, two staffers working for New York Senator Chuck Schumer, a Democrat, allegedly illegally obtained the credit report of Michael Steele, Maryland’s Republican lieutenant governor and a potential Senate candidate. Rather than point fingers and question Senator Schumer’s involvement, the Republican Party has focused on its agenda.

I don’t agree with everything the party has proposed — for instance, abolishing the estate tax is wholly unnecessary, and Miers probably does not have a sufficient background in constitutional law to be considered a qualified nominee to the U.S. Supreme Court. But I do think there must be more of a national conversation about these and many other issues. It’s a conversation appropriate not just for the politicians in Washington, but also for the Rice community. Cheap and illegitimate attacks such as those by the Democrats do nothing to advance such a conversation.

Billy Freeland is a Lovett College freshman.

Back to top