(Backlog) Wally Responds Re; Tom DeLay Ethics Investigation

Sent Oct 25, 2004

---

Dear Patrick:

Thank you for contacting me regarding allegations of ethics violations filed by outgoing Representative Christopher Bell (D- TX) against House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX). As you may know, on October 6, 2004, the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct concluded its investigation into the allegations brought forward by Rep. Bell. I have included the rulings segment of the Committee's joint statement concerning this matter below:

"Today the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, by unanimous votes, adopted each of tlie recommendations made by Chairman Joel Hefley and Ranking Minority Member Alan B. Mollohan for disposition of the three counts of the complaint that was filed against Representative Tom DeLay on June 15, 2004. Those recommendations are detailed in a 44-page memorandum from the Chairman and Ranking Minority Member to the other Committee members. The memorandum was accompanied by approximately 100 pages of attachments consisting of documents that they obtained in their fact-gathering activities under Committee Rule 16(c)."

The memorandum with attachments and the letter of admonition are available on the Committee Web site, http://www.house.gov/ethics. In addition, Majority Leader Delay issued a response to the Committee's ruling. Its text is included below:

"The Ethics Committee has done the right thing in dismissing Mr. Bell's embellished allegations with bipartisan unanimity. While the allegations were dismissed, I accept the Committee's guidance. Mr. Bell displayed contempt for Congress by manipulating the ethics process in pursuit of his personal vendetta, and today's dismissal says more about Mr. Bell's conduct than it does about anything else. "

"The Committee was forced to complete its work in a highly divisive atmosphere fostered by politically motivated individuals and entities who have attempted to tamper with and influence the congressional ethics process for partisan gain. For years, Democrats have hurled relentless personal attacks at me, hoping to tie my hands and smear my name. All have fallen short, not because of insufficient venom, but because of insufficient merit. Mr. Bell's allegations, coordinated with one of these groups, intentionally misstated law and facts and violated the spirit and letter of House Ethics Rules. Although I believe this filing should have been thrown out immediately, I have spent the last four months cooperating with the Committee fact-finding. To expedite this matter, I even offered to waive my rights to bring this matter to closure. I'm glad this matter has been brought to its conclusion. I would invite my political opponents to engage the battle of ideas instead of misusing the congressional ethics process or abusing the legal system in a misguided attempt to settle scores. I'll continue to work hard to advance the cause of Republican governance, which I believe is critical to America's security, prosperity, and families."

Again, thank you for contacting me on this important issue. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.

Sincerely,
Wally Herger
Member of Congress

The DeLay Rule

It's been a while since my last post. I have some pretty stock replies from Congressman Herger I need to scan. But the news right now is who supported the DeLay Rule. I called the Chico and DC office, only to get no answer from Herger's staff. He is listed as being willing to give written answers to constituents. So here it goes.

Let me first say that even though we rarely agree on policy, I respect your public service. You represent me in the House, and I think you should know what I think about certain topics. Congressman DeLay is one of those topics. The rules that were just over-turned to allow Congressman DeLay to stay in power even if he is indicted were put in place during the Clinton administration to take out Democratic leadership. Which, is fine really. If there is corruption in Washington, by all means it should be stamped out.

But to have one set of rules when the Democrats are in power and another set of rules when the GOP is in power is just not right. I would also like to state the three admonishments from the Ethics Committee do not constitute being cleared of the charges.

Which is why I must ask you if you supported the "DeLay Rule." I called both your Chico office and your DC office and your staff did not know your position. I understand that this was a voice vote, but you were acting as my representative when you made that vote. I deserve to know in the name of accountable government.

If you did support it, did you support the original rule to remove people from power when they were indicted? If you did, could you please explain to me how this is not gross hypocrisy, an attempt to seal the GOP in power and move towards a one party system?

I can't wait to hear back...

Tell Your Rep to Give Back the Dirty $ & Dump Delay!

Campaign for America's Future is asking Republican reps to send Tom DeLay's PAC money back and call for his resignation.

Here is my letter, which has some slight edits from the template.

I'm disturbed by Rep. Tom DeLay's repeated ethics violations and am worried that you have taken $1,105 from his political action committee. While it is a trivial amount in the grand scheme of political fundraising, it is nonetheless an implied connection between you and the PAC.

I strongly believe -- as I know you do -- in ethical government. But Rep. DeLay has helped create one of the most corrupt Congresses ever. Public accountability of government is one of the cornerstones or modern conservatism.

As you know, the House Ethics Committee recently admonished DeLay with two ethics violations, adding to two others he'd already received. And, just last month in Texas, three of DeLay's associates were indicted for using his political action committee for illegal purposes in state political races.

All of these actions, added together with DeLay's corrupt tactics in the Congress, dirty the image of the Republican party specifically and the political process in general. Yet, your party is rallying to his defense.

I ask you to send the money you've received from Tom DeLay's PAC back to him. And I ask you to call for his resignation as House majority leader.

We often disagree on policy but I'm hopeful that we can agree that DeLay's actions are unacceptable. We all must be willing to acknowledge that corruption is something that is not inherent to any one party and that it must be fought where ever it rears it's ugly head.

Thank you.

Wally Responds: Don't Fund the War on Filesharing

I just got my own scanner, so this is very late. Wally responded to this Action Alert on June 30, 2004.

---

Dear Patrick:

Thank you for contacting me regarding your opposition to H.R. 4077, the "Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004." I appreciate your thoughts on this matter.

As you may know, H.R. 4077 was introduced by Representative Lamar Smith (R- TX) on March 31,2004. Specifically, the bill seeks to enhance criminal enforcement of the copyright laws, to educate the public about the application of copyright law to the Internet. There is, as you are aware, fairly widespread opposition to this proposal across the recording industry, which is currently seeking better mechanisms to enforce its copyright privileges. Thi& legislation would undermine these efforts.

Following introduction, H.R. 4077 was referred to the House Judiciary Committee, and the Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property for further consideration. On March 31, 2004, a mark up session was held, and the bill was amended by voice vote.

While I do not serve on the committee of jurisdiction over this measure, please be assured I will continue to monitor this issue. Should it come to a vote in the House of Representatives, I will keep your views uppermost in mind.

Again, thank you for contacting me on this important issue. Should you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to contact me in the future.

EFF Action Alert: Call for PATRIOT Review, Not Expansion

Send you own Action Alert!

Mine is slightly edited from the default one that is provided by EFF.

---

I am writing to urge you to oppose the Anti-Terrorism Intelligence Tools Improvement Act (H.R. 3179). This bill would expand the USA PATRIOT Act with serious implications for privacy and civil liberties. I believe that any consideration of an expansion to PATRIOT should be postponed until there has been a thorough, public review of how the law has been used to date.

The brochure that the Department of Justice has published has none of this information, and in some cases contradicts testimony given by Mr Ashcroft himself before the 9-11 Commission.

H.R. 3179 would strengthen the enforcement provisions for National Security Letters (NSLs), which allow the FBI secretly to obtain an individual's private records even if he or she is not suspected of a crime. This secret power to obtain phone, Internet, and financial records was already expanded by PATRIOT, and Congress should evaluate the impact of this change before granting additional powers.

People like to say that 9-11 changed everything. One thing it didn't change is that people in this country are innocent until proven guilty. There are already legal procedures in place for obtaining information about people that are innocent but suspected of being guilty. If the FBI is simply too lazy to gather enough information for a court order, is the information really that vital?

Further, H.R. 3179 would amend the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) to authorize surveillance of individuals who are not affiliated with any foreign government or terrorist group. FISA was meant to address espionage by foreign powers, and its application to unaffiliated individuals would likely violate the Fourth Amendment.

Did 9-11 change our constitution as well?

Public criticism of the PATRIOT Act has been growing steadily. PATRIOT reform bills are being considered by Congress, and a number of provisions are scheduled to expire next year. This political season is not the time to allow an end-run around the deliberative process. Please oppose H.R. 3179, and support a thorough congressional review of PATRIOT's uses to date. Thank you for your time.

EFF Action Alert: Don't Fund the War on File Sharing

You can take action to!

I am writing to express my opposition to the Piracy Deterrence and Education Act of 2004 (PDEA, HR 4077). HR 4077 would divert taxpayer dollars and direct federal law enforcement agencies to fight the entertainment industry's misguided war on file sharing. It would also create the first criminal copyright penalties for people who aren't engaged in willful criminal conduct. Under the law's murky "negligence" standard, a person with 1,000 legally obtained songs could be sent to jail for three years if she fails to lock them up tight enough. I believe that these measures are an egregious misuse of federal resources, and I hope you will oppose this bill.

Copyright holders already have an extraordinary array of legal tools at their disposal for fighting infringement. Copyright law that expands liability to innocents is not the answer to the conflict over P2P.

Instead of criminalizing the activity of 60 million American filesharers, we should be looking for positive solutions that compensate artists. For example, a collective licensing regime could legalize file sharing while generating revenue for artists. Here are several examples of such a plan, two of which can be found in the New York Times:

• EFF: A Better Way Forward
• NYT Op-Ed: Share the Music By Kembrew Mcleod
• NYT Op-Ed: Don't Beat Them, Join Them By William Fisher

I am also opposed to HR 4077's proposed "education" program. If government is to educate the public about copyright, the curriculum must be balanced. The public has a broad range of rights to use copyrighted material, and omitting them is misleading and counterproductive.

As a constituent and a taxpayer, I hope you will agree that HR 4077 is an inappropriate use of government resources. Please oppose HR 4077 and instead look for a better way forward. Thank you for your time.

Three Cheers for Government Regulation

Congressman Herger recently voted aye for an increase in fines to "curb indecency over the airwaves." Behold H.R. 3717 (aka the Broadcast Decency Enforcement Act of 2004)! The Senate version raises the fine by a factor of ten (from $27,500 to $275,000). But the House would not be outdone and went straight to the nice round number of $500,000. Both passed and will be worked out in conference.

But of course a bump to the Federal Minimum Wage would hurt business...