DeLay Indicted for Campaign Finance Conspiracy...And?
Reuters via ABCNews: Indicted DeLay leaves House leadership post
The second-ranking Republican in the House of Representatives, Majority Leader Tom DeLay, was indicted on Wednesday on a felony campaign-finance charge and temporarily stepped down from his post.The powerful Republican, nicknamed "The Hammer" for his reputation as a tough party enforcer, could face up to two years in prison if convicted on the charge handed up by the Travis County grand jury in the Texas state capital, Austin.
DeLay was indicted on a single conspiracy charge tied to illegal fund-raising activities by Texans for a Republican Majority, or TRMPAC, a political action committee he created, the Travis County District Attorney's office said.
The indictment accuses DeLay and two alleged co-conspirators, John Colyandro and Jim Ellis, of engaging in a scheme to launder $190,000 in corporate donations through the Republican National Committee for distribution to Republican candidates for the Texas Legislature.
Texas law generally prohibits corporate money from being used for campaign activities.
Delay denied any wrongdoing.
Copyright 2005 Reuters News Service. All rights reserved.
There are all kinds of hoops Texans must jump through to play nice with Texas election law. What kinds of things does CHAPTER 253. RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES prohibit or regulate?
- § 253.001, CONTRIBUTION OR EXPENDITURE IN ANOTHER'S NAME
- § 253.002, UNLAWFUL DIRECT CAMPAIGN EXPENDITURE
- § 253.003, UNLAWFULLY MAKING OR ACCEPTING CONTRIBUTION
- § 253.004, UNLAWFULLY MAKING EXPENDITURE
- § 253.005, EXPENDITURE FROM UNLAWFUL CONTRIBUTION
- § 253.031, CONTRIBUTION AND EXPENDITURE WITHOUT CAMPAIGN TREASURER PROHIBITED
- § 253.032, LIMITATION ON CONTRIBUTION BY OUT-OF-STATE COMMITTEE
- § 253.033, CASH CONTRIBUTIONS EXCEEDING $100 PROHIBITED
- § 253.034, RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS DURING AND FOLLOWING REGULAR LEGISLATIVE SESSION
- § 253.0341, RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRIBUTIONS TO LEGISLATIVE CAUCUSES DURING AND FOLLOWING REGULAR LEGISLATIVE SESSION
- § 253.035, RESTRICTIONS ON PERSONAL USE OF CONTRIBUTIONS
- § 253.0351, LOANS FROM PERSONAL FUNDS
- § 253.036, OFFICEHOLDER CONTRIBUTIONS USED IN CONNECTION WITH CAMPAIGN
- § 253.037, RESTRICTIONS ON CONTRIBUTION OR EXPENDITURE BY GENERAL-PURPOSE COMMITTEE
- § 253.038, PAYMENTS MADE TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY PROHIBITED
- § 253.039, CONTRIBUTIONS IN CERTAIN PUBLIC BUILDINGS PROHIBITED
- § 253.040, SEPARATE ACCOUNTS
- § 253.041, RESTRICTIONS ON CERTAIN PAYMENTS
- § 253.042, RESTRICTIONS ON REIMBURSEMENT OF PERSONAL FUNDS AND PAYMENTS ON CERTAIN LOANS
- § 253.043, POLITICAL CONTRIBUTIONS USED IN CONNECTION WITH APPOINTIVE OFFICE
- § 253.061, DIRECT EXPENDITURE OF $100 OR LESS
- § 253.062, DIRECT EXPENDITURE EXCEEDING $100
- § 253.063, TRAVEL EXPENSE
Here come the more relevant sections...
- § 253.091, CORPORATIONS COVERED
- § 253.092, TREATMENT OF INCORPORATED POLITICAL COMMITTEE
If a political committee the only principal purpose of which is accepting political contributions and making political expenditures incorporates for liability purposes only, the committee is not considered to be a corporation for purposes of this
subchapter.
- § 253.093, CERTAIN ASSOCIATIONS COVERED
- § 253.094, CONTRIBUTIONS AND EXPENDITURES PROHIBITED
(a) A corporation or labor organization may not make a political contribution or political expenditure that is not authorized by this subchapter.
(b) A corporation or labor organization may not make a political contribution or political expenditure in connection with a recall election, including the circulation and submission of a petition to call an election.
(c) A person who violates this section commits an offense. An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree.
Let one thing be perfectly clear: I think Tom DeLay is a liar or an idiot and should resign in disgrace and for reasons unrelated to this indictment. I have not followed this story but I've known since the beginning of the attempts to nail him.
Regarding the indictment, though, I have to say this. I view any economic exchange among willing participants as fundamentally legitimate. The purposes of that exchange may strike some as thoroughly rotten and may just be intended to accomplish rotten things. I won't deny that corruption exists because it does and it is widespread. However, I firmly think the kind of corruption under discussion exists because government exists. There would be little point in influencing the state of Texas or the United States Federal Government if their agents did not have the power to tamper with, intervene in, and coerce individual lives and property at the pleasure of those agents. If they didn't have the power, their power wouldn't be sought.
If I want to give cash to someone, not one person has any rightful say in that gift except myself and my recipient. If I want to provide services to someone, no one else but us have any claim to the property involved. I expect libertarians will be happy to see DeLay out of power and perhaps out of office. You can count me in with that crowd. But despite my desire to see Mr. DeLay stripped of his state authority and kicked out into the real world, I don't think indicting and convicting him of helping others contribute money to politicians is a crime, let alone an act that deserves "six months to two years in a state jail and a fine of up to $10,000."
I don't think one wrong can outweigh or correct the (I'm guessing) thousands of other wrongs he's perpetuated from my standpoint of free association, private property, and individual rights. Given the votes he's made in the past on legislative matters affecting millions of Americans, there are certainly cases to be made from a natural rights anarchist viewpoint that could easily surpass a $10,000 fine...but that ten grand wouldn't be going to the victims of the laws for which he voted. The indictment wasn't made in the name of those whom he has hurt with his policy decisions. Any jail time he serves won't be in their name. The "federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison" he might experience will constitute additional punishment he doesn't deserve for this conspiracy. Neither the fine nor the jail time will be negotiated by the parties who actually have a grievance with him. This is a crime against the state!, one of those amorphous slippery concepts that eventually boil down to nothing.
So color me unimpressed at the newfound threat against a man who doesn't deserve to be in political power (and neither should anyone else) for "conspiring" (freely associating) to get other commissars elected (to positions of power that shouldn't exist) through the free donation of money (something that was once a safe activity in this nation) from corporations that want to bend the laws in their favor to provide benefits at the expense of others and to protect them from competition (an everyday occurrence).
Comments
My view is that pols are slugs and should be treated as such simply because they support the system. Hang 'em when they violate their law. It's the only thing that makes sense and since they're collectivists by nature they should hang by/on their own petard/law to get a taste of what it feels like.
The facilitator is the guilty party here(Delay).
Posted by: jomama | September 28, 2005 08:55 PM
Hey, like I said, it would take a team of dedicated pro-liberty folk quite some time to sift through the likely vast amount of rights violations DeLay has under his belt. He's got crimes with liabilities greater than a mere two years in the slammer and a paltry sum he probably extorts with practiced political ease from any one industry. He's got plenty to face up to and I'd be willing to say that includes at least a lifetime of repayment along the lines of debtor's prison. Pick a pol at random and they'd fit the bill just as well.
Where I disagree is that this particular allegation is worthy of the name "crime," let alone the guaranteed media hysteria that'll emerge over the next few news cycles.
Posted by: Drizz | September 28, 2005 09:24 PM
It's fairly obvious that DeLay's harmed some people, but it isn't obvious that he's done so with the actions in question here or that anything that'll happen to him because of this will offer any restitution for his prior harm.
The best that might be said is that two years in the slam will allow another horse thief the opportunity to do a little stealing of his own in DeLay's place.
Posted by: John Lopez | September 28, 2005 10:33 PM