Judge Carter Should Not Pass Judgment

Rep. John Carter (R-TX) has been at the forefront of the GOP's campaign to strip the gavel from embattled Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY), Chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee.  Rangel is being investigated by the House Ethics Committee for questionable financial transactions, problematical earmarks and unreported income, including the failure to report a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic. One would reasonably expect Carter, a former judge who boasts of having spent decades in the "courtroom making sure people followed the rules," to not have any similar problems with his own disclosure forms.  But he does.  Carter himself did not "follow the rules" by failing to disclose the sale of stock.  Moreover, Carter will always be remembered for his defence of former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a man more crooked than Lombard Street.

Earlier this month, Carter introduced H. Res. 805, seeking to oust Rangel as Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee. When his resolution was defeated, Carter vowed to fight on, but told Politico, "I don't want to make people think that I'm some guy on some kind of witch hunt for Charlie Rangel.  I'm on a witch hunt only for stopping all this crap that goes on in Congress - and this is one example."  Interestingly enough, Carter has yet to introduce any bills that would single out his GOP colleagues Don Young, Jerry Lewis, Nathan Deal, and Ken Calvert, who, like Rangel, are all mired in alleged ethics violations. 

Last week, Roll Call reported that Carter himself had failed to report sales of Exxon stock.

Stone said Carter made one error on the original May 2008 disclosure report: That form included an Edward Jones brokerage account worth $250,000 to $500,000, with dividend income worth $5,000 to $15,000. The Edward Jones account is the brokerage account that holds the Exxon stock, Stone said, and the report was simply in error. A few weeks after the original report was filed, Carter filed an amendment eliminating the reference to Edward Jones.

While there is no equivalency between Carter's failure to disclose transactions on which he had already paid taxes and what Rangel is accused of doing, it is still fair to call out Carter for not seeing the crookedness of his own neck.  In January, Carter introduced H.R. 735: Rangel Rule Act of 2009, an amusing but clearly partisan piece of legislation, which would change the IRS code to allow:

'Any individual who is a citizen of the United States and who writes 'Rangel Rule' on the top of the first page of the return of tax imposed by chapter 1 for any taxable year shall be exempt from any requirement to pay interest, and from any penalty, addition to tax, or additional amount, with respect to such return.'

What is most ironic about Carter's campaign against Rangel is the judge's inconsistency.  When DeLay was facing indictment for money laundering and conspiracy, however, Carter came to his defense saying that attempts to bring DeLay to justice had "escalated politics into the courthouse."  In fact, Carter, who had received $20,000 from DeLay's PAC put up $5,000 of his own money to the DeLay Legal Expense Trust.  With DeLay's ouster imminent, a despondent Carter said "Texas is going to lose an important asset." 

Not only is it problematic that Carter is leading the fight against Rangel given his own disclosure problems, but it is clearly hypocritical for Carter, after defending DeLay and contributing to his legal defense, to then throw stones at Rangel's house, even if it is in the Dominican Republic.