WASHINGTON In laying out 13 charges of ethical violations committed by Representative Charles B. Rangel the House ethics committee set the stage for a rare public trial of the Democratic Congressman this fall a potential embarrassment for the Democratic leadership during the election season.
The unveiling of the charges Thursday came even as Mr. Rangels lawyers suggested they were trying to reach a settlement to avoid such a fate for Mr. Rangel 80 a Harlem Democrat.
Ethics committee members appeared somber on Thursday expressing fondness for Mr. Rangel even as they issued the stinging report which states that Mr. Rangels actions reflected poorly on the institution of the House and thereby brought discredit to the House."
Mr. Rangel did not appear at the meeting on Thursday but issued a written response denying each and every allegation" and criticizing the committees report as deeply flawed in its factual premises and legal theories."
In the 40-page report the committee said it substantiated the major charges that had been hanging over Mr. Rangel for two years: that he improperly used his office to solicit donations for a school to be named in his honor; failed to pay taxes on and report rental income from his Dominican villa; filed incomplete financial disclosure forms; and improperly accepted from a Manhattan developer rent-stabilized apartments one of which he used as a campaign office.
But while those alleged infractions had been widely reported the committee unearthed new details about Mr. Rangels conduct. The committee said Mr. Rangel not only reached out to corporate executives seeking contributions to the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College but he also personally sought donations from registered lobbyists whose corporations had business before Congress. In some cases Mr. Rangel asked for contributions of as much as $30 million from businesses with issues before the Ways and Means Committee of which he was the chairman until March.
Reasonable persons could construe contributions to the Rangel Center by persons with interests before the Ways and Means Committee as influencing the performance of Respondents governmental duties" the report stated saying it violated the Congressional Code of Ethics.
In addition Mr. Rangel when he secured a rent-stabilized apartment for his campaign operation at the Lenox Terrace development in Harlem signed an application saying that the apartment would be the primary residence for his son Steven Rangel and not be used for business purposes the report said. Steven Rangel never lived in the apartment and the committee said the developer the Olnick Organization included Mr. Rangel on a special handling list" apparently for V.I.P.s and did not take action against him even as it cracked down on other tenants whose apartments were not being used as primary residences.
The report suggested that after 20 terms in Congress Mr. Rangel had come to rely on his government-paid staff for activities unrelated to his Congressional work.
Mr. Rangel and his lawyers will now be given several weeks to review the evidence against him meaning that a trial is unlikely to begin until September the heart of the Congressional campaign season.
With Democrats worried that they might lose control of the House during elections this fall many party officials have urged Mr. Rangel to spare them the public ordeal of a trial and a few Democratic members have called for his resignation.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California declined to speak out in support of Mr. Rangel but said the committees handling of his case was proof that Democrats had delivered on her promise to drain the swamp" of Washingtons dodgy political culture.
Drain the swamp we did as this was a terrible place" Ms. Pelosi said. We made a tremendous difference and I take great pride in that."
At the trial a subcommittee of the ethics committee made up of four Democrats and four Republicans would serve essentially as a jury and seek to determine whether there was clear and convincing evidence" of Mr. Rangels wrongdoing.
Mr. Rangel would be represented by lawyers at the proceedings and could persuade the committee members to drop some or all of the charges. But if he does not the committee could penalize Mr. Rangel or recommend that the House discipline him.
Mr. Rangels lawyers signaled their defense on Thursday arguing in a written statement that the congressman had not sought to gain personally from any of the actions the committee examined.
The congressman did not abuse his official position or enrich himself financially" the statement asserted. He did not target for solicitation foundations corporations or individuals with business before the Ways and Means Committee nor did he offer or provide preferential treatment or favors to potential contributors."
In one of the more important allegations against Mr. Rangel the committee charged him with ethics violations for his solicitation of Eugene Isenberg the chief executive of Nabors Industries an oil company that was seeking a tax break from the Ways and Means Committee when he pledged $1 million to the Rangel Center.
Mr. Rangel met with Mr. Isenberg and his lobbyist to discuss the tax break which the congressman previously opposed in February 2007 the day it was being considered by the Ways and Means Committee.
The tax break ultimately passed with Mr. Rangels vote saving Nabors more than half a billion dollars. Eleven days after the meeting City College cashed a $100000 check from Mr. Isenberg.
The committee charged that the interactions violated ethics rules because they could be construed as influencing the congressmans vote. But Mr. Rangel and Mr. Isenberg have both said that the contribution was unrelated to the tax issue and Mr. Rangels written response Thursday asserted that he never did political favors for donors or anyone else.
After the release of the detailed charges on Thursday Democrats girded themselves for a process that could be ugly and drawn out. In a news conference the White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the administration would not prejudge the outcome.
Theres a you know a bipartisan panel thats looking into this and into these serious charges" he said. We think that is important to do."
The fact that the case has gotten this far is a remarkable event for the secretive ethics committee. The last time the House held a public trial of a member was in 2002 after Representative James A. Traficant Democrat of Ohio had been convicted criminally on corruption charges. Mr. Traficant was expelled from Congress and served a prison term.
Committee members seemed especially concerned about how their handling of Mr. Rangels case would affect public opinion.
Credibility is exactly what is at stake here the very credibility of the House of Representatives itself before the American people" said an ethics committee member Representative Michael T. McCaul a Republican of Texas.
When he arrived on Capitol Hill hours before the hearing Mr. Rangels usual bravado had been replaced by battle-weariness.
Sixty years ago I survived a Chinese attack in North Korea and as a result I wrote a book saying that I hadnt had a bad day since" he said. Today I have to reassess that statement."
In Washington where Mr. Rangel was one of the most powerful members of Congress until he had to relinquish his chairmans position when the ethics committee admonished him for accepting a corporate-sponsored trip many on Capitol Hill were saddened to see a figure of his stature criticized so harshly by the committee.
Mr. Rangel faces a Sept. 14 primary against four underfinanced challengers and because the district is so heavily Democratic the party nominee is a heavy favorite to prevail in the general election.
Some Democrats held out hope late Thursday night for a deal that would end the spectacle and there were unconfirmed reports that Mr. Rangels lawyers and staff attorneys had reached a tentative agreement. But any settlement would need bipartisan approval and on Thursday the ranking Republican appeared to suggested that the time for negotiation had passed.
Let me be clear that Mr. Rangel under these rules was given opportunities to negotiate a settlement during the investigation phase" Representative McCaul said. We are now in the trial phase. And the American people deserve to hear the truth in this case and the charges against him."
WASHINGTON In laying out 13 charges of ethical violations committed by Representative Charles B. Rangel the House ethics committee set the stage for a rare public trial of the Democratic Congressman this fall a potential embarrassment for the Democratic leadership during the election season.
The unveiling of the charges Thursday came even as Mr. Rangels lawyers suggested they were trying to reach a settlement to avoid such a fate for Mr. Rangel 80 a Harlem Democrat.
Ethics committee members appeared somber on Thursday expressing fondness for Mr. Rangel even as they issued the stinging report which states that Mr. Rangels actions reflected poorly on the institution of the House and thereby brought discredit to the House."
Mr. Rangel did not appear at the meeting on Thursday but issued a written response denying each and every allegation" and criticizing the committees report as deeply flawed in its factual premises and legal theories."
In the 40-page report the committee said it substantiated the major charges that had been hanging over Mr. Rangel for two years: that he improperly used his office to solicit donations for a school to be named in his honor; failed to pay taxes on and report rental income from his Dominican villa; filed incomplete financial disclosure forms; and improperly accepted from a Manhattan developer rent-stabilized apartments one of which he used as a campaign office.
But while those alleged infractions had been widely reported the committee unearthed new details about Mr. Rangels conduct. The committee said Mr. Rangel not only reached out to corporate executives seeking contributions to the Charles B. Rangel Center for Public Service at City College but he also personally sought donations from registered lobbyists whose corporations had business before Congress. In some cases Mr. Rangel asked for contributions of as much as $30 million from businesses with issues before the Ways and Means Committee of which he was the chairman until March.
Reasonable persons could construe contributions to the Rangel Center by persons with interests before the Ways and Means Committee as influencing the performance of Respondents governmental duties" the report stated saying it violated the Congressional Code of Ethics.
In addition Mr. Rangel when he secured a rent-stabilized apartment for his campaign operation at the Lenox Terrace development in Harlem signed an application saying that the apartment would be the primary residence for his son Steven Rangel and not be used for business purposes the report said. Steven Rangel never lived in the apartment and the committee said the developer the Olnick Organization included Mr. Rangel on a special handling list" apparently for V.I.P.s and did not take action against him even as it cracked down on other tenants whose apartments were not being used as primary residences.
The report suggested that after 20 terms in Congress Mr. Rangel had come to rely on his government-paid staff for activities unrelated to his Congressional work.
Mr. Rangel and his lawyers will now be given several weeks to review the evidence against him meaning that a trial is unlikely to begin until September the heart of the Congressional campaign season.
With Democrats worried that they might lose control of the House during elections this fall many party officials have urged Mr. Rangel to spare them the public ordeal of a trial and a few Democratic members have called for his resignation.
Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California declined to speak out in support of Mr. Rangel but said the committees handling of his case was proof that Democrats had delivered on her promise to drain the swamp" of Washingtons dodgy political culture.
Drain the swamp we did as this was a terrible place" Ms. Pelosi said. We made a tremendous difference and I take great pride in that."
At the trial a subcommittee of the ethics committee made up of four Democrats and four Republicans would serve essentially as a jury and seek to determine whether there was clear and convincing evidence" of Mr. Rangels wrongdoing.
Mr. Rangel would be represented by lawyers at the proceedings and could persuade the committee members to drop some or all of the charges. But if he does not the committee could penalize Mr. Rangel or recommend that the House discipline him.
Mr. Rangels lawyers signaled their defense on Thursday arguing in a written statement that the congressman had not sought to gain personally from any of the actions the committee examined.
The congressman did not abuse his official position or enrich himself financially" the statement asserted. He did not target for solicitation foundations corporations or individuals with business before the Ways and Means Committee nor did he offer or provide preferential treatment or favors to potential contributors."
In one of the more important allegations against Mr. Rangel the committee charged him with ethics violations for his solicitation of Eugene Isenberg the chief executive of Nabors Industries an oil company that was seeking a tax break from the Ways and Means Committee when he pledged $1 million to the Rangel Center.
Mr. Rangel met with Mr. Isenberg and his lobbyist to discuss the tax break which the congressman previously opposed in February 2007 the day it was being considered by the Ways and Means Committee.
The tax break ultimately passed with Mr. Rangels vote saving Nabors more than half a billion dollars. Eleven days after the meeting City College cashed a $100000 check from Mr. Isenberg.
The committee charged that the interactions violated ethics rules because they could be construed as influencing the congressmans vote. But Mr. Rangel and Mr. Isenberg have both said that the contribution was unrelated to the tax issue and Mr. Rangels written response Thursday asserted that he never did political favors for donors or anyone else.
After the release of the detailed charges on Thursday Democrats girded themselves for a process that could be ugly and drawn out. In a news conference the White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said the administration would not prejudge the outcome.
Theres a you know a bipartisan panel thats looking into this and into these serious charges" he said. We think that is important to do."
The fact that the case has gotten this far is a remarkable event for the secretive ethics committee. The last time the House held a public trial of a member was in 2002 after Representative James A. Traficant Democrat of Ohio had been convicted criminally on corruption charges. Mr. Traficant was expelled from Congress and served a prison term.
Committee members seemed especially concerned about how their handling of Mr. Rangels case would affect public opinion.
Credibility is exactly what is at stake here the very credibility of the House of Representatives itself before the American people" said an ethics committee member Representative Michael T. McCaul a Republican of Texas.
When he arrived on Capitol Hill hours before the hearing Mr. Rangels usual bravado had been replaced by battle-weariness.
Sixty years ago I survived a Chinese attack in North Korea and as a result I wrote a book saying that I hadnt had a bad day since" he said. Today I have to reassess that statement."
In Washington where Mr. Rangel was one of the most powerful members of Congress until he had to relinquish his chairmans position when the ethics committee admonished him for accepting a corporate-sponsored trip many on Capitol Hill were saddened to see a figure of his stature criticized so harshly by the committee.
Mr. Rangel faces a Sept. 14 primary against four underfinanced challengers and because the district is so heavily Democratic the party nominee is a heavy favorite to prevail in the general election.
Some Democrats held out hope late Thursday night for a deal that would end the spectacle and there were unconfirmed reports that Mr. Rangels lawyers and staff attorneys had reached a tentative agreement. But any settlement would need bipartisan approval and on Thursday the ranking Republican appeared to suggested that the time for negotiation had passed.
Let me be clear that Mr. Rangel under these rules was given opportunities to negotiate a settlement during the investigation phase" Representative McCaul said. We are now in the trial phase. And the American people deserve to hear the truth in this case and the charges against him."
