|
The New York Times
Senate Ethics
Committee Admonishes Larry Craig
By CARL HULSE,
nytimes.com on the Web. February 14, 2008
WASHINGTON — Senator Larry E.
Craig was admonished by his colleagues on Wednesday for conduct that reflected
poorly on the Senate as the result of his arrest and guilty plea last summer in
an undercover sex sting in a men’s bathroom at the Minneapolis airport.
The reprimand handed down by the Senate Ethics Committee said that Mr. Craig’s
conduct in the bathroom was improper and that his actions after his arrest
appeared to be an effort to evade the legal consequences in violation of the
code of ethics for government service.
Committee members also raised questions about Mr. Craig’s conversion of over
$200,000 in campaign money to pay legal fees, noting that he had not cleared
that action as required with the committee. The panel said it would
consider further use of campaign money without approval as showing a continuing
disregard for ethics rules.
The committee finding stopped short of recommending a more serious punishment,
like expulsion, but it was another public blow to Mr. Craig, an Idaho
Republican. His political career has been shattered — and his case has
become a staple of late-night television comics — since disclosure of his arrest
by an officer who claimed Mr. Craig had solicited him for sex from an adjoining
bathroom stall.
Mr. Craig, who has said he is not gay, has denied any wrongdoing, saying the
undercover officer misconstrued his actions. He sought unsuccessfully to
have his guilty plea withdrawn.
Although he initially said he would leave Congress, he decided to serve out this
term, his third, but he will not seek re-election.
After the disclosure in August of his June arrest and later guilty plea to a
misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge, Senate Republican leaders called for the
ethics inquiry. They urged Mr. Craig to resign immediately and raised the
threat of public hearings.
But the three-page letter based on the ethics panel’s preliminary inquiry into
Mr. Craig’s case appeared to foreclose that possibility. Mr. Craig did not
testify before the committee, which based its conclusion on the facts of the
criminal case, his public statements and his lawyer’s responses to committee
inquiries.
“The Select Committee on Ethics resolves this matter through your public
admonition so that, on behalf of the United States Senate, it may make known
clearly that the conduct to which you pled guilty, together with related and
subsequent conduct discussed in this letter, is improper conduct which has
reflected discreditably on the Senate,” said the letter, signed by three
committee Republicans and three Democrats.
Aides to Mr. Craig said they learned of the ethics findings only when the letter
was posted on the committee’s Web site. In a statement released by his
office, Mr. Craig said: “While I am disappointed and strongly disagree
with the conclusions reached by the Senate Ethics Committee, from the outset I
have encouraged the committee to act in a timely fashion and they have done so.
I will continue to serve the people of Idaho.”
While the committee took no action beyond the public rebuke, public
admonishments of senators are somewhat rare and considered serious.
Senator Robert G. Torricelli, Democrat of New Jersey, left office after he was
admonished in 2002 in a case involving gifts from a supporter.
Mr. Craig has been treated coldly by some colleagues since his return as he
tried to restore a sense of normalcy to his service. The committee said in
its letter that it accepted as true all the elements of his guilty plea, adding,
“in our view, you committed the offense to which you pled guilty.”
“Your claims to the court, through counsel, to the effect that your guilty plea
resulted from improper pressure or coercion, or that you did not, as a legal
matter, know what you were doing when you pled guilty, do not appear credible,”
the panel said.
The committee also chastised Mr. Craig for showing the arresting officer a
business card that identified him as a senator, saying that action could be
viewed “as an improper attempt by you to use your position as a United States
senator to receive special and favorable treatment.”
Lawyers for Mr. Craig had questioned whether the committee had jurisdiction over
the case since it did not directly relate to his Senate duties, but the panel
dismissed that, noting that it had wide-ranging authority over the behavior of
senators.
Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader who had called for
Mr. Craig’s resignation and for the ethics inquiry, had no comment on Wednesday
night.
|
