# 13 Most Corrupt Members of Congress **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 10, 2005, 12:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471 "2005-10-10T00:43:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 12:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/21 "2005-10-10T12:36:56Z")
Despite my complete and utter distaste and contempt for Ms. Musgrave (and two votes against her when I lived in Fort Collins), the report on her appears to be making a mountain out of a molehill. ---
**Author:** ![NurseCarmen](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/5daacb/32.png) [@NurseCarmen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NurseCarmen)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/22 "2005-10-10T14:54:26Z")
Is the list ranked? Because if it is, I would think Jefferson and Taylor should have been higher. ---
**Author:** ![42fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/4/b487fb/32.png) [@42fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/42fish)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/23 "2005-10-10T15:07:45Z")
> [@NurseCarmen](#): > > Is the list ranked? Because if it is, I would think Jefferson and Taylor should have been higher. Looks like they did Representatives in alphabetical order followed by Senators in alphabetical order. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/24 "2005-10-10T15:11:08Z")
Here’s the problem, as I see it. If there were conclusive evidence that these politicians are corrupt, they would _already be indicted_ (cf. Tom Delay). So, yes – the report is accusatory and (somewhat) unsubstantiated. Is it a witchhunt? I don’t know, and I have neither the time, knowledge, position, nor desire to examine all 535 members of Congress in detail. But, the stated purpose is twofold: > [@](#): > > First, we hope to bring greater attention to the unethical conduct of those named in the report as well as to the subject of congressional ethics in general. Second, we hope to galvanize both the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and the Senate Select Committee on Ethics into action. They acknowledge that the list is not definitive; other Congressmen (they list Senator David Vitter (R-LA), Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA) and Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) explicitly for involvement with Jack Abramoff) are worth investigation. As to the methodology, it’s sparse and easy to understand/criticize (quoted in its entirety): > [@](#): > > To create this report, CREW reviewed articles, Federal Election Commission (FEC) reports and audits, sworn testimony, emails, and personal financial and travel disclosure forms. We then analyzed that information to determine whether the information discovered suggested that a Member of Congress’s conduct violated any federal laws, regulations or congressional ethics rules. That’s it. Not meaning to be critical of you in particular, **SaintCad** and **This Year’s Model** , but your responses: > [@SaintCad](#): > > So fine - all 13 have done corrupt things, but I still find it hard to believe that these are the WORST 13. > [@This Year's Model](#): > > …the report on her appears to be making a mountain out of a molehill. are exactly the type they are trying to say is wrong. The point is that they have found evidence for increased scrutiny on these 13. [Insert deity here] forbid, it shouldn’t be viewed as a competition, nor should “minor” ethics violations be excused. ---
**Author:** ![caveman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/caveman/32/7242_2.png) [@caveman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/caveman)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/25 "2005-10-10T17:06:26Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > I love being from a county whose name is, literally, synonymous with bullshit. I’ll have you know that this comment _forced_ me to go find out what county Asheville, NC is in. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/26 "2005-10-10T17:19:44Z")
> [@Digital Stimulus](#): > > They acknowledge that the list is not definitive; other Congressmen (they list Senator David Vitter (R-LA), Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), Rep. John Doolittle (R-CA) and Rep. J.D. Hayworth (R-AZ) explicitly for involvement with Jack Abramoff) are worth investigation. I should hope that any list entitled “The 13 Most Corrupt Members of Congress” is both definitive and has entailed thorough investigation of all 535 candidates for the list. Otherwise, I have no reason to trust them. Quite frankly, if using a non-existent suite number to separate your campaign office from your district office and abusing franking priviliges is enough to rank in the top 13, Congress is much more honest than I suspected. ---
**Author:** ![yo\_no\_se](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/b487fb/32.png) [@yo\_no\_se](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yo_no_se)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/27 "2005-10-10T18:38:19Z")
“[www.beyonddelay.org](http://www.beyonddelay.org)” – that name kinda provides all you need to know, dontchathink? My personal study has determined that all on that list are still innocent until proven guilty (even the 2 democrats, lol). ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/28 "2005-10-10T18:40:34Z")
> [@yo no se](#): > > “[www.beyonddelay.org](http://www.beyonddelay.org)” – that name kinda provides all you need to know, dontchathink? Actually, no, I don’t think it does. I think that qualifies as a baseless _ad hominem_ attack and is a fallacious argument. The facts contained on the site provide some of what I need to know. > [@](#): > > My personal study has determined that all on that list are still innocent until proven guilty (even the 2 democrats, lol). LOL! HAW HAW HAW! Were I on their jury, this would be relevant. I’m not, however: I’m discussing their **apparent** guilt on a messageboard. If you’re uncomfortable with such discussions, that’s your monkey. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/29 "2005-10-10T18:56:03Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > So there’s something to it, maybe – but if that’s all, comparing Moran’s crimes & misdemeanors to those of the congresscritters listed in the OP, he doesn’t even rate a Dishonorable Mention. Got anything meatier, **Moto?** Moran is a thug who has been violent several times in the past. Allegations of domestic abuse were made against him by his ex-wife, backed up by cops who were called out often to their home. In addition to this, the man has chronic financial problems that he tries to solve by putting his vote up for sale. The Washington Post saw it thusly, [when they endorsed his Republican challenger in 2002:](http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A49826-2002Oct18?language=printer) > [@](#): > > Mr. Moran has endured more than a few disturbing times during his congressional career, including a rough domestic scene, heavy financial losses, a pugilistic skirmish with an Alexandria boy and acceptance of an unsecured, open-ended $25,000 loan at below-market interest rates from a lobbyist – followed five days later by the congressman’s enlistment as a co-sponsor of a bill to help the lobbyist’s company preserve its monopoly on an allergy drug. None of this kept Mr. Moran from an easy victory last time over an archconservative Republican. > > But since then, Mr. Moran’s messy financial dealings and personal debts have produced still worse conduct. He was found to have borrowed money from a party with direct financial interests in congressional legislation – a favorable loan arrangement from MBNA Corp., a credit card lender that was looking to Congress to help it collect from debtors much like Mr. Moran. At the same time, the congressman was supporting a bill pushed by the credit card and finance industry that would make it tougher for borrowers to walk away from debts by declaring bankruptcy. Four days after his loan was final, Mr. Moran became the lead Democratic sponsor of an even broader bill. Weeks later he and an executive in charge of MBNA’s loan department testified on the same day in favor of the bill before a House subcommittee. Mr. Moran said that “it never occurred to me to see any connection.” > > Even if you buy this flimsy denial of any connection between the congressman’s personal finances and his sudden strong embraces of legislation dear to the moneyed hearts of those who offer to bail him out, the pattern of impropriety lingers. The failure of Democratic leaders in the 8th District to find a new standard-bearer – the party has more than a few well-known, highly qualified people who could and would run – ought to haunt them no matter how this election turns out. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/30 "2005-10-10T19:28:25Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Actually, no, I don’t think it does. I think that qualifies as a baseless _ad hominem_ attack and is a fallacious argument. The facts contained on the site provide some of what I need to know. > > Daniel What about this site? [http://www.NoAgenda.org/](http://www.NoAgenda.org/) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/31 "2005-10-10T19:30:03Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > What about this site? > > [http://www.NoAgenda.org/](http://www.NoAgenda.org/) Now THAT name tells me everything I need to know! Or do you have some more specific question than “what about”? Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/32 "2005-10-10T19:36:22Z")
> [@This Year's Model](#): > > I should hope that any list entitled “The 13 Most Corrupt Members of Congress” is both definitive and has entailed thorough investigation of all 535 candidates for the list. Otherwise, I have no reason to trust them. I used the term as in “2. Supplying or being a final settlement or decision; conclusive.” from [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=definitive). I thought that was clear from my statement “If there were conclusive evidence that these politicians are corrupt, they would already be indicted (cf. Tom Delay).” I cannot say one way or the other how thorough their research was. As for your trust, does it really matter to you who is on the list, as opposed to whether the facts are correct? > [@](#): > > Quite frankly, if using a non-existent suite number to separate your campaign office from your district office and abusing franking priviliges is enough to rank in the top 13, Congress is much more honest than I suspected. And I refer you again to my statement regarding indictment. I think it’s safe to say that there’s some amount of corruption in Congress. I also think it’s safe to say that most of it is untraceable. Why would you have an issue with bringing suspect dealings to the attention of the public, whatever party the politician is affiliated with? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/33 "2005-10-10T19:38:44Z")
Okay, taking a more in-depth look, by looking at the congressfolk they excoriate. BARBARA BOXER: They accuse her of two crimes (using smarmy sarcastic language, whic his really grating but not relevant to the substance of their argument, so I’l just whinge about it parenthetically). First, they say that she “directed $15,000 from her political action committee in 2003 to a consulting firm run by her son.” They support this with a link to a New York Times article that I must pay to access, and offer no other details of this transaction. Second, they say that “Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) funneled $115,000 last cycle to Douglas Boxer & Associates, a company run by her son, from PAC For A Change, her leadership political action committee.” They support this with a link to a site that I need to pay two hundred sixty five dollars to access. They give no other details of this transaction. I believe they may be the same transaction, given that both involve her PAC giving an amount of money ending is 15,000 to a company run by her son. The difference may be a typo, or maybe she gave $15,000 once and $115,000 the second time. However, this is not amazingly convincing; given the lack of details, I’m not ready to condemn Boxer. Let’s look at the second one they list, and then be done. They criticize Jon Corzine for voting for an amendment that specifically benefited him. This time, they cite to a live article, giving significant detail. This is a much stronger argument; absent compelling information to the contrary (very, very compelling), I agree that Corzine sounds like a corrupt asshole. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 7:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/34 "2005-10-10T19:50:49Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > First, they say that [Barbara Boxer] “directed $15,000 from her political action committee in 2003 to a consulting firm run by her son.” They support this with a link to a New York Times article that I must pay to access, and offer no other details of this transaction. > > Daniel Here’s the same information from CBS News: > [@](#): > > In 2003, Barbara Boxer directed $15,000 from her political-action committee, “PAC For a Change,” to a consulting firm run by her son. The year before, she funneled $115,000 to the same firm. > > Last year, Joe Lieberman paid his son Matthew $34,000 and daughter Rebecca $36,000 to work on his presidential campaign. > > Also last year, Jon Corzine paid his daughter about $15,000 to work on his upcoming 2006 reelection campaign. > > In fact, in 2001 it was Jesse Jackson Jr. who sought clarification from the Federal Election Commission to ensure Jackson was in good legal graces before hiring his wife to provide fundraising and organizational support to his campaign. > > Other Democrats with family members on the payroll include Pete Stark, Bart Stupak, Jim Costa, Lincoln Davis, and Tim Bishop, amongst others. > > Vermont congressman Bernie Sanders has paid his wife and daughter more than $150,000 in campaign consulting fees in the past several years. > > Democrat Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid is well known for supporting his family with high-paid congressional pork projects. Firms associated with Reid’s son have taken in millions from bills authored and sponsored by Reid. As you’ll see, the writer is a conservative columnist, and is making the point that nothing is wrong with what they’re doing. He says that it is “perfectly legal and ethical, approved by both House rules and the FEC”. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/35 "2005-10-10T19:54:23Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > Here’s the same information from CBS News: > > As you’ll see, the writer is a conservative columnist, and is making the point that nothing is wrong with what they’re doing. He says that it is “perfectly legal and ethical, approved by both House rules and the FEC”. So, I’m confused. In these cases, was Boxer hiring her son’s company to perform a service? Did her son’s company perform the service? Did her hiring her son have any plausible impact on her own performance of her job duties (i.e., did it amount to a bribe of any sort, or did it amount to her funneling tax dollars into her family’s pockets)? I’m not sure what the implied problem is. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/36 "2005-10-10T20:04:37Z")
> [@Digital Stimulus](#): > > Why would you have an issue with bringing suspect dealings to the attention of the public, whatever party the politician is affiliated with? Where my issue lies is with their using the word “corrupt” where it does not seem to be applicable. Had they titled the article “Marilyn Musgrave skates the line on campaign finance laws,” I’d not have a problem. I don’t see corruption there. ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/37 "2005-10-10T20:31:41Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > So, I’m confused. In these cases, was Boxer hiring her son’s company to perform a service? Did her son’s company perform the service? Did her hiring her son have any plausible impact on her own performance of her job duties (i.e., did it amount to a bribe of any sort, or did it amount to her funneling tax dollars into her family’s pockets)? > > I’m not sure what the implied problem is. > Daniel As far as I can see, it’s nothing more than the time honored tradition of politicians feeding friends and family from the pork trough. Or nothing less, depending on your point of view. Who is to say whether Junior’s work was worth $150,000 or whatever or whoever? It would be interesting to know whether there was ever a documented time when a politician fired his own son not being worth the dough. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/38 "2005-10-10T20:33:01Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > As far as I can see, it’s nothing more than the time honored tradition of politicians feeding friends and family from the pork trough. If the pork trough doesn’t consist of tax dollars, I’m not too concerned, to be honest. In this case, it appeared not to be tax dollars, although I could be mistaken. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/39 "2005-10-10T20:42:41Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > If the pork trough doesn’t consist of tax dollars, I’m not too concerned, to be honest. In this case, it appeared not to be tax dollars, although I could be mistaken. > > Daniel They’re not directly tax dollars, but they come from contributions that are tax deductible and that possibly pull dollars from the tax coffers by virtue of the fact that presidential candidates of the two power parties pay themselves federal matching funds for campaigns. In the case of House members, campaigns persist in perpetuity. They also may come substantially from dollars that would not otherwise have existed, but for favorable tax legislation and regulatory favor; e.g., a person who has benefited from a tax break thanks to Senator Smith might be inclined to contribute some money to Smith’s PAC. ---
**Author:** ![Love\_Rhombus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/love_rhombus/32/10694_2.png) [@Love\_Rhombus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Love_Rhombus)\ **Post date:** [October 10, 2005, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471/40 "2005-10-10T20:59:20Z")
As a citizen of PA I just want to say that I find it amusing that no one has tried to deny Santorum’s corruption. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/13-most-corrupt-members-of-congress/325471.md?page=3)