The House of Representatives censured Charles Rangel today. This is the first case censured by House since Gerry Studds and Daniel Crane were censured in 1983 (CNN). Speaker Nancy Pelosi read the censure resolution. This is the most serious punishment conducted by House of Representatives except for expulsion. Rangel was charged guilty on 11 counts, including failing to pay all his tax bills, filling misleading financial statements, and improperly seeking money from corporate interests for a college center bearing his name (NPR). Rangel is not involved in corruption, while his misconducted ethically.
Even though Peter King, New York GOP Rep., backed Rangel, I do not think King's reasons hold. King pointed out that no one questioned Rangel's integrity or he has never seen Rangel treat anyone with disrespect. I think King's defending reasons are irrelevant to Rangel's charges and Rangel's misconduction deserved a censure. Considering that Rangel was re-elected last month by winning 80% of the vote, I think he deceived voters by his positive image, he crossed the moral bottom line of being a leader. His brilliant records, such as he won a purple heart after being wounded in combat in Korea and he is tied for fourth in House seniority, could pay for his deliberate neglect of rules. I see an inconsistency in his characters, between his honors and his unscrupulousness.
No comments:
Post a Comment