Academic

EDITORIAL: THE NEED TO CONTROL PRIVATE PERKS FOR POLITICIANS: Election to Congress should be an?

By Glenn Reynolds

EDITORIAL: THE NEED TO CONTROL PRIVATE PERKS FOR POLITICIANS:

Election to Congress should be an opportunity for public service, not personal enrichment. But given the examples of Sens. Chris Dodd and Kent Conrad, Congress needs to strengthen disclosure rules to help prevent special-interest favors from subverting the public interest.

The Senate Ethics Committee this week dismissed complaints against Dodd and Conrad regarding preferred mortgage terms they received from Countrywide Financial. Ethics rules bar legislators from accepting mortgage terms “not generally available to the public.” Yet, on orders of Countrywide CEO Angelo Mozilo, the company in 2003 cut a half-point off the interest rate on Dodd’s $750,000 loans, saving him $75,000. Also on Mozilo’s orders, Countrywide loaned Conrad $96,000 in 2004 to buy an apartment building — a breach of company rules on residential loans.

The mortgages put off a strong whiff of unethical conduct. Dodd heads the Senate Finance Committee, which develops legislation to regulate the mortgage industry and to subsidize home ownership. Conrad leads the Budget Committee, which sets spending targets for home-ownership programs. Both were in a position to grant preferred treatment to Countrywide in exchange for mortgage favors. But the ethics committee decided that special deals were also available to “Friends of Angelo” outside of government, and so Dodd and Conrad did not violate the rules.

Seems kind of iffy to me, but the Senate Ethics Committee is a toothless watchdog. Plus this: “The ethics committee’s decision was an indictment of the rules, not an exoneration of Dodd and Conrad.” Indeed.

Full post as published by Instapundit.com on August 16, 2009 (boomark / email).