October 11, 2006

Any Reason a Good Reason for Hastert’s Demise

Democrats love to think big, and think high, at least when it comes to their beloved sport of scandal-mongering. An army grunt abused prisoners in Iraq? Take down the Secretary of Defense! An aide to Karl Rove resigned because she was too close to Jack Abramoff? Hey! It should be Rove taking the fall!

So it’s no surprise that Democrats want to take the occasion of former Rep. Mark Foley’s disgusting behavior to take down House Speaker Dennis Hastert as well. It’s what they do. No scandal is ever complete until the blame rises to the top.

In this case, however, the Dems may have stumbled backwards into a point. Foley’s own chief of staff in 2003 told Hastert that Foley was out of control in his creepy behavior toward teenage pages. In early 2006, if not before, Hastert knew of instant messages sent by Foley to teenage pages that, at the very least, showed he had a weird interest in one page’s personal life. Combined with the earlier complaint, the conclusion is inescapable that Hastert knew he had a problem on his hands.

What should he have done? What could he have done? A lawyerly type could argue that Foley, an elected congressman, had broken no laws and had technically committed no violation of any rules. That would be the most obvious defense of Hastert’s inaction.

It would also be the lamest. Real men of principle find ways to stand up for said principle, even when all they have to lean on is their leadership skill. If a member of your caucus is treating teenage pages like his own personal chapter of the Junior Chippendales, your position as Speaker of the House compels you to figure out something to do about it.

But when have principle or leadership skill ever had anything to do with Dennis Hastert? His tenure as Speaker has hardly been characterized by a willingness to put his neck on the line for any sort of principle whatsoever.

Hastert only got the job in the first place because the first choice, Bob Livingston, was found to have a sex scandal in his closet. (Ironic, isn’t it?) He oversaw congressional inaction over Social Security reform, permanent tax reform, health care reform and anything resembling appropriations sanity.

With a GOP Senate and a Republican in the White House, conservatives have had an unprecedented opportunity for the past six years to reorder the nation’s policies. Hastert should have been a leader in this effort. But Hastert is a man who prefers the path of least resistance. Impeaching a Democratic president is one thing. That forces Democrats to defend perjury and obstruction of justice, and that means seat pickups. But angering the senior lobby or Families USA is just too risky.

So when a pervert congressman is found to be running wild with teen-in-tow trips to Dairy Queen, why should Hastert do anything when he can find a way not to?

We now learn that the page community put the word out early and often: Watch out for the weird Republican from Florida who will probably be asking you out for ice cream shortly after meeting you. Ever since Foley came into Congress with the huge freshman Republican class of 1994, pages started figuring him out.

Perhaps it took awhile for the leadership to get the word, but we know that Hastert dithered for at least three years. Once Foley’s creepiness became public, he was quickly forced to resign, which is all well and good. And some pointed out, with a degree of legitimacy, that the most famous Democrat to prey on pages – Massachusetts Rep. Gerry Studds – not only was protected by his party but was re-elected six times thereafter.

But so what? If Hastert only takes action against wrongdoing when the light of public scrutiny leaves him with no choice, it is a pretty weak defense that Democrats would not even do that much. Then again, that’s basically Hastert’s campaign theme this year.

You think I’m bad? Nancy Pelosi would be even worse!

Indeed she would, but perhaps the Foley scandal will finally give the Democrats a chance to land a big fish and take Hastert down, which would leave voters with a choice of Pelosi or – dare to dream – a Republican who might actually try to do something worthwhile in the position of Speaker.

Hastert may or may not deserve to lose his job for dithering on the Foley scandal. But what difference does it make, when he certainly deserves to lose it for being a really bad Speaker of the House?

This is Column # DC54.  Request permission to publish here.