Tuesday, August 4, 2015

Delay verdict: 'The Hammer' gets hammered

A Texas jury's guilty verdict against former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was an overdue rebuke of a man who was once the most powerful member of Congress.

Delay verdict: 'The Hammer' gets hammered

0 comments
Tom DeLay leaving the courtroom in Austin, Texas, after his conviction on money-laundering and conspiracy charges. (LARRY KOLVOORD / Austin American-Statesman)
Tom DeLay leaving the courtroom in Austin, Texas, after his conviction on money-laundering and conspiracy charges. (LARRY KOLVOORD / Austin American-Statesman) LARRY KOLVOORD / Austin American-Statesman

 

A Texas jury’s guilty verdict against former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay was an overdue rebuke of a man who was once the most powerful member of Congress. DeLay, 63, was found guilty Wednesday of illegally funneling corporate money to help elect Republican candidates to the Texas legislature.
 
Solidifying Republicans’ hold in the legislature allowed them to redraw congressional districts to increase the GOP majority in Washington. After DeLay orchestrated the plan in 2002, the Republican Party picked up 12 seats in the U.S. House in the 2004 elections.
 
Compared with the campaign-finance standards of today, DeLay’s funneling $190,000 in corporate money to help elect state candidates seems puny in its scope. In this year’s mid-term elections, anonymous interests paid at least $130 million to defeat or elect favored candidates nationwide, mostly Republicans. Today’s secret campaign slush funds are legal, owing largely to a Supreme Court decision that allows unlimited campaign spending by corporations and unions.
 
But DeLay’s downfall still serves as a lesson. A former lieutenant of then-Speaker Newt Gingrich (R., Ga.), DeLay became known as “The Hammer” for his ability to enforce steely discipline within the Republican ranks. He never became speaker, but he didn’t need to. House Republicans knew who was in charge. DeLay resigned as majority leader in 2005 to fight the charges. It took too long, but the jury’s verdict proves just how far some people will go in their ceaseless push for partisan power.
 
0 comments
We encourage respectful comments but reserve the right to delete anything that doesn't contribute to an engaging dialogue.
Help us moderate this thread by flagging comments that violate our guidelines.

Comment policy:

Philly.com comments are intended to be civil, friendly conversations. Please treat other participants with respect and in a way that you would want to be treated. You are responsible for what you say. And please, stay on topic. If you see an objectionable post, please report it to us using the "Report Abuse" option.

Please note that comments are monitored by Philly.com staff. We reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable. Personal attacks, especially on other participants, are not permitted. We reserve the right to permanently block any user who violates these terms and conditions.

Additionally comments that are long, have multiple paragraph breaks, include code, or include hyperlinks may not be posted.

Read 0 comments
 
comments powered by Disqus
About this blog

The Inquirer Editorial Board's Say What? opinion blog showcases the work of the editors and writers who produce the newspaper's daily and Sunday opinion pages.

Find out more about The Inquirer's Editorial Board here.

The Inquirer Editorial Board
Also on Philly.com
letter icon Newsletter