In what must be the least surprising news story of the past two months, the House Ethics Committee released its report on former Florida congressman Matt Gaetz, confirming in excruciating detail that he has been a very, very, naughty boy.
The report became public two days before Christmas. Maybe Santa was too preoccupied with his worldwide travel plans to withhold any gifts from the Panhandle Partyboy, who even resigned his office in an effort to keep the committee’s report from being released.
That worked for a while, as the five Republicans and five Democrats on the Ethics Committee were divided by party on whether to release the report. But at some point, at least one of the Republicans had a change of heart; permitting headlines like this one on the Fox News website: “House report accuses Matt Gaetz of paying women for sex, using illegal drugs, accepting improper gifts.”
That about covers it. The story and the headlines also provided a definitive resolution to the question, “Do you think a man nominated for attorney general should be someone whom parents would be comfortable that their daughter is dating?”
The obvious answer is yes — the nation’s top law enforcement officer should be someone suitable for dating. But the report makes it obvious that Gaetz was not suitable.
The Ethics Committee and its staff had the goods on Gaetz. Enough people involved in his escapades talked about what they saw and did. This congressman’s behavior was way out of bounds.
Without going into the gory details, the conclusion of the report summed up things nicely: “The Committee determined there is substantial evidence that Representative Gaetz violated House Rules and other standards of conduct prohibiting prostitution, statutory rape, illicit drug use, impermissible gifts, special favors or privileges, and obstruction of Congress.”
Other than all that, he’s a a fine example of an upstanding public official.
Gaetz will have his defenders. But the real debate is whether the Ethics Committee should have released the report — and why this guy was even considered for attorney general.
Committee chairman Rep. Michael Guest of Mississippi was opposed to going public, saying the panel no longer had jurisdiction since Gaetz had resigned from Congress. He said a report had not been released on a former congressman since 2006, when, according to an NPR.org report from the time, the Ethics Committee investigated sexually suggestive emails sent by a Republican congressman to male pages.
Gaetz sued to keep the report under wraps, saying it contained potentially defamatory allegations. He certainly deserves his day in court if he wishes to dispute the report, but the committee made its case by uncovering specific electronic messages and money transfers.
Bottom line: The report holds Gaetz responsible for some incredibly bad behavior. It’s impossible to argue that’s a bad thing.
Jack Ryan, Enterprise-Journal
