U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof, R-Columbia, voted against the rule change, said spokesman Scott Baker.
"It’s a standard Republicans set over 10 years ago, and if it was the proper goal then - and it was - it should still apply today," Baker said.
During his recent re-election campaign, Hulshof - who sits on the House Ethics Committee - came under fire from Democrat Linda Jacobsen, who questioned his ability to be impartial concerning an ethics inquiry into DeLay.
The Democrat cited the fact that Hulshof had in the past received $14,964 from a political action committee linked to the majority leader. Hulshof countered with statements of support from two House Democrats who expressed confidence in his ability to act fairly.
article"It’s a standard Republicans set over 10 years ago, and if it was the proper goal then - and it was - it should still apply today," Baker said.
During his recent re-election campaign, Hulshof - who sits on the House Ethics Committee - came under fire from Democrat Linda Jacobsen, who questioned his ability to be impartial concerning an ethics inquiry into DeLay.
The Democrat cited the fact that Hulshof had in the past received $14,964 from a political action committee linked to the majority leader. Hulshof countered with statements of support from two House Democrats who expressed confidence in his ability to act fairly.
If true, that's one thing Hulshof has done right, but I'm not sure why. He may have figured he could straddle this fence, needing some "political capital" on the ethics committee by being seen to resist DeLay asskissing, knowing that the rule would pass without his vote. I don't know. But I have a bone to pick with Kenny Hulshof, as he refused to permit constituents to enter his office the day George Butt ordered the invasion of Iraq. And he also refused the alternative of coming out to meet us.
No comments:
Post a Comment