US House panel cites lawmaker with 13 violations, trial likely to hurt Democrats in campaign

WASHINGTON - Majority Democrats, already facing grim prospects in upcoming congressional elections, could suffer more damage after the House of Representatives opened an ethics trial of one of its longest-serving members.

The ethics storm has built around Rep. Charles Rangel of New York for months, as the House ethics committee investigated allegations of misdeeds.

During a brief opening session Thursday, with Rangel absent, the House investigatory panel alleged he was involved in 13 violations of congressional ethics and federal law.

Later, however, people familiar with the talks say representatives of Rangel and lawyers for the committee had reached a plea deal. Committee members have not agreed to the settlement.

It was not immediately clear how many of the 13 charges of ethical violations Rangel agreed to accept.

The charges include allegations that Rangel failed to report rental income on vacation property in the Dominican Republic and over the course of nearly a decade failed to report more than $600,000 in assets on his financial disclosure statements.

The charges came as lawyers for Rangel and the House ethics committee worked out a plea deal, according to people familiar with the talks. Republicans on the ethics committee indicated it was too late.

The deal between the lawyers has little meaning if the committee members do not approve it, and Republicans insisted at the first meeting of a House panel chosen to decide Rangel's fate that the case go forward with an ethics trial. The panel is evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans.

Rep. Michael McCaul, the top Republican on a panel that will try Rangel, said the Democrat had been "given the opportunity to negotiate a settlement during the investigation phase."

However, he said, that phase is now over. "We are now in the trial phase," he said.

Some fellow Democrats already have called for Rangel to resign and prevent the embarrassing public airing of details of the 20-term congressman's alleged transgressions three months before elections.

Democrats hold a sizable majority in the House, where all members face re-election every two years. But the sagging popularity of President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats — under the weight of a stalled economy, stubborn near-10-per cent unemployment and voter dissatisfaction with government — have led many to predict that Republicans will take a majority of seats.

The country is awash in anti-incumbent sentiment that has been particularly stirred by the addition of so-called tea party candidates — ultraconservatives who want lower taxes and less government involvement in their lives.

In New York's Harlem district, where Rangel is the only congressman most residents have ever known, two people reflected different opinions of the veteran lawmaker. He is to go before the voters again in a September party election.

Constituent David Hendrickson said Rangel should step down. "He's seen his day. He's either not in touch with the community or insulated himself so that he doesn't have to be in touch with the community," Hendrickson said.

Another, Michael Austin, said it was unfortunate that Rangel's career had been clouded by the allegations. "I think he's been a wonderful congressman throughout the years," Austin said, adding that he would vote again for Rangel "based on his previous record."

Rangel's case, damaging to Democrats on its face, further hurts the party among those who recall that House Speaker Nancy Pelosi assumed leadership of the lower chamber of Congress promising to root out the corruption of her Republican predecessors.

Shortly before the ethics committee convened to hear the case against Rangel, Pelosi said: "The chips will have to fall where they may politically."

The speaker said the pursuit of ethics cases was "a serious responsibility that we have."

The committee laid out precise charges against Rangel for the first time.

Speaking to reporters Thursday, Rangel said he survived a Chinese attack as a soldier in North Korea 60 years ago. As a result, he said, "I haven't had a bad day since." But Rangel said "today I have to reassess that statement."

The trial could have gone away if Rangel negotiated a plea bargain, admitting to substantial violations, or resigns his seat.

The subcommittee now must decide whether the charges can be proved by clear and convincing evidence. Just spelling them out, however, carries substantial damage in an election season, especially one that is as riven as this one has become with partisan rancour.

Rangel remained noncommittal on whether he was open to a deal to avoid all that.

Decisions among fellow Democrats to call for Rangel to quit have become treacherous.

A Democrat who calls for resignation, returns Rangel's campaign donations or just condemns his conduct risks alienating the Congressional Black Caucus, a key Democratic constituency, which has warned against a rush to judgment.

But if a fellow lawmaker remains silent, he risks being tagged an inside-Washington hypocrite who broke a promise to rid Congress of corruption.

The charges are the equivalent of an indictment, not a conviction. So condemning unproven allegations against Rangel could smack of the very rush to judgment against which the Black Caucus warned.

But for vulnerable Democrats, especially freshmen eager to prove their ethical bona fides to voters, couched statements of condemnation could be beneficial, some Democratic lawmakers and their aides said in interviews — under a cloak of anonymity.

Rangel could face a report criticizing his conduct, a reprimand or censure by the full House or even expulsion — the latter very unlikely in this case.

Barring a subsequent plea bargain, the rare ethics trial probably would begin in September.