Here’s the story from the Huffington Post:
The bevy of conservative members of Congress who’ve resided at the notorious “C Street House” may have violated Congressional gift rules by accepting steeply-discounted lodging, new ethics complaints allege.
The watchdog organization CREW (Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington) filed complaints Thursday charging Republican Sens. Sam Brownback (Kan.), Tom Coburn (Okla.), Jim DeMint (S.C.) and John Ensign (Nev.), as well as Reps. Mike Doyle (D-Penn.), Heath Shuler (D-N.C.), Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) and Zach Wamp (R-Tenn.), with accepting “improper gifts” from C Street in the form of way-below-market rent.
Other residents past and present did not make the list — most notably trail-hiking Gov. Mark Sanford (R-S.C.), who lived in the C Street House while in Congress and helped make the place famous by seeking counseling there in the wake of his affair.
According to reports cited in the CREW complaints, the members of Congress residing at C Street pay $950 per month for rent and housekeeping, versus a minimum of $1,700 per month for nearby one-bedroom apartments, $2,400 per month for adjacent hotels or $4,000 for corporate housing. The CREW data piggybacks in part on similar charges filed earlier this week against the house itself by a clergy group, which complained to the IRS that C Street was improperly using its privileged tax status.
2 Comments
Dear Asheville Citizen-Times,
The Asheville Citizen-Times likes to describe Shuler’s DC residence as a “Christian ministry”. While we are free to practice religion as we wish in America, the beliefs of public officials are open to scrutiny. Indeed, voters need to be aware of unusual and potentially dangerous beliefs held by our public officials.
It’s is interesting that A C-T refuses to note that a group of pastors Clergy VOICE, lead in drawing attention to Shuler’s case. What A C-T also refuses to pass on to its readers is the political role of The Family (a.k.a. ‘The Fellowship’). The ELCA church I attend has a very different ministry than Shuler’s. As a church, we do not integrate with Congress in a strategic and tactical way. The Fellowship does.
It doesn’t feel like the First Amendment and House ethics rules supports Shuler’s ‘church’ relationship. If Shuler’s DC church is constitutionally okay, I would be interested in seeing some A C-T reporting that verifies the same.
Harper’s Magazine and the LA Times are at least as credible as the Asheville Citizen-Times. Why can’t the reporting in these credible journals be covered by A C-T?
References:
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2003/03/0079525
Jesus plus nothing: Undercover among America’s secret theocrats
http://www.harpers.org/archive/2009/07/hbc-90005323
The C Street Club (Updated)
http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/44583
CREW FILES ETHICS COMPLAINTS AGAINST C STREET HO– — USE RESIDENTS
1 Apr 2010 // Washington, D.C.
> Note LA Times 2002 story in “Exhibits”
http://www.citizensforethics.org/files/20100401%20-%20CSt%20-%20Exhibits.pdf
Exhibits
It’s difficult to see why A C-T is refusing to cover at least the main aspects of the angles regarding Shuler’s ‘church’, a.k.a. “The Fellowship”. House ethics rules related to rental fees and gifting are the rudimentary legal aspect of the story. The information voters really need relates to the rest of Shuler’s ethical puzzle.
What is your evidence that Mark Sanford sought counseling while at this location?
Teegle