 |
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
Click here
|
Political Potshots Predominant in Foley Sex Scandal 10/3/2006 Foley issues regrets and blames it on booze as he checks into Florida rehab facility. Accusations by House Democrats and denials by House Republicans abound about who knew what and when, and what was done to investigate reports involving sexually explicit messages that Rep. Mark Foley (R-Florida) sent to underage boys who had served as House pages. Foley, the former co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, resigned September 29, 2006, within a few hours of being confronted with the sexually explicit text of an Internet "instant message" he sent to a 16-year-old boy who had served as a House page.
The FBI is investigating whether Foley's conduct violated any federal law. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement is also investigating whether the e-mail communications violated state law.
This morning, a Washington Times editorial calls for Hastert's resignation:
House Speaker Dennis Hastert must do the only right thing, and resign his speakership at once. Either he was grossly negligent for not taking the red flags fully into account and ordering a swift investigation, for not even remembering the order of events leading up to last week's revelations - or he deliberately looked the other way in hopes that a brewing scandal would simply blow away. He gave phony answers Friday to the old and ever-relevant questions of what did he know and when did he know it? Mr. Hastert has forfeited the confidence of the public and his party, and he cannot preside over the necessary coming investigation, an investigation that must examine his own inept performance. (Washington Times, Oct. 3, 2006)
ABC News, which broke the story last Thursday, reported October 2, 2006, that "in addition to explicit sexual language," Foley's instant messages "also include repeated efforts to get the underage recipient to rendezvous with him at night. … In another message, Foley, using the screen name Maf54, appears to describe having been together with the teen in San Diego." (Brian Ross, Maddy Sauer, "E-mails Show Foley Sought to Rendezvous with Page," http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/10/emails_show_fol.html).
The scandal stems from an e-mail in which Foley requested the boy's picture. The boy forwarded the e-mail to an unidentified congressional staffer. In another e-mail to a staffer, the boy wrote, "Maybe it is just me being paranoid, but seriously. This freaked me out." Further reports from ABC indicate that as many as five boys, all congressional pages, have come forward.
On Monday, Foley, 52 and single, checked himself into an alcohol rehabilitation facility in Florida. Foley said he accepts "full responsibility for the harm" he has caused, issuing a statement through David Roth, his attorney: "I strongly believe that I am an alcoholic and have accepted the need for immediate treatment for alcoholism and other behavioral problems." (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217025,00.html).
Foley, who didn't mention any alcohol-related problems when he initially denied the accusations, had said that he was the victim of a political smear campaign: "The e-mails in question were a response to a handwritten thank-you letter from a former page," said Jason Kello, Foley's spokesman. "There have not been any allegations made by anyone except by Tim Mahoney and the Democrats who are attempting to misrepresent a series of innocent communications to prop up a failing political campaign." (Jeffrey H. Birnbaum, Washington Post, Sept. 29, 2006, p. A07).
Democrats are accusing Republican House leadership of covering up Foley's behavior for political reasons. Senate Minority leader, Harry Reid (D-Nevada) said, "The attorney general should open a full-scale investigation immediately," including whether GOP leaders "knew there was a problem and ignored it to preserve a congressional seat this election year." (Fla. GOP Zeroing in on Foley Replacement," Oct. 2, 2006: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217025,00.html).
"'No one in the Republican leadership, nor Congressman Shimkus, saw those messages until last Friday when ABC News released them to the public,' said Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert (R-IL)." (Warnings about Foley Failed to Move Congress to Action," Oct. 2, 2006, http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/10/warnings_about_.html).
According to Fox News, October 2, 2006, "Shimkus and the House clerk called Foley last fall and told him to cut off all communication with the former page. Only after ABC News reported the 2005 e-mail late last week did the more lurid material surface, as pages forwarded further messages to ABC." The network says that an instant message exchange between Foley and a San Diego teenager shows that the teen "was uncomfortable in an exchange discussing dinner plans for when the boy was to come to Washington." ("Speaker Hastert Defends Handling of Foley Scandal," http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217176,00.html).
Republicans say they didn't know about anything other than an e-mail exchange between Foley and the boy, which seemed to them to be simply "over-friendly." In addition to calling for a House Ethics investigation, House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Illinois) sent a letter Sunday to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales asking the Department of Justice to "conduct an investigation of Mr. Foley's conduct with current and former House pages." On Monday, Hastert said he was "outraged and disgusted" with Foley's actions. (Fla. GOP Zeroing in on Foley Replacement," Oct. 2, 2006: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,217025,00.html).
Rep. John Shimkus (R-Illinois), chairman of the Page Board that oversees the congressional work-study program for high schoolers, said, "he did investigate, but Foley falsely assured him he was only mentoring the boy." Shimkus said he learned about the allegations in late 2005. "Republicans Offer Explanations in Wake of Foley's E-Mail Scandal with Teen Boy," Sept. 30, 2006: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,216846,00.html).
Chris Wallace, host of "Fox News Sunday," asked former speaker Newt Gingrich if House Republican leaders had done all they should about Foley:
GINGRICH: Well, I think if you look at what they actually knew, which was that the family did not want anyone involved and the actual notes were relatively innocuous, there was nothing sexual in those notes. They had him counseled. They had the head of the page program, Congressman Shimkus, talk to him very directly. And I think they thought that it was over. The newest incident only surfaced when ABC News interviewed Foley and he resigned within two hours, or I think the House leaders would have moved to expel him.
WALLACE: But during all those months they left Foley in the House Republican leadership. They left him as the head of the congressional caucus dealing with exploited children. No second thoughts about that?
GINGRICH: Well, you could have second thoughts about it, but I think had they overly aggressively reacted to the initial round, they would also have been accused of gay bashing. I mean, the original notes had no sexual innuendo and the parents did not want any action taken.
WALLACE: How would it have been gay bashing?
GINGRICH: Because it was a male-male relationship. And they had no - there was no proof, there was nothing that I know of in that initial round that would have led you to say in a normal circumstance that this is a predatory person. (http://clips.mediamatters.org/static/video/fns-20061001-gingrich.mov).
Like Mr. Wallace, we'd like to know why it would have been "gay bashing" to investigate a complaint by a minor concerning conduct that he said "freaked" him out. We don't recall any concern about accusations of heterosexual bashing when complaints abounded about former President Bill Clinton's sexual exploits with a White House female intern in the Oval Office.
"Gay-bashing" aside, a serious question remains: exactly why did leaders in Congress give such a cursory response to those emails? It is entirely reasonable to conclude that an email that freaks out a minor page should have sparked far more digging than it did. Being intimidated by homosexual activists' intolerance is not a response that builds confidence in Republican leaders. Worse, the public is left wondering what really happened and how much more the leadership should have known but evaded.
Foley had introduced legislation in July to protect children from exploitation by adults over the Internet. He also sponsored other legislation designed to protect minors from abuse and neglect. It may be that Foley violated a law that he helped to write. Foley once said, "We track library books better than we do sexual predators." (Republicans Offer Explanation in Wake of Foley's E-Mail Scandal with Teen Boy," Sept. 30, 2006: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,216846,00.html).
It's unclear whether Foley was referring to Congress.
Democrats, quick to accuse Republicans of a "political cover-up" and failure to properly investigate Foley, refused to expel one of their own in 1983 who had engaged in sex with a 17-year-old House page. Democrats controlled the House at the time.
"In 1983, Gerry E. Studds, another Massachusetts Democrat, acknowledged his homosexuality after disclosures that he had had a sexual relationship with a teen-age House page. That relationship brought a House censure of Mr. Studds. He has been re-elected twice since his acknowledgement." (New York Times, May 31, 1987, p. 22.)
"Studds' involvement dated back to 1973, according to the House investigation. He admitted to having consensual sexual relations with a 17-year-old boy that year, and documents showed he had made advances on two other male pages." Studds "didn't back down during the investigation and instead lashed out at the investigation for invading his privacy; he said that because he was a gay, elected public official, it was much 'more complex' to live a 'meaningful private life.'" ("Foley's Resignation Not the First Scandal of Its Kind," Oct. 2, 2006, http://www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,217067,00.html).
Hopefully, truth will prevail in the Foley fiasco and anyone involved in wrongdoing will be justly punished. And since Congress seems to know no bounds in regulating the rest of us, it's past time for it to properly regulate and monitor its own page program so that nothing like this will ever happen again.
|
|
Concerned Women for America 1015 Fifteenth St. N.W., Suite 1100 Washington, D.C. 20005 Phone: (202) 488-7000 Fax: (202) 488-0806 |
Feedback / Questions? || Problem with this page? || Archives
