DeLay on Track for Reelection

The good news, such as it is, is that the Democrats have found a veteran to oppose Tom DeLay in Nick Lampson, a victim of redistricting. On top of that, some in the GOP are looking for a primary opponent. The bad news is that in both cases, they are doing so for the wrong reason: DeLay's alleged ethics violations.

Let's take the Democrats first. Are they going to drive home the point, so to speak, that DeLay would crucify our judicial system, as I have advocated they (or somebody) should do? Of course not. Their whole focus is going to be on DeLay's "corruption." The first two billboards went up today.

A New England group founded by former Democratic presidential candidate Howard Dean erected two billboards today near the district of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, highlighting his problems with lobbyist-funded travel.

"Lobbyists sent Tom DeLay golfing; all you got was this billboard," says a billboard overlooking a freeway that bends around downtown Houston, identical to one erected in Galveston County. They will remain up until the end of May.

The billboards refer to golf outings and other foreign trips DeLay took that were paid for by lobbyist Jack Abramoff, whose work is now under criminal investigation.

First off, the fact that this group is from New England (and is headed by "Howard the Scream" besides) is going to be easy for DeLay and the Republicans to turn against them. But that obstacle would not be insurmountable if they had something substantive to say. True: Texans won't listen to a bunch of busybodies from New England telling them what to do in exchange for telling them something they already know. However, blue-state provincialism to the contrary, Texans can comprehend a decent argument. This does not appear to be what they will get from the Democrats. DeLay's corrupt? And we should vote in a Democrat to replace him? Democrats are still seen as corrupt and beholden to lobbyists down here. Lampson won't even be seen as a real alternative and DeLay's district will stick with the devil they know.

But is this really a surprise? No. The Democrats' history of petty obstructionism with Republican judicial nominees and their use of the judiciary to circumvent the legislature show that they don't necessarily appreciate why we should have an independent judiciary. Our federal government is built on the principle of balancing the powers of the three branches of the government. That is, the ambitions of the men in office are played off one another to keep these ambitions from being turned on the people. The Democrats thus merely want a strong judiciary with which to advance their agenda. DeLay's jihad against the judiciary is thus seen only in the short-range context of being a threat to their agenda. They are thus incapable of making a strong intellectual case against DeLay and must resort to mud-slinging.

The Republican opponents of DeLay, who are calling themselves the "revolt of the elders" are no better.

McCloskey is one of nine former congressmen who have formed an informal group he called the "revolt of the elders," to oppose congressmen who they think are guilty of ethics violation

Again, there is not a peep about DeLay's jihad against the judiciary. This is not entirely surprising, but it is discouraging. Are there no Republicans out there who are sufficiently concerned about the jihad to make a principled stand against DeLay? Or are there none brave enough to do so?

-- CAV