Deal or no deal, voters must remove Rangel
OPINION - If ever there was a case that screamed for scrubbing race from politics, it's Rangel's...
Embattled Harlem Congressman Charles Rangel sure knows how to come up with a zinger. Speaking to reporters during a recent tour of a Harlem hospital, Rangel said that it would “unpatriotic” for him to resign despite calls from some for him to do just that. Rangel faces a pile of charges of ethics violations. There’s talk of a deal being worked out to give Rangel a soft landing on the charges. The deal would entail him admitting guilt to some or all of the charges. The punishment could be a critical report, a censure by the House or a vote to expel. But deal or no deal, Rangel is still publicly combative.
And why not? He’s still a hero to many Harlem blacks, got loud public support from the Congressional Black Caucus, and there’s absolutely no outcry of protest from black groups about Rangel’s well documented flagrant flaunting of House rules that require reporting of expenses, and his failure to report income, failure to pay taxes, and misuse of rental property. There’s only one explanation for the circle the Rangel wagon routine by blacks. And that’s race.
If ever there was a case that screamed for scrubbing race from politics, it’s Rangel’s. He has been on the legal hot seat for months. The violations go back several years, and they are so serious that he stepped down as chair of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee last March. The congressman’s congressional and legal woes stirred a handful of Rangel opponents to announce they’d challenge him for the seat he’s held for four decades in the fall. But that’s been the extent of the jaundiced look at Rangel’s actions.
Rangel mercifully has not played the so-called race card at any point during his legal ordeal, but he has dropped veiled hints that he is a political victim and the attacks are merely the product of the fierce infighting between Republicans and Democrats in the House. This dismissive attitude toward the charges is a pitch for voter sympathy and, of course, voter support in his re-election battle. But it also implies that he and other African-American politicians should not be held to the same standard of accountability as white officials who get caught with their hand in the till. When they are jailed and pay hefty fines for violating campaign finance and ethics laws, they argue, nobody says that they have to be a cross between Mother Teresa and Saint Paul.
But Rangel and other black elected officials should be held to a higher standard. Their mostly black constituents view them not as politicians, but as leaders and advocates. They look to them to represent their interests and to confront institutional power. Any legal smear on them makes it much harder for blacks to retain confidence in them. This diminishes their political power and influence, creating distrust and dissension among black voters. This makes it that much more difficult for blacks to generate any enthusiasm to get out to vote, or get involved in community improvement actions. After all, the many Harlem voters who have never known any other congressman than Rangel can shrug their shoulders when there’s a problem, and say let Charlie handle it.
It’s not just scandal that hurts black officials — the race card hurts them too. In far too many cases, blacks accused of wrongdoing instinctually deflect, dodge, and muddy the charges and accusations against them by claiming racial persecution. They promptly wrap themselves in the martyr’s cloak of persecuted civil rights fighters.
This is not a small point. In the past when black politicians have been accused and tried on corruption charges, they have used the race card to deflect attention from their crimes.
During the 1990s, former Illinois Congressman Mel Reynolds cried racism when he was indicted, tried and convicted of sexual assault charges. Washington, D.C. Mayor Marion Barry cried racism when he was indicted, tried and convicted on a drug charge. California Congressman Walter Tucker, convicted of bribery charges, loudly shouted racism. In a statement Birmingham MayorLarry Langford issued after his arrest on federal corruption charges some years ago, he strongly implied that he was a victim of political persecution.
These politicians play the odds and remind blacks that two decades ago then President Reagan’s Justice Department initiated dozens of corruption probes against black elected officials. Given the Reagan administration’s perceived indifference to civil rights and social programs, it was easy for many blacks to believe that some of these cases crossed the thin line between legitimate concern with bagging lawbreakers and racially-motivated political harassment of black leadership.
Black officials, such as Rangel, will continue to be keenly watched by state and federal prosecutors for any hint of impropriety. If they engage in any forbidden activities with money, they will swiftly be called on the legal carpet. The burden of proof, then, is on them to show that they will do everything to avoid even the slightest taint of scandal. This may be unfair, but this is the price that they must pay to be regarded as credible and honorable black leaders and advocates.
When the charges against him were first made public, a defiant Rangel vowed that he would never resign from his seat. He banks that black voters will do what they have done for four decades; and that’s ignore the tarnish on his star and reelect him. To hear him tell it, it’s unpatriotic for them to do anything else.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author, political analyst and regular Grio contributor. He hosts a nationally broadcast political affairs radio talk show on Pacifica and KTYM Radio Los Angeles. Follow Earl Ofari Hutchinson on Twitter: http://twitter.com/earlhutchinson
