Get your hats straight
Today’s editorial starts with a quiz: Which of the following two paragraphs is from an official congressional press release, and which is from a political campaign?
“President Joe Biden's weak address to the American people shows he is unfit to serve as President of the United States. For six days, Joe Biden remained in hiding during the most significant foreign policy and national security failure in a generation. … Because of Joe Biden's weak and feckless leadership, the U.S. is less safe today than we were before he took office. This is Joe Biden's Saigon.”
“This is the biggest foreign policy disaster of a generation. There’s blood on Biden’s hands. This is Joe Biden’s Saigon … and for the entire weekend, he remained in hiding! Our Command-in-chief is a deserter, out on vacation while the Taliban declares victory. He has surrendered to pure evil. Joe Biden is unfit to serve and must be held accountable.”
Too close to call?
It’s not supposed to be.
The first diatribe is actually from an official communication sent out by the office of Rep. Elise Stefanik, Rschuylerville, using her House email account. The second one came from her campaign.
This isn’t the first time Ms. Stefanik has blurred the line between political and public business since she became the House Republican conference chair. Last month, her office sent out a nakedly political rant on the Jan. 6 committee investigation, referring to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi as a “radical authoritarian” who is “destroying this country and the United States Congress,” ranting about “drooling ” media, and flouting prohibitions on electioneering by speculating on the fall congressional elections.
While we respect the right of free speech — it is, after all, one of the foundations of democracy, not to mention a free press — we also expect elected officials not to use taxpayer-funded email accounts, staffers, and other resources for political messaging.
This is not some idealistic notion we came up with. It underlies the ethics rules governing how members of Congress keep their politics and the people’s business separate. The House Communications Standards Manual clearly states that official communications may be used only for official congressional business, and lists a host of rules Ms. Stefanik may have violated:
Communications must not be targeted based on political party affiliation.
Communications “must serve the district in which the Member represents, and to the greatest extent possible, shall not be targeted outside of the Member’s district.”
Official communications should not be used for political or personal business.
“No campaign content or electioneering.”
“Official communications critical of policy may not be personalized or politicized, and may not be used to disparage Members, other individuals or political parties.”
Ms. Stefanik’s over-the-top rhetoric may be standard fare in a lot of campaign literature these days, but it has no place in official House correspondence. Ms. Stefanik is due for a refresher course in ethics, if not a reprimand from the House Committee on Ethics. And maybe a bill for all the taxpayer time and resources she’s misusing.