The US Attorney controversy surrounding Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, the Department of Justice, and the Bush Administration will undoubtedly get more interesting as time goes on. Sen. Charles Grassley can’t be the only Republican out there who is becoming frustrated by this president’s executive power grab and the more that’s revealed, the more we know that the White House and AG Gonzales worked together in their efforts to force out 8 US Attorneys. Liberal Oasis has a good primer on the controversy here. But what is the Iowa impact?
Well, beyond Sen. Grassley’s vote to authorize subpoenas in the Congressional investigation, it is worth considering US Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa Matt Whitaker and how he plays into or is involved in the whole issue. While it is unquestionable that Whitaker and his staff in Iowa have done some exemplary work (see the CIETC Scandal for an example), one has to wonder how his partisanship plays in his day job. This has become particularly true in recent weeks because of the indictment of State Senator Matt McCoy on charges of extortion. David Yepsen has taken a look at the matter in his usual way and Chase Martyn of Iowa Progress skims the surface of the issue of Whitaker’s investigation and work here. I plan on taking it a bit further.
Just who is Matt Whitaker? He’s a graduate of the University of Iowa and former football player there. He has his JD and MBA as well. In 2002, he ran against incumbent Democrat Michael Fitzgerald for the position of State Treasurer as the Republican candidate. He lost, garnering 43% of the vote while Fitzgerald had 55%. Contribution information and disclosure forms from the 2002 Elections aren’t available on the IECDB website, but can be requested via email. I’m sure if I were to request a copy of the files, I’d see a bevy of social conservative donors. In early February 2004, Bush nominated Whitaker to the position of US Attorney and he won Senate confirmation in June of 2004.
How partisan is Whitaker? Well, he’s quite the Republican. He’s a social conservative and supportive of the Iowa Christian Alliance (formerly the Iowa Christian Coalition but has since broken off because of the Christian Coalition’s work with Move On — for net neutrality stuff — and other issues). He was to be the emcee at their spring 2007 kickoff event, as noted here on their website, but at the last minute the DOJ told him he couldn’t go as the emcee but had to simply attend. The Associated Press published a story in the Register [available via NewsBank] on his involvement in the event on February 28, noting that the group Americans United for the Separation of Church and State had objected to his role in the event. Traditionally, US Attorneys, while political appointees, have remained largely nonpartisan in their activities outside of the workplace as to avoid the appearance of impropriety or an imposed partisanship on the job. Clearly, by choosing to attend the event Whitaker was upsetting that tradition, to some degree. Even Ted Sporer, Chair of the Polk County Republican Party, wrote on his blog that Whitaker was in attendance at the event, which drew only Republicans.
Why is Whitaker’s partisanship bad? Well, in this case, I’ll let David Yepsen explain:
“Third, Whitaker is a Republican. And not just any Republican, but a socially conservative one who ran unsuccessfully for state treasurer in 2002 and could well be a candidate for office again.
He recently was in the news when he was scheduled to emcee an event for the Iowa Christian Alliance, a successor group to the Iowa Christian Coalition.
After first granting him permission to host the event, Whitaker said the Justice Department revoked it after objections from liberal groups. Instead, he just attended the meeting.
Active involvement in ideological political action groups like that is rare for U.S. attorneys in Iowa — and even the Justice Department higher-ups seemed to think better of it. For good reason. McCoy is a Democrat. And not just any Democrat but an openly gay one.
So we now have the specter of a politically ambitious, evangelical Republican with ties to the religious right going after a gay Democrat.”
Yepsen recommends that Whitaker step aside and let career prosecutors handle the case because of the possible conflicts of interest, or even the appearance of a conflict. Finally, Yepsen offers some wise advice.
Just how partisan are US Attorneys becoming? Well, McClatchy Newspapers has an amazing story on just how political and partisan the attorneys have become in recent years, thanks to Bush Administration efforts. Here is just a tid-bit:
“Since 2005, McClatchy Newspapers has found, Bush has appointed at least three U.S. attorneys who had worked in the Justice Department’s civil rights division when it was rolling back longstanding voting-rights policies aimed at protecting predominantly poor, minority voters.
[…] Taken together, critics say, the replacement of the U.S. attorneys, the voter-fraud campaign and the changes in Justice Department voting rights policies suggest that the Bush administration may have been using its law enforcement powers for partisan political purposes.
The Bush administration’s emphasis on voter fraud is drawing scrutiny from the Democratic Congress, which has begun investigating the firings of eight U.S. attorneys - two of whom say that their ousters may have been prompted by the Bush administration’s dissatisfaction with their investigations of alleged Democratic voter fraud.
Bush has said he’s heard complaints from Republicans about some U.S. attorneys’ “lack of vigorous prosecution of election fraud cases,” and administration e-mails have shown that Rove and other White House officials were involved in the dismissals and in selecting a Rove aide to replace one of the U.S. attorneys. Nonetheless, Bush has refused to permit congressional investigators to question Rove and others under oath.
[…] A third former civil rights division employee, Matt Dummermuth, 33, was nominated to be U.S. attorney in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, last December. Before his appointment, he was counsel to the assistant attorney general for civil rights. He was a special assistant to the civil rights chief from 2002 to 2004.
Details of his involvement in reviewing voter rights couldn’t be determined, and Dummermuth, a Harvard Law School graduate, didn’t return calls seeking comment.
Bush administration officials have said that no single reason led to the firings of the eight U.S. attorneys. But two of those who were forced to resign said they thought they might have been punished for failing to prosecute Democrats prior to the 2006 congressional elections or for not vigorously pursuing Republican allegations of voter irregularities in Washington state and New Mexico.
Former U.S. Attorney David Iglesias of New Mexico has said he thought that “the voter fraud issue was the foundation” for his firing and that complaints about his failure to pursue corruption matters involving Democrats were “the icing on the cake.”"
Clearly, partisanship and ulterior motives have begun to become the emphasis in the selection of US Attorneys and efforts to find some kind of documented voter fraud by the federal government has become the news means for Republicans to find a way to disenfranchise American voters. Read the full story from McClatchy for the full grasp of the situation.
Clearly, Whitaker’s partisanship could become an issue in this case and will likely lead to more criticism from those observing the process. Now, don’t get me wrong, I want to investigate this matter thoroughly. I just don’t want it to be a partisan effort to bring down Democrats. And Whitaker’s role in these cases — because of his active Republican party involvement — complicates the matter so much. The Polk County Democratic Party passed a resolution on Wednesday stating their support for Sen. Matt McCoy as well as noting the partisanship of the Justice Department. You can find the full release and resolution below the fold.
And one more thing to keep in mind: If allegations of voter fraud and other electoral issues are becoming the focal point of selecting US Attorneys, as it seems to be the case even with the Northern District of Iowa’s Matt Dummermuth, then Iowans should be on the lookout for investigations in other parts of Iowa, particularly with Election Day registration passing in the House and likely becoming law, should it pass the Senate. Maybe this Matt is just as partisan as the Matt from the Southern District.
Continue reading ‘Matt Whitaker: Just another partisan US Attorney?’
