Bad News For Larry Craig
Craig announces he will not resign but he will retire.
Update 1 - below the fold
Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID), who once-upon-a-time had announced he would resign from the Senate on 30 September, got a set-back today in his image-polishing effort. Minnesota District Court Judge Judge Charles Porter rebuffed Craig's request to withdraw his guilty plea to misdemeanor disorderly conduct. Craig had been arrested in June for lewd conduct in a men's restroom at the Twin Cities airport.
Craig was the Chairman of the Republican Policy Committee from 1997 until 2003. He is ranking member of the Committee on Veterans' Affairs and a member of both the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources and Appropriations Committee. He has served on the Board of Directors of the National Rifle Association since 1983.
The Idaho Press-Tribune reports: (pdf of the ruling)
In his ruling issued this morning, Porter noted that Craig expressly waived his rights to have a trial, to cross-examine witnesses, to remain silent, to subpoena witnesses and to contest the admissibility of the evidence presented against him.
[...]
The judge found that the evidence presented by the arresting officer supported Craig's guilty plea.
Craig pled guilty to a misdeameanor. As I said in August, I don't care about someone's private sex life unless it interferes with their ability to govern. Craig's behavior certainly appears reckless -- but unless someone was blackmailing him over a double-life, I don't see how it affects his ability to govern. And even then, the decision should like with the voters of Idaho, not Republican dealmakers inside the Beltway.
After all, Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) is implicated in the DC Madam federal case -- and soliciting a prostitute, no matter how "high class," is still a crime. Vitter still has his committee assignments and there are no calls for his resignation by inside-the-Beltway types. Of course, Vitter is not up for re-election in 2008.
Let's look at the retribution Congress placed on a felon: former Rep. Bob Ney (R-OH) pled guilty to a felony in September 2006 -- but did not resign from his Congressional seat nor did Congress force him out. He did step down from his chairmanship after being publicly linked to the Jack Abramoff scandal.
One-third of the Senate is up for grabs each election cycle. In 2008, 22 of 34 contested seats (one special election) are held by Republicans. If Craig stands by his earlier pronouncement that he will not seek re-election, then five of those 22 Republican seats will be "open" seats -- undefended by an incumbent. Since the incumbency advantage helps explain a 90-or-so percent re-election rate, the resignations are a blow to the Republican Party.
Should Craig stand by his resignation -- the result of pressure from Republican Party leadership -- then Idaho Gov. Butch Otter would appoint a replacement. The replacement would have some incumbency advantage, which is one reason the Republican leadership would like Craig to resign. Reportedly, both Idaho Lt. Gov. Jim Risch and Attorney General Lawrence Wasden are interested in the seat.
- Sen. Craig In Hot Seat, 27 Aug 2007
- Craig to Resign Committee Assignments, 30 August 2007
- It's Not Over Until The Fat Lady Sings ..., 5 September 2007
- 2008 Election: US Senate
For anyone who has doubts about Sen. Craig's behavior, I suggest reading the full opinion (pdf). An excerpt that curled my hair:
The Defendant stood approximately three feet outside one particular stall, looked through the crack in the stall door, then looked down at his hands, fidgeted with his fingers, then looked into the stall again, repeating this cycle for approximately two minutes. The stall's occupant, MAC Police Sergeant Dave Karsnia ("Sgt. Karsnia"), observed Defendant's behavior over a long enough period and with sufficient detail to determine that the Defendant had blue eyes.
Craig talked with the prosecuting attorney four times between 25 June and 3 August 2007. He argues, or his lawyers do (this time he actually secured legal counsel), that the pressure of media exposure (because he is a Senator) means that his guilty plea was not voluntary.
Interesting: Minnesota courts have ruled that "[a] person has a reasonable expectation of privacy in a public restroom stall. And the Minnesota statute defining disorderly conduct was constitutional in 1954 and in 1978.
Finally, the Judge noted that the ACLU Amicus Curiae brief was without merit because the ACLU focused on the expectation of privacy in the conduct of sex, even in a public restroom, whereas this case centers on solicitation.