Bipartisan legislation moving in the Senate would substantially lengthen the list of forbidden favors that could expose a member of Congress to charges of bribery. The move comes as Rep. William Jefferson, D-New Orleans, battles federal charges with a defense that his actions on behalf of various businesses were not "official acts" but private deals not covered by the current public corruption statutes.[...]
Jefferson has based a major portion of his defense on the vagueness of the current definition. He said that while he might have been paid to exert influence as a member of Congress -- including writing letters, visiting foreign dignitaries, appearing before a federal agency on behalf of a business client -- his actions didn't amount to "official acts" within the meaning of the bribery law.[...]
Boston College Law School professor George Brown wrote in a law review article last year that the federal gratuities statute "continues to be a source of confusion and contention." In an interview Tuesday, Brown said that for years prosecutors have broadly interpreted what is a narrow law that pertains to such things as voting on legislation, something Jefferson isn't accused of doing.
No comments:
Post a Comment