[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
PoliticsOL.com Editorial - Week of August 26, 2001
Why Condit Refuses to Resign
"Inexcusable and indefensible," and "cannot be condoned."
This is how Rep. Gary Condit (D-CA) described then-President Bill Clinton's conduct, speaking on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives, December 18, 1998.
Two months earlier, Condit was one of only 31 Democrats who voted in favor of beginning the impeachment inquiry of Clinton. Though he ultimately decided against removing Clinton from office, his words then hint at why he stubbornly refuses to apologize for his own conduct now (at least even Clinton did that much) and resign from office:
"I have grave reservations whether they meet the constitutional standards for removal from office. While the President may very well be forced at some point in the future to face civil charges for his actions, given the information currently available to us, removal from office isn't justified."
Though many Americans remain suspicious of a possible Condit role in the disappearance of Chandra Levy, his refusal to acknowledge an extra-marital affair with Levy could be due to his fear of a wrongful death lawsuit that could be eventually filed against him. This could also explain why the Congressman, whose public approval ratings in his own district have dropped like a rock, says he still intends to seek reelection to Congress in 2002.
As veteran California political columnist Dan Walters put it recently, "At least financially, he needs to run. He needs money. He has no wealth, no other job to fall back on. He has zip."
With a campaign apparatus still functioning, Condit can continue to raise money to pay his public relations consultants and legal fees from his campaign funds.
But, if he were to resign or announce now that he wouldn't seek reelection, who is going to contribute to a lame duck or former Congressman?
Therefore, Condit can continue to raise contributions without really spending them on typical reelection expenses, such as campaign literature, TV and radio spots, opposition research, phone banks, staff, etc. In fact, he doesn't have to spend anything at all.
So long as Condit remains a potential candidate for reelection, loyal supporters of his can continue to contribute to his "campaign" and if he later drops out, he can use the remaining funds to help pay the bills he's running up now.
Who, you say, would contribute to this guy, especially in light of his recent TV appearances? Why, many of those who have contributed to him in the past, of course, particularly PAC's.
So, what happens after Condit finally caves and drops out of the 2002 Congressional race? Well, don't look for Condit to get any cushioned, $90,000/year state commission job just yet.
That is, until the California governor's race next year is over. Condit's son and daughter already work for Governor Gray Davis, a political ally of Condit.
Don't bet against that, in 2003, the future former Congressman will as well.
PoliticsOL.com reserves the right to shorten or to edit letters for clarity. Only signed letters will be considered for publication. (i.e., include name, city & state of residence)
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
This is how Rep. 
Why, many of those who have contributed to him 