Wright Support Reflects Fear of New Standards

WASHINGTON —  Ethics charges against House Speaker Jim Wright (D-Tex.) Thursday sparked an enormous outpouring of support for him from fellow Democrats, who predicted that Wright would rebound from the setback and retain his high office.

The angry reaction of these Democrats, including many who have criticized Wright’s behavior in the past, seemed to reflect growing sentiment among House members that the House Ethics Committee’s decision to bring charges against the Speaker ultimately might come back to haunt all of them--setting a new, more stringent standard of conduct for members of Congress.

In an era when many members come from two-wage-earner families, the Democrats--like Wright himself--were particularly upset by charges that the Speaker’s wife, Betty, received an improper salary from a real estate developer in Ft. Worth. “It’s demeaning, it’s sexist, it’s cheap,” said Rep. David E. Bonior (D-Mich.).

Republicans as well as Democrats said that Wright, even though he already has been hurt by the controversy, can still survive the charges if he succeeds in persuading a majority of the Ethics Committee that his alleged missteps are not serious enough to warrant punishment.

Nevertheless, even Wright’s friends acknowledged that there is always a possibility the scandal could mushroom and bring his downfall as Speaker.

“Nobody’s trying to push Jim Wright out at this time,” said one respected Democrat, who declined to be identified. “But if it gets worse, he’s going to find it very hard to hang on.”

Range of Sanctions

The Ethics Committee, which will not issue a final ruling on the charges until hearing Wright’s defense, has a wide range of sanctions at its disposal if it decides to hold the Speaker accountable. It can issue a simple statement of criticism or recommend a reprimand, censure or expulsion.

Members of both parties predicted that the committee would be reluctant to recommend anything as serious as a reprimand, a move that would surely cost Wright his speakership. As Rep. Pat Williams (D-Mont.) put it: “The ground would start to move under him if he were reprimanded.”

The support that Democrats expressed for Wright in response to the committee’s preliminary vote Wednesday was surprising in light of the negative statements that many of these same members had made about the Speaker during the final days of an exhaustive, 10-month committee investigation into his finances. Just two weeks ago, many Democrats indicated that they were losing confidence in Wright.

Many members said that they were persuaded to defend Wright by what they saw as the committee’s unduly strict interpretation of the rules--particularly the rule governing outside earned income by a House member. The committee found that Wright, who earned more than $55,000 by marketing his 117-page book, “Reflections of a Public Man,” may have been overzealous in exploiting a loophole in the rule that permits members to earn unlimited book royalties.

Rep. William H. Gray III (D-Pa.) questioned how Wright could be faulted for using a loophole in the rules. “It’s clear it’s an escape hatch to violate the ceiling on outside income,” he said. “How can you find anybody guilty of violating a loophole put there for that purpose?”

As a result, Democrats vowed to mount a spirited defense of Wright on grounds that the committee is reinterpreting the rules in this case. “We’ll have a big fight on the floor,” predicted Rep. Jack Brooks (D-Tex.). “We’ll have to read the ethics rules to them so they understand--it’s all in English.”

Likewise, many House members were outraged by the charge that Mrs. Wright had erred in accepting an $18,000-a-year salary--plus the use of a condominium and a car--from Wright’s business partnership with a friend, George A. Mallick Jr. The committee concluded that the salary constituted a gift to Wright from a person with an interest in congressional business.

Some members wondered privately whether their spouses’ incomes would pass muster with the committee. And feminists, such as Rep. Patricia Schroeder (D-Colo.), said the committee’s view of Mrs. Wright’s salary suggests that wives of congressmen do not do serious work.

“As a woman that offends me,” she said. “Most women I know who work, work.”

Wright’s emotional defense of his wife Thursday was clearly designed to solidify his support among these women and two-income-family members.

Yet what makes many members of the House even more uncomfortable about the charges against Wright is a fear that the case will set off a public outcry against Congress, causing heightened scrutiny of the personal finances of all members. In addition, no one outside the committee knows what bombshells might be contained in the 450-page report on the Wright case prepared by special counsel Richard J. Phelan. In addition to the charges that were acted on by the committee, the document contains other allegations and evidence collected in the lengthy probe.

“We wonder where this is going,” said Rep. Dave McCurdy (D-Okla.). “We wonder if this is a lose-lose proposition. . . . It’s not a comfortable feeling to see floating standards.”

Another Democrat, who declined to be identified, agreed. “There is a growing apprehension in the House about this whole ethics thing,” he said.