Jason Chaffetz Opens Up Dumbest Investigation of Obama Yet

Let our journalists help you make sense of the noise: Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter and get a recap of news that matters.


I understand why net neutrality is a big deal for internet service providers, who oppose any new rules that restrict what they can do and how much they can charge. Ditto for content companies like Google, who support net neutrality because they don’t want to be extorted by ISPs for access to high-speed pipes. Ditto again for activists who believe internet access should be on a level playing field for everyone.

But it’s also become a bête noire of the tea party crowd, and it’s a lot less clear to me why these folks care. But maybe I’m overthinking it. Perhaps they oppose net neutrality simply because President Obama supports it. Here’s the latest evidence on this score:

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, has written to FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler asking for all documents related to communications and meetings involving White House and agency officials concerning the issue….Republicans have charged that Obama unduly influenced Wheeler’s proposal. Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John Thune (R-S.D.) said Wheeler “succumbed to the bully tactics of political activists and the president himself.”

….Chaffetz said in a letter dated Friday that he was investigating reports indicating “views expressed by the White House potentially had an improper influence” on development of Wheeler’s proposal. He cited a Wall Street Journal article last week that reported that two White House aides led a “secretive effort” to build support from outside groups for tough net-neutrality regulations.

Chaffetz must really be desperate. Does he seriously think that the president of the United States isn’t allowed to try to mobilize outside support for his policy proposals? Or even that the White House isn’t allowed to lobby FCC commissioners? That’s just crackers.

But Chaffetz is a certified up-and-comer in the Republican ranks, and I guess that means he has to make sure his tea party bona fides never get rusty from disuse. This time, though, he’s really digging through the bottom of the barrel. Unless he wants to join up with the crazytown contingent for good—something he’s managed to avoid so far—he should think twice about dumb theatrics like this. He’s better off when he keeps at least one foot planted in realityville.

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest