William Jefferson has refused the request from House leader Nancy Pelosi to resign his seat on the Ways and Means Committee.

Democrats sought to get embattled Rep. William Jefferson (news, bio, voting record) to resign his seat on the House’s most prestigious committee.

“In the interest of upholding the high ethical standard of the House Democratic Caucus, I am writing to request your immediate resignation from the Ways and Means Committee,” wrote House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi in the one-sentence correspondence.

The Louisiana Democrat was defiant.

“With respect, I decline to do so,” he wrote back to Pelosi.”I will not give up a committee assignment that is so vital to New Orleans at this crucial time for any uncertain, long-term political strategy.”

Members of Congress have come together to denounce the search of Jefferson’s office on the grounds of separation of powers. But I think that such an argument is going to play pretty poorly in light of the image many Americans have about politicians. Sister Toldjah put it this way:

Congress may have their heart in the right place here with respect to their concerns on the separation of power argument, but before they flip out like Newt Gingrich, Hastert, and others have done, they might want to learn more about what led up to this before they start making sweeping assertions about this being a violation of separation of powers.

She then points to this post at Gateway Pundit which adds,

Could there have been… anything that would have played better into the Democratic mantra of a corrupt and executive power-abusing Bush White House more than Dennis Hastert’s response to the news of Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-LA) outrageous freezer-foil bribery scandal?

Just wondering.

Yesterday, Dennis Hastert was able to diffuse the swarm of media attention surrounding one of the most outrageous bribery cases in US history by taking the focus off of the perpetrating freezer-cash-stashing democrat, William Jefferson (D-LA), and placing the focus squarely on the back of President George Bush.

This will look like Congress covering up for one of their own among those who don’t pay much attention to politics. For those who are more politically aware it goes even further. Here’s Captain Ed’s take:

This can’t be the same Congress that issues subpoenas for all sorts of probes into the executive branch and the agencies it runs. Does Congress really want to establish a precedent that neither branch has to answer subpoenas if issued by the other, even if approved by a judge — which this particular subpoena was?

The FBI had a valid subpoena for the information in Jefferson’s office. He refused to provide it. The FBI had little choice but to go in and take it, and from the description given in the Washington Post, they took extraordinary care not to confiscate legitimate data relating to his legislative responsibilities.

and further,

Hastert and Boehner had better reconsider this fight. Not only is it a loser legally, but it’s also political suicide. They shouldn’t need the Supreme Court to laugh them into oblivion to comprehend the magnitude of this mistake. [my emphasis]

The entire situation is pretty one sided. 535 MOC and their staffs are about the sum total of those who are distressed with the search. Dafydd at Big Lizards puts it clearly:

The Lords of the District are offended that they may actually be required to suffer under the very laws they enacted for the peóns. How crass and vulgar! The “larger separation of powers principle” evidently also takes precedence over the people’s business — bills on immigration, confirmation of judges and the Director of the CIA, the war, taxes, energy exploration, and every other piece o’legislation that was let hang fire while Congress roared about laws that were a bit too universal.

The American people don’t understand that. But even if you explained it to them, which do you think would concern them more: that Congressmen got their knickers in a twist over being searched (with a search warrant)? Or that Congressmen were taking massive bribes to conspire against the general welfare?

Hmmmmm. Tough question.

I have to add this from Confederate Yankee:

One does not need to graduate from a top flight law school to easily discern in the passage above that the commission of a felony is specifically cited as one of three exemptions from the privilege from arrest. The charges being pursued against Jefferson are indeed felony charges.

The “speech and debate” clause only applies to a Congressman’s official duties, and if Hastert, Boehner and other congressmen think that accepting bribes is part of their official duties, then perhaps we need more search warrants executed on Congressional offices, not fewer. [my emphasis]

Heh. Yup.