From the fine folks over at The Stakeholder:
Just how tangled up in Tom DeLay's House of Scandal is Peter King?
Peter King voted with Tom DeLay 91% of the time between Jan. 1 2004 and March 31 2005.
Is this the kind of lockstep government that working families deserve?
Peter King voted to weaken the ethics rules in a move that many say served only to protect Tom DeLay.
Does the integrity of the House mean so little that Peter King would sacrifice it to defend Tom DeLay?
When Republicans realized it was "impossible to win the communications battle" over the gutted ethics rules, King flip-flopped and voted to put the old rules back into place.
So Peter King cares about the integrity of the House after all -- when cable news is covering it.
When Democrats offered a solution to clean up the House by strengthening ethics rules, Peter King voted twice to make sure it never even came to an up or down vote.
So instead of a bipartisan effort to get government working for Americans, Peter King stood for cronyism and partisan politics.
Peter King voted to allow DeLay to continue serving as Leader even if he is indicted.
Is Tom DeLay's behavior the kind of leadership that should be REWARDED, not punished?
Voting percentage with DeLay:
calculated through: www.cq.com - 91%
Vote to weaken ethics rules:
H Res. 5, Roll Call #6, 1/4/05 YES
Vote to repeal weakened ethics rules:
H Res. 241, Roll Call #145, 4/27/05 YES
Votes to table Democratic solution:
H. Res. 153, Roll Call #70, 3/15/05 YES
H. Res. 213, Roll Call #106, 4/14/05 YES
Closed door indictment rule vote: