Maybe you'd like to give him your opinion of his editorial.
http://www.house.gov/kline/contact.shtml
John Kline: Tom DeLay is political target; session's secrecy was legitimate
John Kline
November 28, 2004 KLINE1128

Your Nov. 24 editorial takes the liberty of making several assumptions for which you have no evidence, while ignoring a number of important facts.

First and foremost, the House Republican Caucus ethics rule to which you refer was not repealed, it was revised. As agreed to by voice vote last week, the "Bonilla rule" requires mandatory review of any indictment against a member of our party leadership. Within 30 days, the panel of review must make a public recommendation for action, and the caucus must act -- also publicly -- on that recommendation. In addition, we strengthened the penalties for wrongdoing by requiring the immediate removal from a leadership position of any member convicted of an offense.

When the original rule was passed, requiring any member under indictment to step down from a position in party leadership, no one considered the possibility of a rogue district attorney bent on partisan political persecution. Unfortunately, Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle has demonstrated his commitment to doing just that by adding Majority Leader Tom DeLay to the long list of Republican lawmakers he has targeted throughout his career.

Sadly, it has become necessary to take steps to address the reality of political manipulation of the process and the constitutional right of every American to be considered innocent until proven guilty. Tom DeLay has not, in fact, been indicted. Does he not deserve the same basic rights afforded the rest of us?

Your editorial also fails to mention Earle's public statement that it is now unlikely DeLay will face indictment, further revealing Earle's opportunistic motives.

Oddly enough, the most vocal critics of this rule are congressional Democrats, whose party has no equivalent standard of justice for colleagues facing criminal investigation. To add insult to the injury of this double standard, the individuals most critical of the rule change are the same men and women who adamantly opposed asking Bill Clinton to step down following his impeachment. Some have themselves been fined for violating federal law, as in the case of minority leader Nancy Pelosi, or found guilty in court of illegally abusing their power while in office, as in the case of Rep. Jim McDermott of Washington state.

Finally, you take issue with the private nature of interparty caucus meetings. The closed-door structure of these meetings creates an environment in which dissent is encouraged. You consistently urge lawmakers to act independently and challenge our leadership, yet you would do away with one of the few places in which we do so regularly and freely.

John Kline, Lakeville, is a Republican member of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Whatever...I find it interesting that the "Moral Values crowd" holds alliegance to a party that just modified thier ethics rules to protect the leadership position of the House majority leader.

Oh, these guys don't hold themselves to any moral standards. <_<