Rangel's predecessor in the House, Adam Clayton Powell Jr., also found himself embroiled in an ethics scandal at the end of his career. After a Judiciary Committee investigation into his conduct, the House formally excluded Powell from the 90th Congress for several infractions, including misuse of public funds. After being expelled, Powell ran in a special election to succeed himself and won, but lost his next election in 1970 -- to Rangel, then a promising 40 year-old former New York prosecutor. 
 
 Two days after Rep. Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y.) was found guilty of 11 ethics violations by a House ethics subcommittee, the full ethics committee voted nine to one to recommend that the House of Representatives censure Rangel for his "lack of attention and carelessness" and for bringing "discredit to the House and serving to undermine public trust" of the institution. They also recommended Rangel pay restitution for unpaid taxes related to a home in the Dominican Republic.In an extraordinary move before the sentence came down, Rangel released a statement apologizing for his conduct. "This has been one of the most difficult days of my life. All of this has been brought upon me as a result of my own actions. In the end, I hope that you would judge me on my entire record as a soldier and a dedicated public servant -- not by my mistakes," he wrote. "To my beloved Colleagues, my constituents and the American people, I am sorry."Now that the full ethics committee has agreed to a sentence, that recommendation will be sent to the full House, which will vote on Rangel's fate. A censure is administered by a formal vote of the two-thirds of the members of the House disapproving of the conduct of a member. After the vote, the member is usually asked to stand in the well of the House while the speaker of the House reads the censure against him.Although the committee attorney, Blake Chisam, said he felt Rangel's conduct deserved a punishment somewhere between a reprimand and the harsher censure, Chisam said the fact that Rangel served as the chairman or ranking member of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee when most of the violations occurred merited the harsher sentence.On Tuesday, the adjudicatory subcommittee convicted Rangel on 11 counts of violating House rules. The infractions involved reporting rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic, using a rent-controlled apartment in New York for campaign activities, and using congressional stationery to raise funds for a center to be built at New York's City University in his name.A forlorn Rangel arrived for the committee's hearing Thursday, flanked by his friend Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.), to make his case for leniency before the 10 committee members. On Tuesday, the congressman walked out of the panel's trial in protest of its decision not to delay the proceedings after he requested more time to find and fund a new legal team. His original defense team separated from Rangel in September. He said he had paid nearly $2 million in legal fees.An ominous sign for Rangel came early in the sentencing hearing, when Rep. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.), the top Republican on the ethics committee, delivered a blistering opening statement against the 20-term congressman, saying it pained him to speak out against a colleague he has long admired."Sadly, it is my unwavering view that the actions, decision and behavior of our colleague from New York can no longer reflect either honor or integrity," Bonner said. "Mr. Rangel can no longer blame anyone other than himself for the position he now finds himself in. Mr. Rangel should only look into the mirror if he wants to know who to blame."Later, Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Tex.) asked Rangel why his failure to pay taxes for 17 years on his Dominican rental property should not be punished harshly by the committee. "What is that?" McCaul said. "How is that different from Mr. [James] Traficant, who failed to pay taxes for two years and was expelled from this body?"But Rep. G.K. Butterfield (D-N.C.) strenuously defended Rangel and called censure too extreme for Rangel's actions. "It should be reserved for intentional conduct where the member has derived a personal financial benefit. That is not this case," Butterfield said. "The law in this case establishes no corruption and as judges we should be bound by this fact."With Lewis by his side, Rangel sat emotionless at the witness table as committee members spoke and as the staff attorney read the lengthy findings against the him. Rangel then rose to defend himself and to take specific issue with Bonner's words."I hope that Mr. Bonner was not suggesting my lack of love for this country or this institution," Rangel said. "I look at myself every morning, Mr. Bonner, and I have never blamed my staff, my family or anyone as it related to my violations of House rules."He also apologized to the committee members for any embarrassment he might have caused them and, holding back tears, appealed for their help in preserving his reputation."I recognize that you cannot deal with issues that are not before this committee," he said. "But what the press has done to me, my community and my family is just totally unfair. Counsel knows it, all of you know it. It's not your responsibility to correct that but they will continue to call me a crook and charge me with being a crook."Although Rangel admitted he was guilty of "faulty behavior" and "wrongdoing," he said his intent was never to enrich himself or deliberately break House rules.After Rangel spoke Thursday, Lewis rose to defend him as well. "I've known Mr. Rangel for more than 50 years. He is a committed and dedicated, hardworking, patriotic American," Lewis said, explaining that Rangel had traveled to Selma, Ala. in the 1960s to march with him and Martin Luther King, Jr. "Charlie Rangel is a good and decent man. I know this man. I think I know his heart."Bonner spoke once more to say that as a native of Selma, he thanked Rangel for going there "to do what you did."The full House can now accept or change the sentence for Rangel. Punishment options include expulsion from the House, but that is considered highly unlikely in this case. The last member of the House to be expelled was Rep. James Traficant (D-Ohio), who later went to federal prison for bribery.Additional reporting by Kevin Brennan for Politics Daily. 

 The House ethics committee is recommending that 20-term Rep. Charles Rangel of New York be censured and pay any unpaid taxes for financial and fundraising misconduct. 
 
 Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y. appears before the House Ethics Committee, on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Nov. 18, 2010. (AP Photo/Harry Hamburg) (Associated Press) 
 
 The House will likely consider a censure motion after Thanksgiving. If it passes, Rangel would suffer the embarrassment of standing before his colleagues and receiving an oral rebuke by the speaker. 
 
 The five Democrats and five Republicans deliberated for several hours behind closed doors Thursday. Earlier, at a sanctions hearing, Rangel apologized for his misconduct but said he was not a crooked politician out for personal gain. 
 
 THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back soon for further information. AP's earlier story is below. 
 
 WASHINGTON (AP) _ The House ethics committee's chief counsel recommended Thursday that veteran Rep. Charles Rangel of New York be censured for financial and fundraising misconduct as lawmakers neared closure on a 2 1/2-year scandal. 
 
 The committee deliberated behind closed doors Thursday after counsel Blake Chisam made his recommendation and Rangel pleaded for fairness, telling the panel he was not a crooked politician. 
 
 Chisam's recommendation was that Rangel receive the most serious congressional discipline short of expulsion. A censure resolution would require a vote by the House disapproving Rangel's conduct and the speaker would orally administer an embarrassing rebuke to the 20-term Democrat in front of his colleagues. 
 
 The ethics committee, made up of five Democrats and five Republicans, could opt for lighter punishments, such as a reprimand, fine or a report deploring Rangel's behavior. 
 
 The full House would have to vote on a reprimand or fine, but Rangel would be spared the embarrassment of being rebuked at the front of the chamber, called the well. The House also could change the recommended discipline by making it more serious or less serious. 
 
 Rangel, 80, who has served in the House for 40 years, ended a sanctions hearing with an emotional plea to salvage his reputation. 
 
 Before speaking, he sat for several minutes trying to compose himself. He placed his hands over his eyes and then his chin, before he slowly stood up and said in a gravelly voice that was barely audible: "I don't know how much longer I have to live." 
 
 Facing the committee members, he asked them to "see your way clear to say, 'This member was not corrupt.'" 
 
 He continued: "There's no excuse for my behavior and no intent to go beyond what has been given to me as a salary. I apologize for any embarrassment I've caused you individually and collectively as a member of the greatest institution in the world." 
 
 In the most dramatic clash of the proceeding, Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, questioned the assertion of Rangel _ the former chairman of the tax-writing Ways and Means Committee _ that he wasn't corrupt. 
 
 "Failure to pay taxes for 17 years. What is that?" McCaul asked, referring to Rangel's shortchanging the Internal Revenue Service on rental income from his villa in the Dominican Republic. 
 
 McCaul also noted the committee's finding that Rangel solicited donors for the Charles B. Rangel Center at City College of New York from donors who had business before the Ways and Means Committee. 
 
 After an investigation that began in summer 2008, Rangel was convicted Tuesday by a jury of his House peers on 11 of 13 charges of rules violations. 
 
 He was found to have improperly used official resources _ congressional letterheads and staff _ to raise funds from businesses and foundations for the Rangel Center. A brochure with some of Rangel's solicitation letters asked for $30 million, or $6 million a year for five years. 
 
 He also was found guilty of filing a decade's worth of misleading annual financial disclosure forms that failed to list hundreds of thousands of dollars in assets, and failure to pay taxes on his Dominican unit. 
 
 Chisam said donations to the Rangel Center were going poorly, then spiked after Rangel rose to the top of the Ways and Means Committee. He noted the center would benefit minority students and asked, "What kid of example is that of what public service ought to be?" 
 
 Chisam asked what a neighbor of Rangel would think after she was evicted from her apartment in Harlem's Lennox Terrace, for violating terms of her lease _ and then learning Rangel was allowed to convert a residential-only unit into a campaign office. Others were evicted for similar offenses, the committee found. 
 
 "How would that influence her faith in government?" Chisam asked. 
 
 And Chisam asked how a waitress struggling to pay her taxes on income and tips would feel about Rangel not paying taxes on rental money from his vacation villa. 
 
 Rangel brought in Rep. John Lewis, a Georgia Democrat, to give a testimonial for the congressman to the panel. Lewis called his colleague "a good and decent man" and said Rangel had worked tirelessly to advance civil rights. 
 
 Before Chisam commenced his remarks, Rep. Jo Bonner, R-Ala., told committee colleagues that Rangel needed only to "look in the mirror to know who to blame" for his predicament. 
 
 Rep. G.K. Butterfield, D-N.C., a former member of his state's Supreme Court, said he believed the facts merited a reprimand, not a censure. 

 The House ethics committee recommended on Thursday by a vote of 9-1 that Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.) be formally censured by the full House for 11 counts of violating ethics rules. 
 
 The panel also ordered Rangel to pay restitution of any unpaid taxes. 
 
 ADVERTISEMENT 
 
 "We have worked together in this matter in a way that actually has been quite wrenching and we're satisfied with our conclusion," said Rep. Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), the panel's chairwoman. 
 
 Short of expulsion, censure is the most serious sanction the ethics panel can recommend. Only 22 House members have been censured in the history of the chamber. 
 
 A majority of the full House would have to vote to censure Rangel or lawmakers could opt for a lighter punishment. That vote likely will wait until after the Thanksgiving recess. 
 
 If the House votes in favor of censure, Rangel most likely would have to stand in the well of the House for a formal rebuke and reading of the censure resolution by outgoing Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.). A reprimand would only require the House to formally adopt the investigative committee’s report on Rangel’s activities. 
 
 Before the committee made its decision, Rep. G.K. Butterfield G.K. ButterfieldBlack lawmakers say Confederate statues should come out of Capitol Federal judges order new North Carolina district lines Dems push back against anti-Pelosi insurgents MORE (D-N.C.) argued for a lighter punishment than censure and reminded the committee that Rangel received a purple heart and a bronze star for his heroism in the Korean War. Butterfield, who is under investigation by the ethics committee for failing to repay excess travel per diems, or another member sympathetic to Rangel could offer a resolution calling for a reprimand or lesser punishment. 
 
 “The facts of the case do not, do not warrant a censure in my opinion,” Butterfield said. “Even counsel has acknowledged that deciding punishment is difficult in this case. Censure is extreme and should be restricted to personal conduct in which the [lawmaker] received personal gain.” 
 
 Rep. Peter Welch Peter WelchDemocrats see ObamaCare leverage in spending fights Group pushes FDA to act on soy milk labeling petition Dems pivot to offering ObamaCare improvements MORE (D-Vt.) cautioned his colleagues that punishing Rangel would bring more scrutiny to each and every member of Congress and the political donations they receive from corporations and individuals. 
 
 “Where you draw the line is in the eye of the beholder,” he said. 
 
 Welch then gave Rangel an opportunity to make some final comments about the matter to his constituents. 
 
 Seemingly on the verge of tears, an emotional Rangel paused for several seconds before responding. 
 
 He thanked Welch for the “awkward opportunity.” 
 
 “I don’t know how much longer I have to live but it will always be to help people, and I thank God for what he has given to me,” he said. 
 
 He apologized for any embarrassment he has caused and stressed that he would like the panel to acknowledge that he never sought any personal gain and is not corrupt. Rangel also lashed out the press. 
 
 “What the press has done to me and my family is totally unfair and they will continue to call me a crook and call me corrupt,” he said. 
 
 Rangel, the 80-year-old, 20-term House veteran, admitted some fault in his initial statement to the panel, but added: "I had no intent to evade or avoid the law." 
 
 At several points during the hearing, Rangel angrily responded to questions from Republican lawmakers about whether his misdeeds constituted corruption. 
 
 Had witnesses testified during the hearing earlier this week, Rangel told the panel, it would have been clear that “there would not be even a suggestion of corruption.” 
 
 Rangel said the panel denied him the chance to call witnesses, but Lofgren refuted that charge, saying that he could have refused to agree to a request for summary judgment and called witnesses had he not walked out of the hearing on Monday. 
 
 Rangel also repeated testimony by Chisam, who earlier this week said Rangel was not corrupt but just “overzealous” and “sloppy” in his actions. 
 
 Storied civil rights leader Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.) sat alongside Rangel at the beginning of the sanctions hearing, and referred to him as "my colleague, my brother." 
 
 Lewis said he didn't "know the facts in the case," but testified to Rangel's commitment and dedication to "hardworking Americans." 
 
 "He has always been a champion of those who had been left out and left behind," said Lewis, who mentioned Rangel's decorated Korean War service and his leadership during the civil rights era, when he marched with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. and others in Selma, Ala., for the right of African Americans to vote. 
 
 "Charlie Rangel is a good and decent man," he said. "I know this man ... I think I know his heart." 
 
 During the entire proceeding, Rangel appeared weary and diminished but far from contrite. 
 
 During a recess in the sanctions hearing, reporters mobbed him as he exited the hearing room. 
 
 Rangel angrily told the reporters that it wasn't appropriate to talk about anything outside the proceedings and appeared exasperated when an elevator wasn't readily available for him. 
 
 "Is there an elevator — is there an elevator?" he asked. "Son of a b----." 
 
 The sanctions hearing got off to a dramatic start when Rep. Jo Bonner (R-Ala.) harshly rebuked the veteran lawmaker for his actions this week. 
 
 Bonner, the ranking Republican on the House ethics committee, lectured Rangel for blaming others for his conviction on 11 counts of ethics violations instead of himself. 
 
 "It is painful for me to say this, but Mr. Rangel can no longer blame anyone but himself for the position he finds himself in,” Bonner said. 
 
 “Mr. Rangel should only look into the mirror if he wants someone to blame. … It should not take a law degree or a legal dictionary to determine right from wrong." 
 
 Bonner also said Rangel’s “distinguished military service is not up for debate, nor is it relevant.” 
 
 Bonner said the task of punishing Rangel is particularly “difficult and unpleasant” because “many a newly elected members … has been welcomed to the Capitol by that bigger-than-life, gravelly-voiced” congressman. 
 
 Rangel was convicted earlier this week by an adjudicatory panel of the Ethics committee on 11 counts of violating House rules. 
 
 The lawmakers on the panel found that Rangel had used House stationery and staff to solicit money for a school of public policy in his name at the City College of New York. They also concluded that he solicited donors for the center with interests before the Ways and Means Committee. Members of Congress are allowed to solicit money for nonprofit entities — even those bearing their names — as long as they do not use congressional letterhead or office resources to do so. 
 
 The ethics panel split 4-4 on a charge that Rangel violated the gift ban because the plans for the center included an office and the archiving of his personal and professional papers. 
 
 The panel also found Rangel guilty of using an apartment in Harlem zoned for residential use as his campaign office, failing to report more than $600,000 on his financial disclosure report and failing to pay taxes on rental income from a villa he owns in the Dominican Republic. 
 
 
 

– Brutal day for a tearful Charlie Rangel: The House ethics committee took the rare step of recommending that he get the most serious punishment short of expulsion—censure, reports AP. The matter now goes to the full House. Rangel's appeal for a "drop of fairness or mercy" didn't sway committee members. "I don't know how much longer I have to live," he said. "I just want you when you decide on the sanctions that you put in that report that Charles Rangel never sought any personal gain." The panel, however, followed the advice of its chief counsel, who said Rangel "brought discredit" on the House with his ethics violations. Only four members have been censured in the committee's 43-year history, notes the Hill. If the House approves, Rangel would have to stand in the well of the House and listen to a formal rebuke from the speaker. Click here for more, including Republican Joe Bonner's forceful opening statement that set the day's tone.