Steve Scalise still mending fences
Steve Scalise is on a non-apology apology tour. Seven weeks after coming under fire for giving a 2002 speech to a group associated with white supremacists, the Houseâs No. 3 Republican is meeting with key members of the Congressional Black Caucus, conferring with civil rights leaders and trying to forge relationship with reporters â though itâs unclear if that will be enough to fix what could have been potentially career-ending damage. Story Continued Below One of the people heâs met with, CBC Chairman G.K. Butterfield of North Carolina, expressed frustration that the Louisiana Republican hasnât committed to attending next monthâs 50th anniversary of the civil rights marches in Selma, Alabama. Scalise allies insist he is not mounting a formal mea culpa. He expressed regret after the scandal initially broke in late December, but now allies say the House majority whip is just working to build new bonds on Capitol Hill and granting meetings with those who ask. The people heâs sat down with include black lawmakers who were deeply offended by the revelation that as a state legislator he had given the speech to a conference associated with former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. That was followed by last monthâs news that in 1996 Scalise had also opposed a state legislative resolution apologizing for slavery. Butterfield, a Democratic House member from North Carolina, said last weekthat Scalise is âgoing to have to determine how to repair the damage thatâs been done.â âHe has the ability to do it, but the question is does he have the will?â Butterfield said. âI donât believe in manifestos. We donât give deadlines. Heâs a Republican leader, heâs a leader of the Republican caucus, not of the Democratic conference, and if they want to keep someone in their leadership that has this controversy swirling around, that is their prerogative.â Butterfield added that he would be closely watching Scaliseâs decision on Selma, saying the Republican was âequivocalâ when invited. Marc Morial, the president the National Urban League, wouldnât even rule out calling for Scaliseâs resignation after meeting with the lawmaker last week, despite characterizing the confab as a âgood meeting characterized by respectful dialogue.â âI have been asked whether I would join calls for Rep. Scaliseâs resignation, and following todayâs meeting, I remain undecided,â Morial said in a statement. âI am, however, hopeful that moving forward Rep. Scalise will demonstrate that he is serious about acting in good faith to build relationships.â Scaliseâs office has not commented on the outreach effort and did not respond to a question about whether he will go to Selma. One of his D.C. roommates, Rep. John Shimkus, said he doesnât think the Republican conference has suffered lasting harm from the revelations. The Illinois Republican said that during the several years they have lived together, he hasnât seen any sign of Scalise being racist. âThere has never been any impropriety, so what Steve has to do, Steve will have to decide,â Shimkus said. âI went to Selma. I just think itâs a good thing to do regardless. Itâs probably earlier rather than later might have been good.â So far, Scaliseâs public response to the crisis has been a strategy out of public relations 101 â going local. He expressed his initial contrition in December to Louisiana television stations and the New Orleans Times-Picayune but then stopped talking about the controversy in front of the newsmedia. He has avoided sit-down interviews with national reporters and tried to refocus attention on House Republicansâ efforts to take a lead role on the Department Homeland Security funding fight. But heâs also followed a quiet course in D.C., including trying to build relationships with Capitol Hill reporters by holding off-the-record sitdowns. Earlier this month, he met with Butterfield and two other CBC members, Reps. Karen Bass (D-Calif.) and AndrÃ© Carson (D-Ind.). The trio had a series of requests for Scalise, including that he go to Selma and line up Republican sponsors to a Voting Rights Act amendment that would reverse portions of a 2013 Supreme Court decision.