OTTUMWA – Rep. David Loebsack's pledge to take a position on the guilt or innocence of a colleague embroiled in an ethics scandal after an investigation is over hides the fact he voted to block that probe, a spokesman for GOP challenger Mariannette Miller-Meeks said today.

"Dave Loebsack is doing a pitch-perfect impression of the old Abbott and Costello routine, 'Who's on First?' Only he's the one who should be out after taking three positions in one week on this ethics mess and then playing hide the ball from voters," communications director Eric Woolson said.

He added, "When he's in Washington and he thought constituents aren't watching, Dave Loebsack voted against investigating Charles Rangel's alleged tax avoidance and other possible violations when he should have been voting for flood relief for Iowans.  He voted to block that investigation because he wants to protect the status quo, not clean up Washington's problems.  When Dr. Miller-Meeks challenged him about accepting $5,000 from Rangel and called on to give that money to charity, he couldn't write the checks fast enough in hopes of looking like a hero. But when his campaign manager was asked about the Rangel investigation, she says her boss will 'wait for the results of the investigation before taking a stand.' That's not leadership; that's the same old-school Washington politics that Mariannette Miller-Meeks is going to change."

Rangel, a New York Democrat, is at the center of the ethics investigation for using a rent-subsidized apartment as a fundraising office, failing to pay taxes on at least $75,000 of rental income from a Caribbean villa he owns and using his House stationery to solicit contributions to a City University of New York school to be named in his honor.  Not surprising in the current Washington culture Loebsack protects, Rangel is the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee that writes tax policy.

"That's the same culture Dave Loebsack told voters in 2006 he'd reform if elected. Instead he's become 'Do-Nothing Dave' in a Do-Nothing Congress committed to doing nothing but defending what voters abhor about Washington," Woolson said. "This routine would almost be comical if we hadn't seen it over and over, and if the stakes weren't so high for Iowans.