WASHINGTON -- There is a certain symmetry to the ethics accusations against the next House speaker, Newt Gingrich.
In 1987, it was a brash young Republican crusader who had the audacity to file ethics charges against the tough-talking speaker of the House, Jim Wright -- charges that led two years later to the mighty Democrat's fall from grace.
Today, as that brash and brazen House member, Mr. Gingrich, prepares to realize his life's dream and step up to the speaker's seat himself, he finds himself dogged by an ethics complaint -- what Democrats call a "cloud hanging over his head" -- raised by a political nemesis of his own.
Is the allegation against Mr. Gingrich a case of turnabout being fair play? Or is it a serious question of an ethical breach?
Not surprisingly, it depends on whom you ask.
Mr. Gingrich has called the complaint "nonsense" and says he believes it is merely a payback by the Democrats. "Ever since I filed charges against Jim Wright, who had to resign as speaker, there's been, I think, a sincere desire to make sure that I'm investigated as thoroughly as possible," he said recently.
But Rep. David E. Bonior of Michigan, the Democrat who is about to take the same job Mr. Gingrich held for the past five years -- minority whip -- said this week that it appeared that the incoming speaker had "engaged in a web of corrupt activities" that may have violated House rules and the federal tax code. He called for the appointment of an outside counsel to conduct a full-scale investigation.
Postponed decision
The complaint has been considered by the House ethics committee. The panel decided in November to postpone a decision about whether to proceed with a full investigation or dismiss the charge, saying it needed more information.
But unless the committee meets again in the next three weeks to decide the matter, it will go before the new ethics committee of the 104th Congress -- with members appointed by Mr. Gingrich, who has refused to recuse himself from naming the new panel.
The complaint against Mr. Gingrich, filed by former Rep. Ben Jones, who was defeated by the Georgia Republican in the election last month, centers on a college course the congressman first taught at Kennesaw State College and now teaches at Reinhardt College, both in Georgia.
The course, titled "Renewing American Civilization," was financed first by the Kennesaw State College Foundation and later by the Progress and Freedom Foundation, a nonprofit conservative outfit run by Mr. Gingrich's brain trust.
Both foundations enjoy tax-exempt status and are thus barred from engaging in partisan political activity.
Mr. Jones' complaint, under review by the House ethics committee, contends that the course is highly partisan -- in possible violation of the tax code -- and, in fact, is a tool used by Mr. Gingrich to advance his conservative agenda and help recruit young Republicans. The complaint also alleges that Mr. Gingrich used his congressional staff and office equipment to organize and promote the course.
The course is broadcast by satellite on the National Empowerment Television Network and is offered as a for-credit course at about 20 universities around the country. It is also available on videotape.
Although Mr. Gingrich told the ethics committee in early 1993 that his course would be "completely nonpartisan," documents reviewed by the ethics committee, along with news reports, suggest that the course has been financed and designed largely by Mr. Gingrich's political action committee, GOPAC, for the purpose of benefiting Republicans.
A letter to a potential donor written by Jeffrey Eisenach, a longtime Gingrich adviser and former GOPAC executive director who now heads the Progress and Freedom Foundation, says "the goal of this project is simple: to train, by April 1996, 200,000+ citizens into a model for replacing the welfare state and reforming our government."
Series in 'Roll Call'
According to a series in Roll Call, a newspaper that covers Capitol Hill, 15 of the 24 known contributors to the course in 1993 had previously given money to GOPAC, or to Mr. Gingrich's congressional campaigns.
What's more, many GOPAC employees, including Mr. Gingrich's chief campaign strategist, Joseph Gaylord, helped design the college course, whose name, "Renewing American Civilization" is the theme of much GOPAC literature.
The degree of GOPAC's involvement is a key factor in determining the partisan intent of the course. Those investigating the complaint have turned up files at Kennesaw State with scores of letters, memos and faxes discussing the course sent by GOPAC members on GOPAC stationery, as well as a phone log with more than 100 phone calls placed to GOPAC in a three-month period.
Mr. Gingrich maintains that GOPAC "provided some initial ideas on who might be interested in financing the course; that's all they did."
The Roll Call investigation also revealed that in his classes, Mr. Gingrich, a former history professor, boldly touts companies that have contributed to the course, as well as his major political backers.
Contributors are also offered an opportunity to help shape the content of the course, with their level of input commensurate with their largess.
According to a "Request for Funding" letter, contributors who give $50,000 can "work directly with the leadership of the Renewing American Civilization project in the course development process," while those who give $25,000 are "invited to participate" in the development process.
In one example detailed by Roll Call, Mr. Gingrich boldly promoted a Birmingham, Ala.-based company called HealthSouth in one of his lectures, even showing a video about the company that had contributed at least $15,000 to the course.
So far, the complaint against the incoming speaker has been little more than background noise. It has not gathered much momentum, nor has it taken on the gravity or ferocity of the crusade against Mr. Wright.
Mr. Gingrich, in hammering away at Mr. Wright in the late 1980s for "highly questionable conduct" involving acceptance of gifts from a Texas developer, the improper bulk sale of his book and other ethics violations, was brutal in his rhetoric.
'Mussolini-like ego'
He called Mr. Wright "the most corrupt speaker of the 20th century" and a man consumed by a "Mussolini-like ego."
As the Democrats prepare for their chief tormentor to become the chief power center in the House, they have been treading relatively lightly. Asked this week whether he thought the allegations against Mr. Gingrich were serious enough to merit his resignation should they prove true, Mr. Bonior declined to answer.
"I think the question of stepping down is appropriate at the appropriate time," he said.
Mr. Gingrich may find that what goes around doesn't always come around. And if he fares better than Mr. Wright it will be, at least in part, because the Democrats don't seem to have an attack dog eager to hurl firebombs day after day, as the Republicans did seven years ago.
They don't have Newt Gingrich.