Jay Kim Couldn't Hide: Should He Run?

BY PHIL TAJITSU NASH

This month, Rep. Jay Kim, R-Calif., and his wife June were finally sentenced for campaign finance violations, including accepting more than $250,000 in illegal campaign contributions. After denying wrongdoing for four years, Kim, of Diamond Bar, pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges last August and received two months of electronically-monitored home detention, a fine of $5,000 a year of probation, and 200 hours of community service. His campaign committee was also placed on probation for five years and fined $170,000.

Despite these developments, plus an ongoing investigation by the House Committee on Standards of Conduct (the ethics committee) and requests by Republican allies that he resign, Kim says he is planning to run for re-election next fall. His re-election plans could be curtailed, however, if the House votes to reprimand, censure, or expel him. Expulsion can only come by a two-thirds vote, and is unlikely in an election year.

According to a Los Angeles Times report, Kim admitted accepting a $50,000 contribution from a citizen of Taiwan despite knowing that American campaign laws prohibit gifts from nonresident foreigners. Other violations included unlawfully accepting $12,000 from a New York company and having his own company provide $83,000 in services for his 1992 campaign.

These infractions are embarrassing to a Republican leadership that has tried to paint campaign finance violations in general and illegal donations from Asia in particular as the bailiwick of President Clinton and the Democrats. Notably, the Republican National Committee Web site does not mention the Kim case.

Kim also seems eager to distance himself from the matter. "It's time to put this behind us," he said in a press release last week. However, he'll find it hard to just walk away. Like others in the federal monitoring program, he will be fitted with an electronic tracking bracelet and his movements will be limited.

In his favor, Kim has been re-elected twice and has a 100 percent voting record in his six years in the House. He also has the power to shape legislation such as a major transportation bill currently before Congress that will affect California and his district for years to come.

On a personal note, I remember the spring of 1993, when I was organizing a major reception for Asian Pacific Americans in Washington, D.C., and Kim's name came up. This Korean American engineer had just been elected as a Republican to represent the Orange County area near Los Angeles, and I wanted to make sure that he, as the first Republican Asian Pacific American in Congress since Sen. S.I. Hayakawa of California and Rep. Patricia Saiki of Hawaii, was going to feel welcome. Also, while there had been Asian Indians (Rep. Dalip Singh Saund, D-Calif.), Chinese Americans (Sen. Hiram Fong, R-Hawaii), and Japanese Americans (Rep. and then Sen. Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii) in Congress since the 1950s, no Korean American had ever been elected to Congress.

Right from the start, however, I and other Asian Pacific American activists in Washington noticed several things. Kim was reluctant to participate in Asian Pacific American activities or to hire Asian Pacific American staff. He seemed uncomfortable with his fellow Asian Pacific American legislators (who, admittedly, were all Democrats and who were a good deal more liberal than he).

In a recent interview with AsianWeek, one long-time Washington, D.C., activist well respected by conservatives and liberals put it this way: "He was shown a hell of a lot of bipartisan comradeship by his other colleagues of APA background and other APA political activists. Yet, he personally attacked or bad-mouthed us.''

While there is no requirement that a politician hang out with or actively support people of his or her own ethnic group, Kim at times has seemed to be going out of his way to dissociate himself. He voted for anti-immigration legislation, including last year's HR 2202. This bill, which was eventually signed by President Clinton, created almost insurmountable barriers for those seeking political asylum. Kim's voting record, as one might expect, was zero percent from the liberal American Civil Liberties Union and 100 percent (as far as I can tell by checking out their Web site) from the American Conservative Union.

What has been truly astounding, though, has been the total lack of support for him from any of his natural allies since his sentencing last week. I made calls and sent e-mails in my research for this article to Republican, Democratic and independent Asian Pacific Americans from all over the country, and most simply did not respond.

Especially telling was the silence from Korean Americans, who must have felt shame even though he was acting as an individual, not as a representative of an ethnic community. One community representative who agreed to speak on the record was John Yang, president of the Washington, D.C., chapter of the Asian Pacific American Bar Association. He said, "With respect to Jay Kim, I would say that it is a very disappointing development for Asian Pacific American political empowerment. Obviously, wrongdoing cannot be condoned and should be punished appropriately. It is unfortunate, however, because Kim is one of the few Asian Pacific Americans in Congress.

"Hopefully, this setback will not discourage other Asian Pacific Americans from seeking elected office, nor should it cause unfair stereotyping or accusations concerning the political activities of the entire Asian Pacific American community."

A Chinese American, speaking from outside the Beltway, said: "I'm disappointed with what happened to Kim. With so few APAs in high public office, his conviction threatens to cement a stereotype of Asians and APAs as sneaky and untrustworthy."

Once again, as with John Huang, we seem to be stuck between criticizing inappropriate behavior while worrying about collateral effects on other Asian Americans.

©1998 AsianWeek. The information you receive on-line from AsianWeek is protected by the copyright laws of the United States. The copyright laws prohibit any copying, redistributing, retransmitting, or repurposing of any copyright protected material.