Punitive actions for what?  Has he been found guilty of something?

They [Democrats] just can‘t stop talking about poor old Tom DeLay?

The appellate decision was not "absolutely clear".  Read the dissent in the case for an analysis of how the law was indeed constitutional.

The cause for congressional investigation relates to why the court did not follow the law...

On what grounds is it appropriate for a congressional investigation of the 2000 decision?

The ethical questions dogging House Majority Leader Tom DeLay boiled over into the west suburban 6th Congressional District race Thursday, as one Republican pledged support and another called on the Texas congressman to relinquish his leadership post.

"What I read in the paper, whether it's correct or not, just seems to be an embarrassment for the Republican Party," said former DuPage County Recorder of Deeds J.P. "Rick" Carney. "To stay in his leadership position seems arrogant to me."

But state Sen. Peter Roskam, who worked for DeLay 20 years ago, voiced support.

"Trotting out some of ... these old accusations that are two and three and four years old is a little bit tiresome," Roskam said. "I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt."

Members of Congress are rushing to amend their travel and campaign records, fearing that the controversy over House Majority Leader Tom DeLay will trigger an ethics war that will bring greater scrutiny to their own travel and official activities.
<snip>
Jan W. Baran, a Republican lobbying and campaign finance expert at Wiley, Rein & Fielding, says that in reaction to DeLay's woes, none of his clients who are members of Congress are traveling at the expense of private interests these days. WA Post

House Republican aides said yesterday for the first time that they believe they will have to reverse or modify the ethics rules that were passed on a party-line vote in January and have caused Democrats to refuse to allow the ethics committee to organize. Republican leaders had been trying to avoid a new floor vote over the rules, but aides said they now are convinced that they need to get the committee going so that Democrats cannot accuse them of squelching an investigation of DeLay. WA Post

A plane trip to London and Scotland in 2000 by beleaguered House Majority Leader Tom Delay was charged to a credit card issued to a Washington lobbyist who is the subject of a federal probe, the Washington Post reported on Sunday.
<snip>
The holder of the American Express credit card was Jack Abramoff, who at the time was employed by the lobbying firm Preston Gates & Ellis, according to the report, which cited two sources who know his credit card account number and a copy of a travel invoice. Reuters

But not to worry, because his buddy Dubya still has unwavering faith in him; Tommy's even getting a free ride on Air Force One. One can only hope that the old adage holds true: when you lie down with dogs, you get fleas.

Hey, at least a lobbyist won’t be paying for first class airfare, hotel, dining, golf, etc.! 

Actually, isn't DeLay one who has built his political power outside of the Bush/Rove sphere?  In short, I don't think they are buddies...that's part of which has put DeLay into the situation he's in, with many of those in his party not coming to his support.

DeLay went from a back-bench position in the Texas House to the pinnacle of power in the U.S. House—without the blessing or backing of Bush political guru Karl Rove. page 10

The expected rules changes to the House Ethics committee are a smoke screen and I doubt that Nancy Pelosi will even allow the rules to simply revert back to the way they were at the beginning of this Congress.  This whole Ethics Committee thing (with a tie in the "grand jury" portion of the hearings equating to a finding of reasonable guilt) has allowed the Democrats to say that the rules were changed to help Delay.  In fact, this rule is also protecting Democrat Jim McDermott from similar Ethics committee censure for allegedly leaking a private conversation to the New York Times. link

In fact, Delay would prefer an investigation at this point.  There is nothing to these charges and if the Democrats would have the decency to allow an investigation (it is the Democrats that are, in fact, blocking an investigation at this point) then we could shed some light on just how bad Mr. Delay's ethics are.

The Democrats prefer to have Delay viewed as hiding behind rules created to help him, rather than facing the charges against him.  The Democrats would rather have the media circus instead of the truth.

The expected rules changes to the House Ethics committee are a smoke screen and I doubt that Nancy Pelosi will even allow the rules to simply revert back to the way they were at the beginning of this Congress.  This whole Ethics Committee thing (with a tie in the "grand jury" portion of the hearings equating to a finding of reasonable guilt) has allowed the Democrats to say that the rules were changed to help Delay.  In fact, this rule is also protecting Democrat Jim McDermott from similar Ethics committee censure for allegedly leaking a private conversation to the New York Times. link

In fact, Delay would prefer an investigation at this point.  There is nothing to these charges and if the Democrats would have the decency to allow an investigation (it is the Democrats that are, in fact, blocking an investigation at this point) then we could shed some light on just how bad Mr. Delay's ethics are.

The Democrats prefer to have Delay viewed as hiding behind rules created to help him, rather than facing the charges against him.  The Democrats would rather have the media circus instead of the truth.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. And sometimes, according to House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, a cigar is an economic prop to a brutal totalitarian regime. Arguing against loosening sanctions against Cuba last year, DeLay warned that Fidel Castro "will take the money. Every dime that finds its way into Cuba first finds its way into Fidel Castro's blood-thirsty hands.... American consumers will get their fine cigars and their cheap sugar, but at the cost of our national honor."

DeLay has long been one of Congress' most vocal critics of what he calls Castro's "thugocracy," which is why some sharp-eyed TIME readers were surprised last week to see a photo of the Majority Leader smoking one of Cuba's best—a Hoyo de Monterrey double corona, which generally costs about $25 when purchased overseas and is not available in this country. The cigar's label clearly states that it was made in "Habana." The photo was taken in Jerusalem on July 28, 2003, during a meeting between DeLay and the Republican Jewish Coalition at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem.

Ronnie Earle, the Texas prosecutor who has indicted associates of House Majority Leader Tom DeLay in an ongoing campaign-finance investigation, dropped felony charges against several corporations indicted in the probe in return for the corporations' agreement to make five- and six-figure contributions to one of Earle's pet causes.

A grand jury in Travis County, Texas, last September indicted eight corporations in connection with the DeLay investigation. All were charged with making illegal contributions (Texas law forbids corporate giving to political campaigns). Since then, however, Earle has agreed to dismiss charges against four of the companies — retail giant Sears, the restaurant chain Cracker Barrel, the Internet company Questerra, and the collection company Diversified Collection Services — after the companies pledged to contribute to a program designed to publicize Earle's belief that corporate involvement in politics is harmful to American democracy.

<snip>
In any event, the agreements between Earle and the corporations struck some outside observers as not only unusual but also indicative of the highly political nature of the case. "What does funding think tanks and polling organizations have to do with a violation of the criminal law?" asks former United States Attorney Joseph DiGenova, who has publicly supported DeLay. "This is an extortionate use of the indictment power." One close ally of DeLay calls it a "dollars for dismissals" scheme.

Making the situation worse, say DeLay allies, is what they believe is Earle's political motivation in pursuing DeLay. As an example, they point to Earle's attendance at a Democratic fundraiser in Dallas on May 12, in which Earle publicly discussed DeLay. For his part, Earle, an elected Democrat, has denied have any partisan purpose in the investigation. Whatever the case, Earle's dismissal of the charges against Sears, Cracker Barrel, and the other corporations has at least raised the question of whether his allegations were very strong in the first place.

Is Tom DeLay becoming (or has he already become) a liability for the Republican party? Will the GOP steadfastly “stand by their man” or distance themselves by forcing him out as they did Trent Lott?

Should DeLay face charges for threatening federal judges?