EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Ethics Investigators Probe Dozens in Congress
WASHINGTON - House ethics investigators have been scrutinizing the activities of more than 30 lawmakers and several aides in inquiries about issues including defense lobbying and corporate influence peddling, according to a confidential House ethics committee report prepared in July.
House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., which has jurisdiction over Social Security in the House, is seen during a hearing of the committee on Capitol Hill in Washington, Thursday, Oct. 15, 2009.(AP Photo/Harry Hamburg) The
report appears to have been inadvertently placed on a publicly
accessible computer network, and it was provided to The Washington Post
by a source not connected to the congressional investigations. The
committee said Thursday night that the document was released by a
low-level staffer.
The ethics committee is one of the most secretive panels in Congress, and its members and staff members sign oaths not to disclose any activities related to its past or present investigations. Watchdog groups have accused the committee of not actively pursuing inquiries; the newly disclosed document indicates the panel is conducting far more investigations than it had revealed.
Shortly after 6 p.m. Thursday, the committee chairman, Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.), interrupted a series of House votes to alert lawmakers about the breach. She cautioned that some of the panel's activities are preliminary and not a conclusive sign of inappropriate behavior.
"No inference should be made as to any member," she said.
Rep. Jo Bonner (Ala.), the committee's ranking Republican, said the breach was an isolated incident.
The 22-page "Committee on Standards Weekly Summary Report" gives brief summaries of ethics panel investigations of the conduct of 19 lawmakers and a few staff members. It also outlines the work of the new Office of Congressional Ethics, a quasi-independent body that initiates investigations and provides recommendations to the ethics committee. The document indicated that the office was reviewing the activities of 14 other lawmakers. Some were under review by both ethics bodies.
Ethics committee investigations are not uncommon. Most result in private letters that either exonerate or reprimand a member. In some rare instances, the censure is more severe.
Campaign contributions Many of the broad outlines of the cases cited in the July document are known - the committee announced over the summer that it was reviewing lawmakers with connections to the now-closed PMA Group, a lobbying firm. But the document indicates that the inquiry was broader than initially believed. It included a review of seven lawmakers on the House Appropriations defense subcommittee who have steered federal money to the firm's clients and have also received large campaign contributions.
The document also disclosed that:
Rangel said he has not discussed other parts of the investigation of his finances with the committee. "I'm waiting for that, anxiously," he said.
Mollohan said that he was not aware of any ongoing interest by the Justice Department in his case and that he and his attorneys have not heard from federal investigators. "The answer is no," he said.
Harman said that the ethics committee has not contacted her and that she has no knowledge that the subpoena was ever issued. "I don't believe that's true," she said. "As far as I'm concerned, this smear has been over for three years."
In June 2009, a Justice Department official wrote in a letter to an attorney for Harman that she was "neither a subject nor a target" of a criminal investigation.
Because of the secretive nature of the ethics committee, it was difficult to assess the current status of the investigations cited in the July document. The panel said Thursday, however, that it is ending a probe of Rep. Sam Graves (R-Mo.) after finding no ethical violations, and that it is investigating the financial connections of two California Democrats.
The committee did not detail the two newly disclosed investigations. However, according to the July document, Rep. Maxine Waters, a high-ranking member of the House Financial Services Committee, came under scrutiny because of activities involving OneUnited Bank of Massachusetts, in which her husband owns at least $250,000 in stock.
Waters arranged a September 2008 meeting at the Treasury Department where OneUnited executives asked for government money. In December, Treasury selected OneUnited as an early participant in the bank bailout program, injecting $12.1 million.
The other, Rep. Laura Richardson, may have failed to mention property, income and liabilities on financial disclosure forms.
File-sharing networks The committee's review of investigations became available on file-sharing networks because of a junior staff member's use of the software while working from home, Lofgren and Bonner said in a statement issued Thursday night. The staffer was fired, a congressional aide said.
The committee "is taking all appropriate steps to deal with this issue," they said, noting that neither the committee nor the House's information systems were breached in any way.
"Peer-to-peer" technology has previously caused inadvertent breaches of sensitive financial, defense-related and personal data from government and commercial networks, and it is prohibited on House networks.
House administration rules require that if a lawmaker or staff member takes work home, "all users of House sensitive information must protect the confidentiality of sensitive information" from unauthorized disclosure.
Leo Wise, chief counsel for the Office of Congressional Ethics, declined to comment, citing office policy against confirming or denying the existence of investigations. A Justice Department spokeswoman also declined to comment, citing a similar policy.
Staff writers Carol D. Leonnig and Joby Warrick and staff researcher Julie Tate contributed to this report.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

8 Comments so far
Show AllOnly those going against the pro-corporate, anti-labor Pelosi/Reid agenda in congress are being probed.
The rule is, it's okay to steal but you must conform to and vote with the leadership 100% of the time.
House "Ethics" Committee - also know as, The Foxes Guarding the Henhouse, Inc.
Is the Ethics Committee's mandate to ensure no damn ethics sneak in?
In any other country, there is only one description of a corporation giving money to a polititian....a BRIBE
"The only means of strengthening one's intellect is to make up one's mind about nothing, to let the mind be a thoroughfare for all thoughts." - John Keats
It's an impossible situation. We will not have ethics or ethical people in office as long as at takes millions of dollars to get elected. Only the independently wealthy will be able to get elected and act with integrity on behalf of their class. For the rest of us, we rely on those who are willing to sell themselves to wealthy contributors. It is a system that requires corruption, that fosters corruption, even for those few who were not initially so inclined.
Here are two ideas -
1. Organize elections that require televised debates including every candidate on the ballot. Mandate space in newspapers for publication of platforms. Limit the total expenditure on purchased advertising. This is not likely to happen since it would require legislation and be like asking fraternity brothers to ban hazing.
2. Field grass roots candidates and raise money for them $5 and $10 at a time. Run some recovering plutocrats.
Joe
FIRE ALL OF THEM!!!!!
GET RID OF THESE PARASITES NOW!!!!
THESE PEOPLE LACK VIRTUES AND ARE OBVIOUSLY CORRUPT!
How very interesting that of the "dozens" of investigations the Washington Post chooses to detail four Democrats that are under investigation, while the only Republican mentioned is no longer under investigation - although it is "investigating the financial connections of two California Democrats."
I will be MORE than happy to bet my next paycheck that this is not an accurate representation of the overall numbers (Democrat vs. Republican) in the source report.
Which...is why I canceled my subscription to the Washington Post.
Should have known better than to support that rag in the first place.
This is a perfect example why the "terrorist" in Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, and other US occupied third world countries are fighting against this type of misguided and corrupt military lobbyist controlled democracy. It's well past time for a regime change in amerika.