[House Report 113-727]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]


113th Congress    }                                   {      Report
                       HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES            
2d Session        }                                   {      113-727
_______________________________________________________________________
                                

                                                 Union Calendar No. 558


                         SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES

                    ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

                               __________

                                A REPORT

                                 of the

                          COMMITTEE ON ETHICS

                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES





January 2, 2015.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed
              
                                    ______

                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

49-006 PDF                     WASHINGTON : 2015 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
  For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing 
  Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; 
         DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, 
                          Washington, DC 20402-0001            
              
                          COMMITTEE ON ETHICS

K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas            LINDA T. SAANCHEZ, California
  Chairman                             Ranking Member
CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania        PEDRO R. PIERLUISI, Puerto Rico
PATRICK MEEHAN, Pennsylvania         MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts
TREY GOWDY, South Carolina           YVETTE D. CLARKE, New York
SUSAN W. BROOKS, Indiana             TED DEUTCH, Florida

                              REPORT STAFF

              Thomas A. Rust, Chief Counsel/Staff Director
             Deborah Sue Mayer, Director of Investigations
             Tonia Smith, Director of Advice and Education
               Jackie M. Barber, Counsel to the Chairman
            Daniel J. Taylor, Counsel to the Ranking Member

                    Brittany M. Bohren, Investigator
                  C. Tucker Carr, Investigative Clerk
               Molly McCarty, Advice and Education Clerk
                    Patrick McMullen, Senior Counsel
                      Tamar Nedzar, Senior Counsel
                      
                          LETTER OF SUBMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                          House of Representatives,
                                       Committee on Ethics,
                                   Washington, DC, January 2, 2015.
Hon. Karen L. Haas,
Clerk, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Ms. Haas: Pursuant to clauses 3(a)(2) and 3(b) of Rule 
XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives, we herewith 
transmit the attached Report, ``Summary of Activities 113th 
Congress.''
            Sincerely,
                                   K. Michael Conaway,
                                           Chairman.
                                   Linda T. Saanchez,
                                           Ranking Member.
                                           
                                           
                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              
                                                                   Page
  I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................3
 II. ADVICE AND EDUCATION.............................................3
III. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE............................................10
 IV. COMMITTEE RULES.................................................11
  V. INVESTIGATIONS..................................................11
APPENDIX I: RELEVANT HOUSE RULES.................................    30
APPENDIX II: ADVISORY MEMORANDA..................................    40
APPENDIX III: COMMITTEE RULES....................................   149
APPENDIX IV: PUBLIC STATEMENTS...................................   202


                                                 Union Calendar No. 558
                                                 
113th Congress    }                                    {        Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session       }                                    {        113-727

======================================================================
 
                         SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES


                    ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS

                                _______
                                

January 2, 2015.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

      Mr. Conaway and Ms. Saanchez, from the Committee on Ethics, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                            Acknowledgement 

    The Committee notes the untimely death of its former 
Director of Advice and Education, Carol E. Dixon. Her wisdom, 
hard work, and dedication to public service will be missed by 
all.

                               Overview 

    The Committee on Ethics (Committee) is tasked with 
interpreting and enforcing the House's ethics rules. The 
Committee has sole jurisdiction over the interpretation of the 
Code of Official Conduct, which governs the acts of House 
Members, officers, and employees. The Committee is the only 
standing House committee with equal numbers of Democratic and 
Republican members. The operative staff of the Committee is 
required by rule to be professional and nonpartisan.
    In the 113th Congress, the Committee was led by Chairman K. 
Michael Conaway and Ranking Member Linda T. Saanchez. The 
Members appointed at the beginning of the Congress were Charles 
W. Dent, Pedro R. Pierluisi, Patrick Meehan, Michael E. 
Capuano, Trey Gowdy, Yvette Clarke, Susan W. Brooks, and Ted 
Deutch.
    The Committee's core responsibilities include providing 
training, advice, and education to House Members, officers, and 
employees; reviewing and approving requests to accept 
privately-sponsored travel related to official duties; 
reviewing and certifying all financial disclosure reports 
Members, candidates for the House, officers, and senior staff 
are required to file; and investigating and adjudicating 
allegations of misconduct and violations of rules, laws, or 
other standards of conduct.
    The Committee met 24 times in the 113th Congress, including 
13 times in 2013, and 11 times in 2014. Every Committee vote in 
the 113th Congress was unanimous.
    Within the scope of its training, advice and education, 
travel, and financial disclosure responsibilities, the 
Committee:
     Issued more than 320 formal advisory opinions 
regarding ethics rules;
     Fielded nearly 40,000 informal telephone calls, 
emails, and in-person requests for guidance on ethics issues;
     Released 18 advisory memoranda on various ethics 
topics to the House;
     Provided training to approximately 10,000 House 
Members, officers, and employees each year, and reviewed their 
certifications for satisfying the House's mandatory training 
requirements;
     Received more than 5,000 Financial Disclosure 
Statements and amendments filed by House Members, officers, 
senior staff, and House candidates; and
     Received 2,992 Periodic Transaction Reports filed 
by House Members, officers, and senior staff, containing 
thousands of transactions.
    In addition, the Committee actively investigates 
allegations against House Members, officers, and employees, 
using a mix of informal and formal investigative techniques to 
determine the validity of factual allegations, explore 
potential rules violations, and recommend appropriate sanctions 
and corrective actions. The Committee's options for 
investigating a matter include fact-gathering under Committee 
Rule 18(a), which may or may not be publicly disclosed, the 
empanelment of investigative subcommittees, and the review of 
transmittals from the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE). The 
fact that the Committee is investigating a particular matter or 
that a House Member, officer, or employee is referenced in an 
investigative matter should not be construed as a finding or 
suggestion that the Member, officer, or employee has committed 
any violation of the rules, law, or standards of conduct.
    During the 113th Congress, within the scope of its 
investigative responsibilities, the Committee:
     Commenced or continued investigative fact-
gathering regarding 89 separate investigative matters;
     Empanelled four new investigative subcommittees, 
in the matters of Representative Robert E. Andrews, 
Representative Don Young, Representative Michael G. Grimm, and 
Representative Henry J. ``Trey'' Radel III;
     Held 23 investigative subcommittee meetings;
     Filed 10 reports with the House totaling nearly 
1,900 pages regarding various investigative matters;
     Publicly addressed 34 matters, described in 
Section V of this report;
     Resolved 44 additional matters;
     Conducted 78 voluntary witness interviews;
     Authorized the issuance of 60 subpoenas; and
     Reviewed more than 430,000 pages of documents.
    All votes taken in the investigative subcommittees were 
unanimous. In addition to the publicly-disclosed matters 
discussed in this report, there were a total of 24 
investigative matters pending before the Committee as of 
January 2, 2015.

                            I. INTRODUCTION

    House Rule XI, clause 1(d), requires each committee to 
submit to the House, not later than January 2 of each year, a 
report on the activities of that committee under that rule and 
House Rule X. This report summarizes the activities of the 
Committee for the annual period ending January 2, 2015, as well 
as for the entirety of the 113th Congress.
    The jurisdiction of the Committee on Ethics is defined in 
clauses 1(g) and 11(g)(4) of House Rule X, clause 3 of House 
Rule XI, and clause 5(h) of House Rule XXV. The text of those 
provisions is attached as Appendix I to this Report.
    In addition, a number of provisions of statutory law confer 
authority on the Committee. Specifically, for purposes of the 
statutes on gifts to federal employees (5 U.S.C. Sec. 7353) and 
gifts to superiors (5 U.S.C. Sec. 7351), both the Committee and 
the House of Representatives are the ``supervising ethics 
office'' of House Members, officers, and employees. In 
addition, as discussed further in Part III below, for House 
Members, officers, and employees, the Committee is both the 
``supervising ethics office'' with regard to financial 
disclosure under the Ethics in Government Act (EIGA) (5 U.S.C. 
app. 4 Sec. Sec. 101 et seq.) and the ``employing agency'' for 
certain purposes under the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act (5 
U.S.C. Sec. 7342). The outside employment and earned income 
limitations of the EIGA are administered by the Committee with 
respect to House Members, officers, and employees (5 U.S.C. 
app. 4 Sec. 503(1)(A)). Finally, the notification of 
negotiation and recusal requirements created by the Honest 
Leadership and Open Government Act (HLOGA) are administered, in 
part, by the Committee.

                        II. ADVICE AND EDUCATION

    Pursuant to a provision of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 (2 
U.S.C. Sec. 4711(i)), the Committee maintains an Office of 
Advice and Education, which is staffed as directed by the 
Committee's Chairman and Ranking Member. Under the statute, the 
primary responsibilities of the Office include the following:
     Providing information and guidance to House 
Members, officers, and employees on the laws, rules, and other 
standards of conduct applicable to them in their official 
capacities;
     Drafting responses to specific advisory opinion 
requests received from House Members, officers, and employees, 
and submitting them to the Chairman and Ranking Member for 
review and approval;
     Drafting advisory memoranda on the ethics rules 
for general distribution to House Members, officers, and 
employees, and submitting them to the Chairman and Ranking 
Member, or the full Committee, for review and approval; and
     Developing and conducting educational briefings 
for House Members, officers, and employees.
    The duties of the Office of Advice and Education are also 
addressed in Committee Rule 3, which sets out additional 
requirements and procedures for the issuance of Committee 
advisory opinions.
    Under Committee Rule 3(j), the Committee will keep 
confidential any request for advice from a Member, officer, or 
employee, as well as any response to such a request. As a 
further inducement to House Members, officers, and employees to 
seek Committee advice whenever they have any uncertainty on the 
applicable laws, rules, or standards, statutory law (2 U.S.C. 
Sec. 4711(i)(4)) provides that no information provided to the 
Committee by a Member or staff person when seeking advice on 
prospective conduct may be used as a basis for initiating a 
Committee investigation if the individual acts in accordance 
with the Committee's written advice. In the same vein, 
Committee Rule 3(k) provides that the Committee may take no 
adverse action in regard to any conduct that has been 
undertaken in reliance on a written opinion of the Committee if 
the conduct conforms to the specific facts addressed in the 
opinion. Committee Rule 3(l) also precludes the Committee from 
using information provided to the Committee by a requesting 
individual ``seeking advice regarding prospective conduct . . . 
as the basis for initiating an investigation,'' provided that 
the requesting individual ``acts in good faith in accordance 
with the written advice of the Committee.'' In addition, the 
Committee understands that federal courts may consider the good 
faith reliance of a House Member, officer, or employee on 
written Committee advice as a defense to Justice Department 
prosecution regarding certain statutory violations.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\For example, a federal court held that it is a complete defense 
to a prosecution for conduct assertedly in violation of a related 
federal criminal strict-liability statute (18 U.S.C. Sec. 208) that the 
conduct was undertaken in good faith reliance upon erroneous legal 
advice received from the official's supervising ethics office. United 
States v. Hedges, 912 F.2d 1397, 1403 n.2 (11th Cir. 1990).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee believes that a broad, active program for 
advice and education is an extremely important means for 
attaining understanding of, and compliance with, the ethics 
rules. The specifics of the Committee's efforts in the areas of 
publications, briefings, and advisory opinion letters during 
the 113th Congress are set forth below. In addition, on a daily 
basis Committee staff attorneys provided informal advice in 
response to inquiries received from Members, staff persons, and 
third parties in telephone calls and e-mails directed to the 
Committee office, as well as in person. During the 113th 
Congress, Committee attorneys responded to nearly 40,000 phone 
calls and e-mail messages seeking advice, and participated in 
many informal meetings with Members, House staff, or outside 
individuals or groups regarding specific ethics matters.

                              PUBLICATIONS

    The Committee's major publication is the House Ethics 
Manual, an updated version of which was issued in March 2008. 
The Manual provides detailed explanations of all aspects of the 
ethics rules and statutes applicable to House Members, 
officers, and employees. Topics covered by the Manual include 
the acceptance of gifts or travel, campaign activity, casework, 
outside employment, and involvement with official and outside 
organizations. The House Ethics Manual is posted in a 
searchable format on the Committee's Web site: http://
ethics.house.gov.
    The Committee updates and expands upon the materials in the 
Manual, as well as highlights matters of particular concern, 
through the issuance of general advisory memoranda to all House 
Members, officers, and employees. The memoranda issued during 
the 113th Congress were as follows:
     Change to Financial Disclosure Reporting 
Obligations and Reminder Regarding Periodic Transaction 
Reporting Requirement (January 23, 2013);
     The 2013 Outside Earned Income Limit and Salaries 
Triggering the Financial Disclosure Requirement and Post-
Employment Restrictions Applicable to House Officers and 
Employees (January 24, 2013);
     New Travel Forms (March 1, 2013);
     Ethics Guidance Related to Sequestration (March 8, 
2013);
     REMINDER: Travel Approval Requests Must Be 
Submitted at least 30 Days Before the Trip (June 12, 2013);
     Notice With Regard to Financial Disclosure of 
Spouse Assets (July 24, 2013);
     Reminder about the 2013 Annual Ethics Training 
Requirement and Upcoming Training Dates (September 30, 2013);
     Reminder about the Limitation on Participating in 
Initial Public Offerings (November 5, 2013);
     Helping the Victims of the Philippines Typhoon 
(November 14, 2013);
     Holiday Guidance on the Gift Rule (December 4, 
2013);
     Announcement of the New Electronic Filing System 
for Financial Disclosure Statements and Periodic Transaction 
Reports (January 14, 2014);
     The 2014 Outside Earned Income Limit and Salaries 
Triggering the Financial Disclosure Requirement and Post-
Employment Restrictions Applicable to House Officers and 
Employees (January 15, 2014);
     Update to Guidance on the Disclosure of Privately-
Sponsored Travel (July 11, 2014);
     Campaign Activity Guidance (August 15, 2014);
     Holiday Guidance on the Gift Rule (December 4, 
2014);
     Reminder About the 2014 Annual Ethics Training 
Requirement (December 22, 2014);
     Negotiations for Future Employment and 
Restrictions on Post-Employment for House Members and Officers 
(December 23, 2014); and
     Negotiations for Future Employment and 
Restrictions on Post-Employment for House Staff (December 23, 
2014).
    A copy of each of these advisory memoranda is included as 
Appendix II to this Report.
    In addition to the advisory memoranda listed above, the 
Committee issued an updated version of its summary memorandum, 
Highlights of the House Ethics Rules, in February 2013. Copies 
of all current Committee publications are available from the 
Committee's office, and their text is posted on the Committee's 
Web site. The Committee also submits a report each month of the 
Committee's activities to the Committee on House 
Administration. Finally, with this report and the annual report 
published by the Committee in early 2014, the Committee has 
sought to provide as much transparency as is appropriate. In 
addition to the many numbers referred to throughout this 
report, the Committee annually publishes the following summary 
chart in the interest of transparency.



                            ETHICS TRAINING

    Clause 3(a)(6) of House Rule XI, which originated in the 
110th Congress, requires each House employee to complete ethics 
training each calendar year, pursuant to guidelines to be 
issued by the Committee. The House rules and Committee's 
guidelines require each House employee to complete one hour of 
ethics training each calendar year. The guidelines also require 
all House employees who are paid at the ``senior staff rate'' 
to complete an additional hour of training once each Congress 
on issues primarily of interest to senior staff.\2\ Rule XI 
requires staff newly hired by the House to complete their 
training within 60 days of the commencement of their employment 
with the House.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\In 2014, the senior staff rate was $120,749 per year, or a 
monthly salary above $10,062. This figure is subject to change each 
year, and the Committee issues a general advisory memorandum to all 
House Members, officers, and employees announcing changes in this and 
other salary thresholds relevant to ethics rules.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Pursuant to its obligations under Rule XI, the Committee 
held 48 ethics training sessions during 2013 and 54 during 
2014. During the 113th Congress, all employees other than new 
employees were permitted to fulfill their training requirement 
either through attending a training session in person or by 
viewing an on-line presentation. The training sessions for new 
employees provided a general summary of the House ethics rules 
in all areas, such as gifts, travel, campaign activity, 
casework, involvement with outside entities, and outside 
employment. The live and on-line sessions for existing House 
employees covered specific topics, such as gifts and travel or 
campaign work, on a more in-depth basis. The Committee also had 
several different options that senior staff could use to 
fulfill their requirement of one additional hour of training. 
The on-line training provided a general overview of ethics 
rules of particular interest to senior staff. The live training 
sessions focused in depth on a single topic, of import for 
senior staff, such as the rules on completing a Financial 
Disclosure Statement, the post-employment restrictions, or 
STOCK Act filings.
    In 2013, the Committee trained more than 2,000 employees in 
person at live ethics briefings, and nearly 8,000 used one of 
the on-line training options. During 2014, the Committee 
trained more than 1,500 employees in person at live ethics 
briefings, and more than 7,000 through one of the on-line 
training options. The total number of employees who completed 
ethics training for 2014 will be determined after January 31, 
2015, the date that House Rule XI established as the deadline 
for employees to certify completion of the ethics training 
requirement for 2014.
    In addition to the training required under House Rule XI, 
the Committee also provided training in several other contexts. 
The House will include 60 new Members in the 114th Congress, 
most of whom have not previously served in the House. The 
Committee made a presentation to the Members-elect of the 114th 
Congress during New Member Orientation. The Committee also met 
with numerous departing Members and staff to counsel them on 
the ethics rules related to their transition to private life 
and the post-employment restrictions. The Committee also 
provided training open to all House Members, officers, and 
employees on the financial disclosure rules, which is discussed 
further in Section III. Finally, together with the Committee on 
House Administration, the Committee participated in two general 
briefings, one in 2013 and one in 2014, on the rules related to 
Member participation in the Congressional Art Competition.
    Committee staff also participated in approximately 10 
briefings sponsored by or held for the members of outside 
organizations. In addition, Committee staff led approximately 
12 briefings for visiting international dignitaries from a 
variety of countries, including Venezuela, Tanzania, and 
Armenia.
    The Committee will continue this outreach activity in the 
114th Congress.

                        ADVISORY OPINION LETTERS

    The Committee's Office of Advice and Education, under the 
direction and supervision of the Committee's Chairman and 
Ranking Member, prepared and issued nearly 740 private advisory 
opinions during the 113th Congress: 416 in 2013 and 323 in 
2014. Opinions issued by the Committee in the 113th Congress 
addressed a wide range of subjects, including various 
provisions of the gift rule, Member or staff participation in 
fund-raising activities of charities and for other purposes, 
the outside earned income and employment limitations, campaign 
activity by staff, and the post-employment restrictions.

                        TRAVEL APPROVAL LETTERS

    As discussed above, House Rule XXV, clause 5(d)(2), which 
was enacted at the start of the 110th Congress, charged each 
House Member or employee with obtaining approval of the 
Committee prior to undertaking any travel paid for by a private 
source on matters connected to the individual's House duties.
    House Rule XXV, clause 5(i), charges the Committee with 
undertaking an annual review of its guidelines and regulations 
regarding privately-funded, officially-connected travel by 
House Members, officers, and employees. In the 112th Congress, 
the Committee carried over a bipartisan travel working group to 
assess and make recommendations regarding its process for the 
review and approval of such travel. Committee members 
Representatives Charles Dent and Donna F. Edwards comprised the 
working group. As a result of the efforts of the working group, 
the Committee adopted comprehensive revised travel regulations 
for privately-sponsored, officially-connected travel which were 
released as a general advisory on December 27, 2012. The 
regulations were made effective for travel beginning on April 
1, 2013. In the 113th Congress, the Committee continued its 
ongoing efforts to review the guidelines and regulations 
regarding privately-funded, officially-connected travel. This 
review included a thorough examination of the forms used for 
privately-funded, officially-connected travel approval.
    Under the travel approval process established by the 
Committee to implement this rule, the Committee reviewed more 
than 2,400 requests, and issued letters approving nearly 2,000 
requests for travel in 2013. In 2014, the Committee reviewed 
more than 2,140 requests and issued letters approving nearly 
1,850 requests for travel. The Committee also reviewed the 
post-travel disclosure forms filed by the traveler on each 
approved trip pursuant to House Rule XXV, clause 
5(b)(1)(A)(ii), requesting amendments or other remedial action 
by the traveler when deemed necessary.

                       III. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

    Title I of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (EIGA), as 
amended (5 U.S.C. app. 4 Sec. Sec. 101-111), requires certain 
officials in all branches of the federal government, as well as 
candidates for federal office, to file publicly-available 
Financial Disclosure Statements (Statements). These Statements 
disclose information concerning the filer's finances, as well 
as those of certain family members. By May 15 of each year, 
these ``covered individuals'' are required to file a Statement 
that provides information for the preceding calendar year. In 
addition, the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act 
(STOCK Act) amended EIGA to add a requirement that financial 
disclosure filers must report certain securities transactions 
over $1,000 no later than 45 days after the transaction. The 
Committee has termed these interim reports ``Periodic 
Transaction Reports'' or ``PTRs.''
    Starting in 2013, financial disclosure filers were able to 
use an online electronic filing system to draft and submit 
their Statements and PTRs. Thanks to a very industrious 
collaboration with the Clerk of the House to create the online 
system, and extensive outreach and education, more than half of 
all Members and staff used the online electronic filing system 
to submit their calendar year 2013 Statements. Specifically, 
63% of Members and 72% of House staff used the online system to 
draft and submit their 2013 Statements.
    The Committee engages in substantial training efforts to 
assist filers with completing their Statements and PTRs. In 
2013 and 2014, the Committee held three briefings for Members 
and three for officers and employees. In 2014, the Committee 
hosted six walk-in clinics to support filers' use of the new 
electronic filing system for Statements and PTRs.
    In 2013, the Committee formed a bipartisan working group 
led by Representative Susan W. Brooks and Representative Ted 
Deutch to study matters related to disclosure of and handling 
of personal financial interests in the House of 
Representatives. In 2013 and 2014, the working group met 
formally 25 times. The working group sought input from the 
House community, as well as ethics experts from the government 
and private sector, during its review. The working group's 
efforts resulted in changes to the Committee's guidance on the 
financial disclosure of modern complex investment vehicles.
    For the 113th Congress, the Committee continued its long-
standing practice of Committee staff meeting with Members, 
officers, and employees of the House to assist filers with 
their Statements and PTRs. Committee staff responded to 
telephone, e-mail, and in-person questions from filers on an 
as-needed basis, in addition to reviewing drafts of Statements 
and PTRs. The Committee issued advisory memoranda concerning 
financial disclosure to the House community: three in 2013 and 
three in 2014. These advisories are available on the 
Committee's Web site and in Appendix II to this Report. The 
Committee encourages all financial disclosure filers to avail 
themselves of opportunities to seek and receive information and 
assistance.
    For calendar year 2013, the Legislative Resource Center of 
the Clerk's office referred a total of 2,780 Financial 
Disclosure Statements to the Committee for review. Of those, 
2,012 were Statements filed by current or new House Members or 
employees, 407 were filed by departing House Members or 
employees, and 361 were Statements filed by candidates for the 
House. The Clerk's office also referred a total of 1,646 PTRs 
to the Committee for review. The Committee received 697 PTRs 
from Members and 949 PTRs from officers and employees.
    For calendar year 2014, the Legislative Resource Center of 
the Clerk's office referred a total of 2,774 Statements to the 
Committee for review. Of those, 1,900 were Statements filed by 
current or new House Members or employees, 120 were filed by 
departing House Members or employees, and 754 were Statements 
filed by candidates for the House. The Clerk's office also 
referred a total of 1,346 PTRs to the Committee for review, 
representing over 9,183 individual transactions. The Committee 
received 559 PTRs from Members and 787 PTRs from officers and 
employees.
    Where the Committee's review indicated that a filed 
Statement or PTR was deficient, the Committee requested an 
amendment from the filer. Such amendments are routine and, 
without evidence of a knowing or willful violation, the 
Committee will usually take no further action. The Committee 
also followed up with filers whose Statements indicated non-
compliance with applicable law, such as the outside employment 
and outside earned income limitations.

                          IV. COMMITTEE RULES

    After the beginning of each Congress, the Committee must 
adopt rules for that Congress. On February 3, 2013, the 
Committee met and adopted the Committee rules for the 113th 
Congress. The substance of the Committee rules for the 113th 
Congress was largely identical to the amended rules adopted in 
the 112th Congress, except they were changed in conformance 
with changes that had been made to the House rules for the 
113th Congress.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\In the 112th Congress, as a result of the efforts of a working 
group formed to assess the Committee's rules and procedures, numerous 
changes were made to the Committee's investigative rules, including 
changes to Committee Rules 4, 9, 17A, 18, 19 and 23. Those changes were 
adopted by the Committee on May 18, 2012. House Comm. on Ethics, 
Summary of Activities One Hundred Twelfth Congress, H. Rept. 112-730, 
112th Cong. 2nd Sess. at 21 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    A copy of the Committee Rules for the 113th Congress is 
included as Appendix III to this Report.

                           V. INVESTIGATIONS

    Article I, Section 5 of the Constitution grants each 
chamber of Congress the power to ``punish its Members for 
disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, 
expel a Member.'' The Committee is designated by House rule as 
the body which conducts the investigative and adjudicatory 
functions which usually precede a vote by the full House 
regarding such punishment or expulsion. House Rule XI, clause 
3, as well as Committee Rules 13 through 28, describe specific 
guidelines and procedures for the exercise of that authority.
    The Committee's investigations are conducted either 
pursuant to authorization by the Chairman and Ranking Member, 
under Committee Rule 18(a), or pursuant to a vote by the 
Committee to empanel an Investigative Subcommittee (ISC). Most 
investigations are conducted pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a). 
Even those investigations that ultimately result in the 
formation of an ISC usually begin as Committee Rule 18(a) 
investigations. Committee Rule 18(a) and ISC investigations 
differ only in process, not substance. In both kinds of 
investigations, Committee staff are authorized by Members of 
the Committee to interview witnesses, request documents and 
information, and engage in other investigative actions. 
Further, both the Committee and ISC may authorize subpoenas for 
documents and witness testimony.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\The mechanism for issuing a subpoena by the Committee or an ISC 
does differ. Where an ISC has been empanelled, it can authorize a 
subpoena, to be signed by the Committee's Chairman and Ranking member. 
If the investigation is at the Committee Rule 18(a) stage, the full 
Committee can vote to issue a subpoena to be signed by the Chairman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Committee may opt to investigate a matter under 
Committee Rule 18(a) rather than an ISC for a number of 
reasons. For example, investigating pursuant to Committee Rule 
18(a) preserves the Committee's ability both to deploy its 
limited resources in the most efficient manner possible, and to 
maintain the confidentiality of its investigations. In general, 
the Committee publicly announces when it has voted to empanel 
an ISC. In contrast, most investigations conducted pursuant to 
Committee Rule 18(a) are confidential. Maintaining the 
confidentiality of investigations minimizes the risk of 
interference and protects the identities of complainants. 
Indeed, in recent investigations, employees of a Member have 
brought allegations of misconduct to the Committee when they 
have remained in the employ of the Member and faced 
intimidation or reprisal.\5\ Maintaining a confidential 
investigation also avoids unnecessarily tarnishing a Member's 
reputation before a determination of wrongdoing has been made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\See e.g., House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, In the 
Matter of Allegations relating the Representative Laura Richardson, H. 
Rept. 112-642, 112th Cong. 2d Sess. (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Whether the Committee investigates a matter under Committee 
Rule 18(a) or through an ISC, by rule, the Committee may choose 
to exercise its investigative authority in several different 
scenarios.\6\ However, most Committee investigations begin when 
the Committee, on its own initiative, undertakes an 
investigation. In the 113th Congress, the Committee commenced 
or continued investigative fact-gathering regarding 89 separate 
investigative matters, most of which were begun at the 
Committee's initiative. Those matters also included referrals 
from the OCE. In the 113th Congress, the OCE referred 21 
matters to the Committee, 15 with a recommendation for further 
review and 6 with a recommendation for dismissal.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\Specifically, the Committee may exercise its investigative 
authority when: (1) information offered as a complaint by a member of 
the House of Representatives is transmitted directly to the Committee; 
information offered as a complaint by a Member of the House of 
representatives is transmitted directly to the Committee; (2) 
information offered as a complaint by an individual not a Member of the 
House is transmitted to the Committee, provided that a Member of the 
House certifies in writing that such Member believes the information is 
submitted in good faith and warrants the review and consideration of 
the Committee; (3) the Committee, on its own initiative, undertakes an 
investigation; (4) a Member, officer, or employee is convicted in a 
Federal, State, or local court of a felony; (5) the House of 
Representatives, by resolution, authorizes or directs the Committee to 
undertake an inquiry or investigation; or (6) a referral from the OCE 
is transmitted to the Committee. See Committee Rule 14(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The OCE in an independent office within the House created 
by a House resolution in the 110th Congress after the release 
of a report of the Democratic Members of the Special Ethics 
Task Force on Ethics Enforcement (Task Force Report).\7\ 
According to the Task Force Report, the OCE Board has the 
responsibility to review information on allegations of 
misconduct by Members, officers, and employees of the House and 
make recommendations to the Committee for the Committee's 
official consideration and action. Two OCE Board members may 
initiate a review by notifying all other OCE Board members in 
writing. The OCE Board then has 30 calendar days to consider 
the matter in a preliminary review phase and may vote to either 
terminate the review or progress to the second-phase review. 
Once in the second phase, the OCE Board has 45 calendar days 
(with a possible one-time extension of 14 days) to complete 
consideration of the matter and refer it to the Committee with 
a recommendation for dismissal, further review, or as 
unresolved due to a tie vote. The OCE Board's referral may not 
contain any conclusions regarding the validity of the 
allegations upon which it is based or the guilt or innocence of 
the individual who is the subject of the review. The Task Force 
considered whether to give the OCE either direct or indirect 
subpoena power. But the Task Force Report ultimately decided 
not to give the OCE subpoena power based on a number of 
factors. Instead, the Task Force Report stated that the Board's 
referral may include recommendations for the issuance of 
subpoenas by the Committee where members feel it appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \7\Special Task Force on Ethics Enforcement, 110th Cong., Report of 
the Democratic Members of the Special Task Force on Ethics Enforcement 
(Comm. Print 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    When the Committee receives a referral from the OCE, it is 
required to review the referral ``without prejudice or 
presumptions as to the merit of the allegations.''\8\ The 
Committee thus makes an independent determination about how to 
proceed in the matter based on the information before the 
Committee, which may include not only the OCE referral and 
supporting documents provided to the Committee by the OCE, but 
other information. It is not uncommon that the Committee's 
review will require more than 90 days, because of the need to 
review documents, interview witnesses, and/or assess the legal 
significance of evidence, among other investigative steps. Some 
investigations may require the review of tens of thousands, if 
not hundreds of thousands, of pages of documents. For example, 
in the 113th Congress one investigation that spanned multiple 
Congresses required the Committee to review more than 220,000 
pages of documents to resolve the matter.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\Committee Rule 17A(a).
    \9\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative Don Young, H. Rept. 113-487, 113th Cong. 2nd Sess. at 2 
(2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In one matter referred to the Committee during the 112th 
Congress, although the OCE recommended dismissal, the Committee 
continued review of the matter. In another matter referred 
during the 112th Congress, the Committee agreed with the OCE's 
recommendation to dismiss certain allegations against a Member 
but continued its own, confidential review of related 
allegations against the same Member that were not part of the 
OCE's referral. As described further below, in one of those 
matters, the Committee subsequently issued a letter of 
reproval; the other matter remains pending. Had the Committee 
simply accepted the OCE recommendation to dismiss each matter, 
it would not have been required to make any public statement or 
conduct any further investigation.
    In some instances, the Committee may be asked to defer its 
investigation by another law enforcement entity, generally the 
U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). The Committee typically 
honors such requests, barring unusual circumstances. For one 
thing, parallel investigations pose the risk of compromising 
one another. Also, for the most serious criminal violations, 
only DOJ can pursue a prosecution to seek imprisonment, the 
most serious possible consequence for a violation of law. 
Provided that the Committee still retains jurisdiction, a 
decision by the Committee to defer does not preclude the 
Committee from continuing its investigation later, regardless 
of the outcome of the other entity's investigation. In 
addition, a decision by the Committee to defer an investigation 
does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or 
reflect any judgment on behalf of the Committee. In the 113th 
Congress, the Committee did opt to defer several investigations 
at the request of DOJ, as described further below.
    The Committee publicly addressed 34 investigative matters 
during the 113th Congress. In addition to confidential matters, 
the Committee also carried over several public matters from the 
112th Congress. In the 113th Congress, the Committee continued 
to address the matters concerning Representatives Robert E. 
Andrews, Vern Buchanan, Michael G. Grimm, Alcee L. Hastings, 
William L. Owens, and Aaron Schock. A chronological overview of 
public statements made by the Committee in the 113th Congress 
regarding investigative matters follows.
    On February 6, 2013, the Committee announced that, pursuant 
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE regarding Representative 
William L. Owens and officially-connected travel that was 
sponsored, funded, or organized by the Taipei Economic and 
Cultural Representative Office (TECRO).
    On February 6, 2013, the Committee announced that, pursuant 
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Aaron 
Schock and persons working on his behalf solicited funds on 
behalf of a political action committee in excess of the legal 
limitations on such solicitations.
    On February 26, 2013, the Committee voted to establish an 
ISC with regard to allegations that Representative Don Young 
improperly obtained, received, or accepted gifts, improperly 
used official resources or campaign funds for personal 
purposes, failed to report certain gifts on his annual 
Financial Disclosure Statements, and made false statements to 
federal officials.
    On February 26, 2013, the Committee voted to establish an 
ISC with regard to allegations that Representative Robert E. 
Andrews improperly used funds from his principal campaign 
committee and leadership PAC for personal purposes, used 
official resources for nonofficial and personal purposes, and 
made false statements to federal officials.
    On July 26, 2013, the Committee announced that it had 
unanimously voted to dismiss three referrals from the OCE 
related to a privately-sponsored trip that was paid for, in 
part, by the Turkish Coalition of America (TCA).
    On September 11, 2013, the Committee announced that, 
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Michele 
Bachmann used her leadership PAC to compensate a campaign 
consultant for work performed for her presidential campaign, 
used campaign resources to promote the sale of her book, and 
received improper in-kind contributions to her presidential 
campaign from her book publisher.
    On September 11, 2013, the Committee announced that, 
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Timothy H. 
Bishop or a member of his campaign staff solicited a campaign 
donation from a constituent who had sought official action from 
his office.
    On September 11, 2013, the Committee announced that, 
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE regarding Representative Peter 
Roskam and officially-connected travel that was sponsored, 
funded, or organized by TECRO.
    On September 11, 2013, the Committee transmitted a Report 
to the House regarding allegations referred by the OCE that 
Representative John F. Tierney failed to report some payments 
his wife received from her family to the Internal Revenue 
Service and on his annual Financial Disclosure Statements.
    On October 30, 2013, the Committee voted not to establish 
an ISC with regard to the arrests of eight Members--Joseph 
Crowley, Keith Ellison, Al Green, Raul M. Grijalva, Luis V. 
Gutierrez, John Lewis, Charles B. Rangel, and Jan Schakowsky--
for blocking passage during a protest in front of the United 
States Capitol.
    On November 15, 2013, the Committee transmitted a Report to 
the House regarding allegations relating to travel to Taiwan by 
Representatives William Owens and Peter Roskam in 2011.
    On November 26, 2013, the Committee announced that it had 
unanimously voted to continue deferring consideration of 
allegations related to Representative Michael G. Grimm in 
response to a request from DOJ in the 112th Congress.
    On December 12, 2013, the Committee voted to establish an 
ISC with respect to conduct forming the basis for criminal 
charges of possession of cocaine in the District of Columbia, 
to which Representative Henry J. ``Trey'' Radel III pled 
guilty.
    On March 24, 2014, the Committee announced that, pursuant 
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Cathy 
McMorris Rodgers used House resources for campaign activity and 
combined campaign and House resources for her campaign for a 
Republican House leadership position.
    On March 24, 2014, the Committee announced that, pursuant 
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Markwayne 
Mullin received outside earned income in excess of the outside 
earned income limitations that apply to Members of Congress and 
impermissibly received payment for his service on the board of 
directors of a company.
    On May 5, 2014, the Committee announced that, pursuant to 
Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review allegations 
referred by the OCE that Representative Luis V. Gutieerrez used 
his Member's Representational Allowance (MRA) to pay for 
consulting services that may not be paid for with MRA funds.
    On May 8, 2014, the Committee voted to establish an ISC 
with regard to allegations forming the basis for criminal 
charges of obstructing the tax law, conspiracy to defraud the 
United States, aiding and abetting tax evasion, health care 
fraud, wire fraud, mail fraud, unlawful employment of aliens, 
obstruction of an official proceeding, and perjury, as filed 
against Michael G. Grimm in the United States District Court 
for the Eastern District of New York on April 25, 2014.
    On June 11, 2014, the Committee announced that, pursuant to 
Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review allegations 
referred by the OCE that Representative Steve Stockman accepted 
campaign contributions from persons who were employed by his 
congressional office, falsified Federal Election Commission 
(FEC) reports and official payroll records, made false 
statements to the OCE, and compensated part-time staff as full-
time House employees.
    On June 20, 2014, the Committee transmitted a Report to the 
House regarding allegations relating to Representative Don 
Young.
    On June 18, 2014, the Committee unanimously voted to defer 
consideration of allegations referred by the OCE that 
Representative Michael G. Grimm threatened a reporter following 
the 2014 State of the Union address, in response to a request 
from DOJ.
    On September 10, 2014, the Committee voted not to establish 
an ISC with regard to the arrest of Representative Gwen Moore 
for disorderly conduct during a protest in West Milwaukee, 
Wisconsin.
    On September 30, 2014, the Committee announced that, 
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Tom Petri 
took official actions on behalf of entities in which he had a 
financial interest.
    On October 29, 2014, the Committee announced that, pursuant 
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Paul Broun 
used his MRA to pay for consulting services that may not be 
paid for with MRA funds.
    On November 10, 2014, the Committee announced that, 
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Bobby L. 
Rush received unpaid usage of office space.
    On November 10, 2014, the Committee announced that, 
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review 
allegations referred by the OCE that Representative Ed 
Whitfield's wife, a federally-registered lobbyist, actively 
lobbied his congressional office and used his staff to actively 
lobby other congressional offices.
    On November 26, 2014, the Committee announced that it had 
unanimously voted to continue deferring consideration of 
allegations related to Representative Michael Grimm in response 
to a request from DOJ in the 112th Congress.
    On December 11, 2014, the Committee submitted four 
individual Reports to the House in separate matters regarding 
allegations related to Representative Judy Chu, Representative 
Alcee L. Hastings, Representative Phil Gingrey, and 
Representative Tom Petri.
    These investigative matters are described in more detail 
below, in alphabetical order. Copies of all of the Committee's 
public statements related to these matters are included as 
Appendix IV to this Report.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Robert E. 
        Andrews

    On April 2, 2012, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Robert E. Andrews may have 
converted funds from his principal campaign committee and 
leadership political action committee (PAC) to personal use by 
paying for trips to Scotland and to California with family 
members. On August 31, 2012, the Chairman and Ranking Member 
released a public statement that, pursuant to Committee Rule 
18(a), the Committee would continue to review the matter. On 
that same date, pursuant to Committee Rule 17A(c)(2), the 
Committee published OCE's Report and Findings relating to 
allegations against Representative Andrews.
    On February 26, 2013, based on the results of the 18(a) 
investigation, the Committee unanimously voted to empanel an 
ISC to investigate allegations that Representative Andrews 
improperly used funds from his principal campaign committee and 
PAC for personal purposes, used official resources for 
nonofficial and personal purposes, and made false statements to 
federal officials.
    On February 4, 2014, Representative Andrews announced that 
he was resigning from the House, effective February 18, 2014. 
On the date of Representative Andrews' resignation, the ISC's 
and the Committee's jurisdiction to continue its investigation 
of Representative Andrews ended.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Michele Bachmann

    On June 13, 2013, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Michele Bachmann may have 
violated the Federal Election Campaign Act, 2 U.S.C. 441a, as 
well as House Rule XXIII, clause 1, where her leadership PAC 
allegedly compensated a campaign consultant for work performed 
for Representative Bachmann's presidential campaign.\10\ The 
Report and Findings also recommended further review of 
allegations that her campaign used its resources to promote 
Representative Bachmann's book, and her book publisher provided 
improper in-kind contributions to her presidential campaign. 
The Committee released the OCE's Report and Findings, along 
with Representative Bachmann's response, on September 11, 2013, 
and noted in a public statement that the Committee was 
continuing to review the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 
18(a).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\This statute was recodified as 52 U.S.C. Sec. 30116, effective 
September 1, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Representative Bachmann did not run for election to the 
House for the 114th Congress and the Committee will not have 
jurisdiction over her after January 3, 2015.

Representative Timothy H. Bishop

    On June 13, 2013, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Timothy H. Bishop may have 
violated 18 U.S.C. 201, as well as House Rule XXIII, clause 1, 
where he allegedly solicited a campaign contribution from a 
constituent seeking official action from his office. The 
Committee released the Report and Findings, along with 
Representative Bishop's response, on September 11, 2013, and 
noted in a public statement that the Committee was continuing 
to review the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
    Representative Bishop lost his bid for reelection to the 
House for the 114th Congress and the Committee will not have 
jurisdiction over him after January 3, 2015.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Paul Broun

    On July 31, 2014, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Paul Broun may have used his 
MRA to pay for consulting services that may not be paid for 
with MRA funds. The Committee released the Report and Findings 
on October 29, 2014, and noted in a public statement that the 
Committee was continuing to review the allegations pursuant to 
Committee Rule 18(a).
    Representative Broun did not run for election to the House 
for the 114th Congress, and the Committee will not have 
jurisdiction over him after January 3, 2015.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Vern Buchanan

    On February 9, 2012, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Vern Buchanan may have violated 
18 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 201, 1505, and 1512, as well as House Rule 
XXIII, clause 1, by making the settlement of a lawsuit against 
a former business partner contingent on the business partner 
signing a false affidavit to be filed with the FEC. The 
Committee in the 112th Congress released the OCE Report and 
Findings, along with Representative Buchanan's response, on May 
9, 2012, and noted in a public statement that the Committee was 
continuing to review the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 
18(a).
    As of the conclusion of the 113th Congress the Committee 
had not completed its investigation into this matter. 
Representative Buchanan was reelected to the House for the 
114th Congress.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Judy Chu\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \11\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative Judy Chu, H. Rept. 113-665, 113th Cong. 2nd Sess. 
(2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In June 2011, the Chairman and Ranking Member of the 
Committee for the 112th Congress authorized Committee staff to 
investigate allegations, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), that 
Representative Judy Chu's Chief of Staff and Legislative 
Director had required other staff to perform campaign-related 
work in the House office, during regular working hours. The 
Committee investigated the allegations and determined that 
Representative Chu's Chief of Staff and Legislative Director 
directed members of Representative Chu's staff to perform 
campaign-related work using official resources on a sporadic 
and limited basis. The investigation did not reveal any 
evidence that Representative Chu was aware of any improper use 
of official resources for campaign purposes.
    However, the Committee did find that Representative Chu 
took actions that interfered with the Committee's investigation 
of the matter. During the Committee's investigation, 
Representative Chu communicated with a potential material 
witness in a manner suggestive of an interpretation of events 
that the Committee was investigating. Representative Chu later 
expressed regret for her inappropriate communications. The 
Committee unanimously decided to issue a public letter of 
reproval regarding her interference with the Committee's 
investigation.
    On December 11, 2014, the Committee submitted a Report to 
the House describing the facts and its findings in this matter 
and issued a public letter of reproval to Representative Chu.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Phil Gingrey\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \12\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative Phil Gingrey, H. Rept. 113-664, 113th Cong. 2nd Sess. 
(2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In the Spring of 2012, the Chairman and Ranking Member of 
the Committee for the 112th Congress authorized Committee staff 
to investigate allegations, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), 
that Representative Phil Gingrey received stock warrants from 
two Georgia community banks--Bank of Ellijay and Westside 
Bank--as compensation for serving on their boards of directors, 
and that he advocated legislation that would benefit the banks.
    On April 2, 2012, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report in which it recommended dismissal of allegations that 
Representative Gingrey received stock warrants as compensation 
for his service as a board member. On August 2, 2012, the 
Committee voted unanimously to close its review of the 
compensation allegation, while continuing its review of 
allegations related to Representative Gingrey's advocacy on 
behalf of the banks.
    The Committee's investigation showed that Representative 
Gingrey invested $250,000 in Bank of Ellijay, and subsequently 
took official actions to assist the bank. The Committee found 
no evidence that Representative Gingrey's actions resulted in 
any financial benefit to him, or were taken with that intent. 
However, the Committee concluded that Representative Gingrey's 
efforts to assist Bank of Ellijay violated two provisions of 
the Code of Ethics for Government Service, which prohibit 
dispensing special favors to anyone, ``whether for renumeration 
or not,'' and the acceptance of benefits that could be seen as 
influencing a Member's official duties. The Committee also 
found that Representative Gingrey's actions did not reflect 
creditably on the House or comport with the spirit of the House 
rules regarding conflicts of interest.
    On December 11, 2014, the Committee submitted a Report to 
the House describing the facts and its findings in this matter 
and issued a public letter of reproval to Representative 
Gingrey.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Michael G. Grimm

    On June 28, 2012, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report in which it recommended dismissal of allegations that 
Representative Michael G. Grimm may have violated federal 
campaign finance laws, where he allegedly solicited and 
accepted prohibited campaign contributions, including 
contributions in excess of contribution limits, excessive cash 
contributions, contributions from foreign nationals, and 
contributions made in the name of another. The Report contained 
additional allegations that Representative Grimm had filed 
false information in his campaign finance reports to the FEC, 
and that he may have improperly sought assistance from a 
foreign national in soliciting campaign contributions in 
exchange for offering to use his official position to assist 
that individual in obtaining a green card. The OCE recommended 
dismissal because it could not establish with sufficient 
certainty that a violation occurred after Representative Grimm 
became a Member of Congress.
    On November 15, 2012, the Committee unanimously voted to 
affirm jurisdiction over matters relating to a successful 
campaign for election to the House. The Committee had 
previously taken this position with respect to its jurisdiction 
in other matters similar to these allegations, where Members 
had allegedly violated laws, rules, or standards of conduct 
when conducting their initial campaign for the House.\13\ 
Because the Committee disagreed with the OCE's conclusion 
regarding its jurisdiction, the Committee released a public 
statement on November 26, 2012, and stated that it had 
authorized an inquiry into the alleged violations pursuant to 
Committee Rule 18(a). However, the Committee noted that DOJ had 
requested that the Committee defer its investigation of the 
matter, and the Committee agreed to do so. The Committee issued 
a public statement on November 26, 2013, and again on November 
26, 2014, stating that it would continue to defer its 
investigation of this matter at DOJ's request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\See, e.g., House Comm on Standards of Official Conduct, In the 
Matter of Representative Earl F. Hilliard, H. Rept. 107-130, 107th 
Cong. 1st Sess. (2001); House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, 
In the Matter of Representative Jay Kim, H. Rept. 105-797, 105th Cong. 
2d Sess. at 6,677 (1998).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On April 9, 2014, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings recommending further review of allegations 
that Representative Grimm violated the House Code of Official 
Conduct and District of Columbia law by threatening a reporter 
in the course of an interview following the 2014 State of the 
Union address.\14\ On June 25, 2014, the Committee released the 
OCE Report and Findings, and stated that DOJ had asked the 
Committee to defer consideration of the matter, and the 
Committee had agreed to do so.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\See House Rule XXIII, clauses 1 and 2; D.C. Code Sec. 22-404 
(2013); D.C. Code Sec. 22-407 (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On April 25, 2014, the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern 
District of New York filed an indictment against Representative 
Grimm in federal district court, charging him with obstructing 
the tax law, conspiracy to defraud the United States, aiding 
and abetting tax evasion, health care fraud, wire fraud, mail 
fraud, unlawful employment of aliens, obstruction of an 
official proceeding, and perjury. On May 23, 2014, the 
Committee issued a public statement indicating that on May 8, 
2014, the Committee voted unanimously to establish an ISC with 
jurisdiction to determine whether Representative Grimm violated 
the Code of Official Conduct or any law, rule, regulation, or 
other applicable standard of conduct in the performance of his 
duties or the discharge of his responsibilities, with respect 
to the allegations forming the basis for the criminal charges 
against him. The Committee further stated that DOJ had asked 
the Committee to defer consideration of the matter, and the 
Committee agreed to do so.
    As of the conclusion of the 113th Congress, the Committee 
continues to defer its investigation of the above matters, at 
the request of DOJ. Representative Grimm was reelected to the 
House for the 114th Congress. However, on December 29, 2014, 
Representative Grimm announced his intention to resign from the 
House, effective January 5, 2015, after the beginning of the 
114th Congress. Should Representative Grimm resign, the 
Committee's jurisdiction to continue its investigation of 
Representative Grimm will end at that time.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Luis V. 
        Gutieerrez

    On December 4, 2013, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Luis V. Gutieerrez 
impermissibly used his MRA to pay a consultant to perform work 
on behalf of his official office. The referral also included an 
allegation that Representative Gutieerrez impermissibly allowed 
the consultant to lobby him during the time he was employed by 
Representative Gutieerrez. Committee Rule 17A(j) provides that 
the Committee may postpone any reporting requirement related to 
a referral from the OCE that falls within 60 days of an 
election in which the subject of the referral is a candidate. 
Representative Gutieerrez was on the primary ballot in March 
2014. Therefore, the announcement that the Chairman and Ranking 
Member jointly decided to extend the matter of Representative 
Gutieerrez for a 45-day period pursuant to Committee Rule 
18A(b)(1)(A) was postponed until March 20, 2014. On May 5, 
2014, the Chairman and Ranking Member released a public 
statement that, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), the Committee 
would continue to review the matter. On that same date, 
pursuant to Committee Rule 17A(c)(2), the Committee published 
the OCE's Report and Findings relating to allegations against 
Representative Gutieerrez.
    As of the conclusion of the 113th Congress the Committee 
had not completed its investigation into this matter. 
Representative Gutieerrez was reelected to the House for the 
114th Congress.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Alcee L. 
        Hastings\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \15\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative Alcee L. Hastings, H. Rept. 113-663, 113th Cong. 2nd 
Sess. (2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On November 8, 2011, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Alcee L. Hastings may have 
violated House Rule XXIII, clause 1, and the Congressional 
Accountability Act, 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec. 1311(a), 1317(a), where 
he allegedly sexually harassed a staffer of the United States 
Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe. The Committee 
in the 112th Congress released the OCE's Report and Findings, 
along with Representative Hastings' response, on January 11, 
2012, and noted in a public statement that the Committee was 
continuing to review the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 
18(a).
    The Committee conducted a thorough investigation into these 
allegations, reviewing more than one thousand pages of 
documents and interviewing eight witnesses, some more than 
once. At the conclusion of its investigation, the Committee 
found that the most serious allegations in this matter were not 
supported by evidence. While Representative Hastings did admit 
to certain conduct that was less than professional, the 
Committee determined that the conduct did not rise to the level 
of a violation of House rules, laws, regulations, or other 
standards of conduct.
    On December 11, 2014, the Committee submitted a Report to 
the House describing the facts and its findings in this matter, 
as well as its determination to take no further action in this 
matter.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Cathy McMorris 
        Rodgers

    On December 23, 2013, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Cathy McMorris Rodgers may have 
violated House rules by using House resources for campaign 
activity and combined campaign and House resources for her 
campaign for a House leadership position. The Committee 
released the OCE's Report and Findings, along with 
Representative McMorris Rodgers' response, on March 24, 2014, 
and noted in a public statement that the Committee was 
continuing to review the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 
18(a).
    As of the conclusion of the 113th Congress the Committee 
had not completed its investigation into this matter. 
Representative McMorris Rodgers was reelected to the House for 
the 114th Congress.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Gwen Moore\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \16\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative Gwen Moore, H. Rept. 113-585, 113th Cong. 2nd Sess. 
(2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In accordance with the requirements of H. Res. 451, H. Res. 
5, Section 4(d) and Committee Rule 18(e)(2), the Committee 
convened on September 10, 2014, to consider the arrest of 
Representative Gwen Moore for disorderly conduct during a 
protest in West Milwaukee, Wisconsin, on September 4, 2014. 
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee 
voted against empanelling an ISC. In reaching this decision, 
the Committee considered the scope and nature of the violation, 
and determined it to be one for which review by an 
investigative subcommittee was not required.
    On September 11, 2014, the Committee submitted a report to 
the House of Representatives describing the facts and its 
findings regarding this matter.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Markwayne Mullin

    On December 23, 2013, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Markwayne Mullin received 
outside earned income in excess of the outside earned income 
limitations that apply to Members of Congress and that he 
impermissibly received payment for his service on the board of 
directors of a company. The Committee released the Report and 
Findings, along with Representative Mullin's response, on March 
24, 2014, and noted in a public statement that the Committee 
was continuing to review the allegations pursuant to Committee 
Rule 18(a).
    As of the conclusion of the 113th Congress the Committee 
had not completed its investigation into this matter. 
Representative Mullin was reelected to the House for the 114th 
Congress.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Tom Petri\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \17\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative Tom Petri, H. Rept. 113-666, 113th Cong. 2nd Sess. 
(2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On July 2, 2014, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Tom Petri may have violated 
House rules, laws, and other standards of conduct where he 
allegedly undertook official actions for entities in which he 
had a financial interest. The Committee released the OCE's 
Report and Findings, along with Representative Petri's 
response, on September 30, 2014, and noted in a public 
statement that the Committee was continuing to review the 
allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
    The Committee investigated the allegations and determined 
that Representative Petri repeatedly sought advice from the 
Committee staff on the official actions in question, and 
appears to have substantially complied with that advice. The 
Committee concluded that Representative Petri was entitled to 
rely on the staff-level analysis of his conduct and their 
contemporaneous advice.
    On December 11, 2014, the Committee submitted a Report to 
the House describing the facts and its findings in this matter, 
as well as its determination to take no further action in this 
matter.

In the Matter of the Representative Henry J. ``Trey'' Radel III

    In accordance with the requirements of H. Res. 451, H. Res. 
5, Section 4(d) and Committee Rule 18(e)(2), on December 12, 
2013, the Committee established an ISC to determine whether 
Representative Henry J. ``Trey'' Radel III violated the Code of 
Official Conduct or any law, rule, regulation, or other 
applicable standard of conduct in the performance of his duties 
or the discharge of his responsibilities, with respect to 
conduct forming the basis for criminal charges of possession of 
cocaine in the District of Columbia, to which Representative 
Radel pled guilty on November 20, 2013.
    On January 27, 2014, Representative Radel announced that he 
was resigning from the House, effective that day. On the date 
of Representative Radel's resignation, the ISC's and the 
Committee's jurisdiction to continue its investigation of 
Representative Radel ended.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representatives William Owens 
        and Peter Roskam\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \18\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Travel to Taiwan by Representatives William Owens and Peter Roskam in 
2011, H. Rept. 113-266, 113th Cong. 2nd Sess. (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Beginning in the 112th Congress, the Committee began 
investigating separate trips taken to Taiwan by Representatives 
William Owens and Peter Roskam that were sponsored by the 
Chinese Culture University (CCU), a private university. 
Although CCU was ostensibly the private sponsor of each 
Member's trip, the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative 
Office (TECRO) had previously invited each Member on a trip to 
Taiwan. TECRO is the representative of the Government of Taiwan 
in the United States and so any trip sponsored by TECRO could 
only be authorized under the Mutual Educational and Cultural 
Exchange Act (MECEA).
    After TECRO extended the initial invitations, each Member's 
trip was changed from a MECEA program to travel subject to the 
House's officially-connected, privately-sponsored travel rules. 
Following the change in the nature of the trip, both Members 
sought and received approval from the Committee for themselves 
and their wives to participate in these privately-sponsored 
trips to Taiwan, now sponsored by CCU. However, TECRO remained 
involved in the planning and conduct of the trip. At that time, 
the Committee was not informed that the trips had initially 
been planned and organized under the MECEA program. It was only 
after the conclusion of the trips that the Committee became 
aware of this fact.
    Neither TECRO nor CCU cooperated with the Committee's 
investigation of these two trips, and the Committee's 
investigation determined that the presently-available evidence 
was inconclusive as to whether CCU was a proper sponsor under 
the privately-sponsored travel rules. Thus, the Committee was 
unable to determine if Representative Roskam's travel was 
improper. However, the Committee's investigation did find that 
Park Strategies, LLC, a registered foreign agent for TECRO, was 
closely involved in the planning and organization of 
Representative Owens' trip. Under the privately-sponsored 
travel rules, such lobbyist involvement is prohibited. Thus, 
the Committee determined that Representative Owens' travel was 
improper, and repayment of the market value of the travel was 
necessary. Representative Owens had voluntarily repaid the 
value of the travel for both him and his wife prior to the 
Committee's review.
    On November 15, 2013, the Committee submitted a Report to 
the House describing the facts and its findings in this matter, 
as well as its determination to take no further action.

In the Matter regarding the arrests of Members of the House during a 
        protest outside the United States Capitol on October 8, 
        2013\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \19\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter Regarding the Arrests of 
Members of the House During a Protest Outside the United States Capitol 
on October 8, 2013, H. Rept. 113-256, 113th Cong. 1st Sess. (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In accordance with the requirements of H. Res. 451, H. Res. 
5, Section 4(d) and Committee Rule 18(e)(2), the Committee 
convened on October 30, 2013, to consider the arrest of 
Representatives Joseph Crowley, Keith Ellison, Al Green, Raul 
M. Grijalva, Luis V. Gutierrez, John Lewis, Charles B. Rangel, 
and Jan Schakowsky for blocking passage during a protest in 
front of the United States Capitol on October 8, 2013. Prior to 
that, each of the Representatives had forfeited a $50.00 
collateral payment, whereupon the charges against them had been 
dropped. The local proceedings related to these arrests were 
thus resolved.
    After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee 
voted against empanelling an ISC related to the conduct of the 
Representatives. In reaching this decision, the Committee 
considered the scope and nature of the violations, and 
determined them to be ones for which review by an ISC was not 
warranted.
    On October 30, 2013, the Committee submitted a Report to 
the House of Representatives describing the facts and its 
findings regarding the matter.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Bobby L. Rush

    On June 10, 2014, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Bobby L. Rush received unpaid 
usage of office space. On July 25, 2014, the Chairman and 
Ranking Member jointly decided to extend the matter of 
Representative Rush for a 45-day period pursuant to Committee 
Rule 17A(b)(1)(A). Committee Rule 17A(j) provides that the 
Committee may postpone any reporting requirement related to an 
OCE referral that falls within 60 days of an election in which 
the subject of the referral is a candidate. Representative Rush 
was on the general election ballot in November 2014. Therefore, 
the announcement that the Chairman and Ranking Member jointly 
decided to continue to review this matter was postponed until 
November 8, 2014. On the following weekday, November 10, 2014, 
the Chairman and Ranking Member released a public statement 
that, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), the Committee would 
continue to review the matter. On that same date, pursuant to 
Committee Rule 17A(c)(2), the Committee published the OCE's 
Report and Findings relating to allegations against 
Representative Rush, along with Representative Rush's response.
    As of the conclusion of the 113th Congress the Committee 
had not completed its investigation into this matter. 
Representative Rush was reelected to the House for the 114th 
Congress.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Aaron Schock

    On August 30, 2012, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Aaron Schock and persons 
working on his behalf solicited funds on behalf of a PAC in 
excess of the legal limitations on such solicitations. On 
February 6, 2013, the Chairman and Ranking Member released a 
public statement that, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), the 
Committee would continue to review the matter. On that same 
date, pursuant to Committee Rule 17A(c)(2), the Committee 
published the Report and Findings relating to allegations 
against Representative Schock, along with Representative 
Schock's response.
    As of the conclusion of the 113th Congress the Committee 
had not completed its investigation into this matter. 
Representative Schock was reelected to the House for the 114th 
Congress.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Steve Stockman

    On March 13, 2014, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Steve Stockman may have 
violated House rules, laws, and other standards of conduct, by 
accepting campaign contributions from persons who were employed 
by his congressional office at the time the contributions were 
made, and filing FEC reports that falsely attributed campaign 
contributions to family members of Representative Stockman's 
official staff, when the contributions were actually made by 
the staff themselves. The Report and Findings also recommended 
further review of allegations that Representative Stockman 
compensated official staff as full-time House employees, when 
they were actually working part-time for the official office 
and part-time for Representative Stockman's campaign, and that 
he made false statements to the OCE and otherwise obstructed 
the OCE's investigation by falsifying official payroll records 
after OCE began its investigation. The Committee released the 
Report and Findings, along with Representative Stockman's 
response, on June 11, 2014, and noted in a public statement 
that the Committee was continuing to review the allegations 
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
    On September 11, 2014, DOJ requested that the Committee 
defer its investigation of the allegations contained in the 
Report and Findings. The Committee agreed to this request. 
Representative Stockman did not run for election to the House 
for the 114th Congress and the Committee will not have 
jurisdiction over him after January 3, 2015.

In the Matter of Allegations relating to Staff Travel provided by the 
        Turkish Coalition of America in August 2008\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \20\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Staff Travel Provided by the Turkish Coalition of America in August 
2008, H. Rept. 113-176, 113th Cong. 1st Sess. (2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Beginning in the 112th Congress, the Committee undertook an 
investigation of a multi-day, privately-sponsored trip to 
Turkey in August 2008 that was paid for, in part, by the 
Turkish Coalition of America (TCA). Five House employees sought 
and received Committee approval to participate in the trip. 
However, the Committee later learned that, at the time of the 
travel, TCA employed or retained a federally-registered 
lobbyist, making it ineligible to sponsor a multi-day trip 
under the House's privately-sponsored travel rules. The 
Committee's investigation found that the employees who 
participated in the trip acted in good faith, relied on the 
Committee's approval, and had no knowledge that TCA employed or 
retained a lobbyist.
    On June 13, 2013, after completing its own investigation, 
the Committee received referrals from the OCE regarding three 
of the travelers. These three travelers were the only travelers 
still employed by the House when the OCE began its 
investigation, and therefore were the only travelers subject to 
the OCE's jurisdiction. In its referrals the OCE determined 
that the employees acted in good faith and were unaware that 
TCA employed a lobbyist.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\Despite the lack of evidence of wrongdoing, the OCE referred 
the matter to the Committee with a recommendation for further review 
because ``pursuant to precedent of the Committee on Ethics, a person's 
ignorance of the true source of travel expenses is not an absolute 
shield from liability for receipt of travel expenses from an improper 
source.'' While this is a true statement, the Committee determined that 
the precedents cited by the OCE were distinguishable from this case for 
several reasons.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On July 26, 2013, the Committee submitted a Report to the 
House describing the facts and its findings in this matter, as 
well as its determination to take no further action.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative John Tierney\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \22\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative John Tierney, H. Rept. 113-208, 113th Cong. 1st Sess. 
(2013).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On June 13, 2013, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that some payments that Representative John 
Tierney's wife received from her brother and mother were income 
that should have been reported by Representative Tierney to the 
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and disclosed on his annual 
Financial Disclosure Statements. Representative Tierney and his 
wife had treated the payments as gifts from a family member and 
therefore had not reported the payments to the IRS or disclosed 
them on Representative Tierney's Financial Disclosure 
Statements.
    The Committee investigated the allegations and unanimously 
determined that the evidence was inconclusive as to whether the 
payments to Mrs. Tierney were income or gifts. Accordingly, the 
Committee decided that the evidence did not warrant a finding 
that Representative Tierney intentionally mischaracterized the 
nature of the payments for financial disclosure or tax 
purposes.
    On September 11, 2013, the Committee submitted a Report to 
the House describing the facts and its findings in this matter, 
as well as its determination to take no further action.

In the Matter of Allegations related to Representative Ed Whitfield

    On June 10, 2014, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a 
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of 
allegations that Representative Ed Whitfield's wife, a 
federally-registered lobbyist, actively lobbied his 
congressional office and used his staff to actively lobby other 
congressional offices in violation of House Rule XXV, clause 7. 
The Committee released the Report and Findings, along with 
Representative Whitfield's response, on November 10, 2014, and 
noted in a public statement that the Committee was continuing 
to review the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
    As of the conclusion of the 113th Congress the Committee 
had not completed its investigation into this matter. 
Representative Whitfield was reelected to the House for the 
114th Congress.

In the Matter of Allegations Related to Representative Don Young\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \23\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative Don Young, H. Rept. 113-487, 113th Cong. 2nd Sess. 
(2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    During the 111th Congress, pursuant to their authority 
under Committee Rule 18(a) the Chairman and Ranking Member 
authorized an investigation into allegations related to 
Representative Don Young's receipt of certain gifts related to 
travel expenses, as well as other things of value, which he 
received between 2003 and 2007. The Committee's investigation 
began after both Representative Young and DOJ sent letters to 
the Committee regarding the allegations, as well as materials 
relevant to the allegations. At the outset of the 112th 
Congress, the then-Chairman and Ranking Member reauthorized the 
investigation based on the information submitted by 
Representative Young and DOJ. The Committee received and 
reviewed over 150,000 pages of documents from DOJ and 
Representative Young, and also reviewed reports from witness 
interviews conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation 
(FBI) at DOJ's offices in Washington, D.C.
    Based on an initial review of the documents collected, as 
well as its review of the FBI interview reports, the Committee 
voted to empanel an ISC on February 26, 2013. The ISC issued 20 
subpoenas and reviewed over 220,000 pages of documents, which 
included over 150,000 pages provided to the Committee during 
the 111th and 112th Congresses. The ISC interviewed 16 
witnesses, including Representative Young's former chief of 
staff, former campaign manager, other relevant staffers, and 
other witnesses to the trips taken by Representative Young.
    On February 27, 2014, the ISC sent an additional request 
for information to Representative Young and informed him of his 
right to make a statement to the ISC under Committee Rule 
19(b)(3). Representative Young provided a written response on 
March 12, 2014.
    Upon completing its investigation, the ISC issued a Report 
in which it concluded that, given the lengthy chronology of 
this matter, and the corrosion of evidence over time, it could 
not recommend a finding that Representative Young purposefully 
or corruptly accepted any of the gifts reviewed in this matter. 
Nevertheless, the ISC concluded that Representative Young did 
violate House Rule XXV, clause 5, by accepting certain gifts 
that did not fall within an exception to the gift rule.\24\ The 
ISC also found that Representative Young improperly used 
campaign funds for personal use by paying for certain personal 
travel expenses with his campaign fund, in violation of House 
Rule XXIII, clause 6(b) and 2 U.S.C. Sec. 439a(b).\25\ Finally, 
the ISC concluded that Representative Young had violated the 
Ethics in Government Act, 5 U.S.C. app. 4 101-111, and House 
Rule XXVI, clause 2, by not including in his annual Financial 
Disclosure Statements the required disclosure of gifts he 
received.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \24\House Rule XXV, clause 5 (hereinafter ``the House Gift Rule''), 
was previously codified as House Rule XXVI, clause 5, until the 110th 
Congress.
    \25\This statute was recodified as 52 U.S.C. Sec. 30114(b), 
effective September 1, 2014.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Accordingly, the ISC recommended that Representative Young 
repay the full amount of the improper gifts and the improperly 
used campaign funds. This amount totaled $59,063.74, which 
included repayment of $30,936.33 to Representative Young's 
principal campaign committee and repayment of $28,127.41 to ten 
private individuals or companies. The ISC also recommended that 
Representative Young amend his Financial Disclosure Statements 
to report gifts received, whether those gifts were permissibly 
accepted or not. Furthermore, while the ISC did not recommend 
that Representative Young receive a House sanction for his 
actions, it recommended that the Committee issue a letter of 
reproval to Representative Young for his conduct.
    In a June 2, 2014, letter to the ISC, Representative Young 
accepted the ISC's Report, along with its recommendation that 
he be issued a letter of reproval, and he expressed regret. 
Representative Young also submitted evidence that he had repaid 
the gifts and campaign funds as the ISC recommended. On June 
18, 2014, the Committee considered the ISC Report and 
recommendations and voted unanimously to release a public 
Report to the House. The Committee concurred in the ISC's 
findings and recommendations. The Committee found that, while 
Representative Young accepted responsibility for his actions, 
repaid the amounts in question, and took steps to ensure future 
compliance with House rules, these actions did not overcome the 
need to issue him a letter of reproval regarding his conduct. 
This was especially true given that Representative Young used 
campaign funds for personal purposes and accepted several of 
the improper gifts after the 2007 House Gift Rule changes, and 
that Representative Young only brought these matters to the 
attention of the Committee after DOJ had begun its 
investigation. The Committee agreed with the ISC that 
Representative Young should be reproved because his actions 
``demonstrated a lack of appropriate safeguards and an 
inattention to the relevant standards of conduct.''\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \26\Committee on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to 
Representative Don Young, H. Rept. 113-487, 113th Cong. 2nd Sess. at 4 
(2014) (quoting ISC Report).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On June 20, 2013, the Committee submitted a Report to the 
House describing the facts and its findings in this matter and 
issued a public letter of reproval to Representative Young. 
Following these actions, the Committee determined that, once 
Representative Young files properly completed amendments to his 
Financial Disclosure Statements the matter will be closed.

Other Committee investigative actions

    In addition to the publicly disclosed matters discussed in 
this Report, the Committee either commenced review of, or 
continued to review from the 112th Congress, 54 investigative 
matters. Of these 54 matters which remain confidential, 44 were 
resolved in the 113th Congress.