[House Report 117-706]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Union Calendar No. 522
117th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 117-706
_______________________________________________________________________
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON ETHICS
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
January 2, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
50-202 WASHINGTON : 2023
COMMITTEE ON ETHICS
SUSAN WILD, Pennsylvania MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi
Chairwoman Acting Ranking Member
DEAN PHILLIPS, Minnesota DAVE JOYCE, Ohio
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas JOHN H. RUTHERFORD, Florida
MONDAIRE JONES, New York KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota
REPORT STAFF
Thomas A. Rust, Chief Counsel/Staff Director
Donna Herbert, Director of Administration
Brittney Pescatore, Director of Investigations
Stephanie Richards, Director of Financial Disclosure
Sarah Myers-Mutschall, Director of Advice and Education
David Arrojo, Counsel to the Chairwoman
Kelle Strickland, Counsel to the Acting Ranking Member
Caroline Taylor, Investigator
Nicholas Goranites, Financial Disclosure Clerk
Peyton Wilmer, Investigative Clerk
Nicholas Long, Staff Assistant
Janet Foster, Senior Counsel
Tamar Nedzar, Senior Counsel
C. Ezekiel Ross, Senior Counsel
Sydney Bellwoar, Counsel
Melissa Chong, Counsel
Christine Gwinn, Counsel
LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL
House of Representatives,
Committee on Ethics,
Washington, DC, January 2, 2023.
Hon. Cheryl L. Johnson,
Clerk, House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
Dear Ms. Johnson: 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
117th Congress.''
Sincerely,
Susan Wild,
Chairwoman.
Michael Guest,
Acting Ranking Member.
C O N T E N T S
----------
OVERVIEW......................................................... 1
I. INTRODUCTION.....................................................3
II. ADVICE AND EDUCATION.............................................4
III. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE............................................10
IV. COMMITTEE RULES.................................................12
VI. FINE APPEALS....................................................13
VII. DISSEMINATION OF MANIPULATED MEDIA..............................14
VIII.INVESTIGATIONS..................................................15
APPENDIX I: RELEVANT HOUSE RULES................................. 33
APPENDIX II: ADVISORY MEMORANDA.................................. 45
APPENDIX III: COMMITTEE RULES.................................... 162
APPENDIX IV: PUBLIC STATEMENTS................................... 214
Union Calendar No. 522
117th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 117-706
======================================================================
SUMMARY OF ACTIVITIES
ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS
_______
January 2, 2023.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State on the State of the Union and ordered to be printed
_______
Ms. Wild and Mr. Guest, from the Committee on Ethics,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
Acknowledgement
The Committee acknowledges the tragic loss of its former
Ranking Member Representative Jackie Walorski of Indiana.
Ranking Member Walorski's dedication to public service and the
institution is 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 Committee's professional staff is
required by rule to be nonpartisan.
In the 117th Congress, the Committee was led initially by
Chairman Theodore E. Deutch and Ranking Member Jackie Walorski
and then by Chairwoman Susan Wild and Acting Ranking Member
Michael Guest. The Members appointed at the beginning of the
Congress were Dean Phillips, Veronica Escobar, Mondaire Jones,
Dave Joyce, John H. Rutherford, and Kelly Armstrong.
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 117th Congress, including
15 times in 2021 and 9 times in 2022.
Within the scope of its training, advice and education,
travel, and financial disclosure responsibilities, the
Committee:
Issued nearly 750 formal advisory opinions
regarding ethics rules;
Reviewed and approved more than 2,900
requests to accept privately-sponsored, officially-
connected travel;
Fielded more than 36,000 informal telephone
calls, emails, and in-person requests for guidance on
ethics issues;
Released 25 advisory memoranda on various
ethics topics to the House;
Provided training to over 14,000 House
Members, officers, and employees each year, and
reviewed their certifications for satisfying the
House's mandatory training requirements;
Received nearly 9,400 Financial Disclosure
Statements and amendments filed by House Members,
officers, senior staff, and House candidates; and
Received more than 4,000 Periodic
Transaction Reports filed by House Members, officers,
and senior staff, containing thousands of transactions.
In the 117th Congress, the Committee also had
responsibility to consider appeals of fines imposed by the
Sergeant at Arms pursuant to House Resolutions 38 and 73, and
House Rule II, clause 3(g). In the 117th Congress, the
Committee was notified of 111 fines involving 20 Members and
considered appeals of 47 of those fines.
In addition, the Committee actively investigates
allegations against House Members, officers, and employees,
using a mix of 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 Rules 16(c) or 18(a),
the impanelment of investigative subcommittees (ISC),
consideration of formal complaints, and the review of
transmittals from the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE).
Committee review of a matter in any of these formats is an
``investigation'' under House and Committee rules. Also, it is
not uncommon for a matter to be investigated by the Committee
in more than one of these formats over the course of the
Committee's overall review of that matter. For example, as
discussed further in this report, from time to time the
Committee may begin an investigation under Committee Rule 18(a)
and subsequently determine that it is appropriate to continue
the investigation through an ISC.
The initiation or status of an investigative matter may or
may not be publicly disclosed, depending on the circumstances
of the individual matter. However, the fact that the Committee
is investigating a particular matter, opts to investigate a
matter in one format instead of another, is required or chooses
to make a public statement regarding a pending investigative
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 117th Congress, within the scope of its
investigative responsibilities, the Committee:
Commenced or continued investigative fact-
gathering regarding 72 separate investigative matters;
Impaneled three ISCs, in the matters of
Delegate Michael San Nicolas, Representative Jeff
Fortenberry, and Representative Madison Cawthorn;
Held 12 ISC meetings;
Filed 11 reports with the House totaling
approximately 350 pages regarding various investigative
matters;
Publicly addressed 50 matters, described in
Section VI of this report;
Resolved 6 additional matters;
Conducted 42 voluntary witness interviews;
Authorized the issuance of 1 subpoena;
Conducted 1 interview pursuant to subpoena;
and
Reviewed over 125,000 pages of documents.
There were a total of 26 investigative matters pending
before the Committee as of January 2, 2023.
All of the Committee's work as summarized in this report is
made possible by the Committee's talented professional,
nonpartisan staff. The Members of the Committee wish to
acknowledge their hard work and dedication to the Committee and
the House. In addition, the Committee wishes to thank its
departing Members for their service and for the thoughtfulness
and collegiality they showed during their time on the
Committee.
I. INTRODUCTION
House Rule XI, clause 1(d), requires each committee to
submit to the House, not later than January 2 of each odd-
numbered 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 entirety of the 117th
Congress.
The jurisdiction of the Committee on Ethics is defined in
clauses 3(g), 4(d)(1) and 6(c)(5) of House Rule II, 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. 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. 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 Chair 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 Chair 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
Chair 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 117th 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 117th
Congress, Committee attorneys responded to more than 36,000
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. 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. In the 117th Congress, the Committee
issued an updated print of the Manual, including revised travel
and gift sections. The Committee also updated the Highlights of
the House Ethics Rules. All current Committee publications,
including the House Ethics Manual 2022 Print and the Highlights
of the House Ethics Rules 2022 Print, are available from the
Committee's office and their text is posted in a mobile-
friendly searchable format on the Committee's website: https://
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 117th Congress were as follows:
The 2021 Outside Earned Income Limit and
Salaries Triggering the Financial Disclosure
Requirement and Post-Employment Restrictions Applicable
to House Officers and Employees (February 8, 2021);
Ethics Guidance Regarding Financial Interest
in Funding Requests (April 12, 2021);
Upcoming Financial Disclosure Filing
Deadline & Automatic Extension (April 26, 2021);
Reminder of Financial Disclosure Filing
Deadline & Assistance Available (July 19, 2021);
Reminder of Financial Disclosure Filing
Deadline (August 6, 2021);
Reminder of Financial Disclosure Filing
Deadline (August 10, 2021);
Joint Afghanistan Guidance (August 30,
2021);
Important Information Relating to Hurricane
Ida (September 10, 2021);
Joint Guidance Regarding Redistricting
(September 10, 2021);
Reminder about Annual Ethics Training
Requirements for 2021 (December 3, 2021);
Joint Guidance Regarding Important
Information Relating to Central U.S. Tornados (December
14, 2021);
Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act CY2021
Reporting (December 15, 2021);
The 2022 Outside Earned Income Limit and
Salaries Triggering the Financial Disclosure
Requirement and Post-Employment Restrictions Applicable
to House Officers and Employees (January 13, 2022);
Joint Guidance Regarding Ukraine
Humanitarian Relief Efforts (March 4, 2022);
Upcoming Financial Disclosure Clinics &
Training (April 14, 2022);
Guest Policy Change and Reminder of Gift
Rules for Attendance at Events (September 19, 2022);
Annual Member Ethics Training Now Live
(September 22, 2022);
Joint Guidance Relating to Hurricanes Fiona
and Ian (September 29, 2022);
Upcoming Live Ethics Training Session
(October 7, 2022);
Two Upcoming Live, In-Person Ethics Training
Sessions (October 24, 2022);
Member Swearing-in Events (November 29,
2022);
Reminder about Annual Ethics Training
Requirement for 2022 (December 15, 2022);
Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act CY 2022
Reporting Reminder (December 15, 2022);
Negotiations for Future Employment and
Restrictions on Post-Employment for House Members and
Officers (December 15, 2022); and
Negotiations for Future Employment and
Restrictions on Post-Employment for House Staff
(December 15, 2022).
A copy of each of these advisory memoranda is included as
Appendix II to this Report.
The Committee also submits a report each month of the
Committee's activities to the Committee on House Administration
(CHA). Finally, with this report, 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 publishes the following summary chart in the interest
of transparency.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
ETHICS TRAINING
Clause 3(a)(6) of House Rule XI, which originated in the
110th Congress, requires all House Members and employees 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 new House Members and employees to
complete ethics training within 60 days of the commencement of
their service to the House.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\In 2022, the senior staff rate was $135,468 per year, or a
monthly salary above $11,289. 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.
\3\The requirement that new Members receive training within 60 days
of commencement of their service to the House was added to House Rule
XI in the 114th Congress.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pursuant to its obligations under Rule XI, the Committee
held 49 ethics training sessions during 2021 and 33 during
2022. During the 117th Congress, all Members, officers, and
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
Members and 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
Members and 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
importance for senior staff.
In 2021, the Committee trained 310 employees at live ethics
briefings, and more than 14,700 used one of the on-demand
training options. During 2022, the Committee trained 630
employees at live ethics briefings, and more than 14,200
through one of the on-demand training options. The total number
of employees who completed ethics training for 2022 will be
determined after January 31, 2023, the date that House Rule XI
established as the deadline for employees to certify completion
of the ethics training requirement for 2022.
In addition to the training required under House Rule XI,
the Committee also provided training in several other contexts.
The House will include 74 new Members in the 118th Congress,
most of whom have not previously served in the House. The
Committee made a presentation to the Members-elect of the 118th
Congress during New Member Orientation and participated in two
issue-specific panels. 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 are discussed further in
Section III.
Committee staff also participated in approximately 5
briefings sponsored by or held for the members of outside
organizations. In addition, Committee staff led approximately 6
briefings for visiting international dignitaries from a variety
of countries, including North Macedonia, Ukraine, and Kosovo.
ADVISORY OPINION LETTERS
The Committee's Office of Advice and Education, under the
direction and supervision of the Committee's Chair and Ranking
Member, prepared and issued 663 private advisory opinions
during the 117th Congress: 380 in 2021 and 283 in 2022.
Opinions issued by the Committee in the 117th 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.
Since 2007, the Committee has conducted a thorough review of
each proposed privately-sponsored trip.
Committee approval of a proposed trip does not reflect an
endorsement of the trip sponsor or a determination regarding
the safety or security of a proposed trip. Instead, Committee
approval is limited to the question of whether the proposed
trip complies with the relevant laws, rules, or regulations. To
that end, the Committee's nonpartisan, professional staff
recommends changes where necessary to bring a proposed trip
into compliance with relevant laws, rules, or regulations and,
on occasion, informs House Members and employees that a
proposed trip is not permissible. The Committee recognizes both
the significant benefit the public receives when their
Representatives and their Representatives' staff receive hands-
on education and experience, as well as the mandate that
outside groups be appropriately limited in what gifts and
support they are allowed to provide to Members of Congress and
congressional staff.
The Committee is directed by House Rules to develop and
revise as necessary guidelines and regulations governing the
acceptance of privately-sponsored, officially-connected travel
by House Members, officers, and employees.\4\ The Committee
issued initial travel regulations in a pair of memoranda dated
February 20 and March 14, 2007. At the end of the 112th
Congress, the Committee adopted new travel regulations (Travel
Regulations). The new Travel Regulations were issued on
December 27, 2012, and were effective for all trips beginning
on or after April 1, 2013. In the 116th Congress, the Committee
adopted revised Travel Regulations and FGDA Regulations. The
new Travel Regulations were effective for all trips starting on
or after April 1, 2021. In general, the Committee requires that
any House Member, officer, or employee who wishes to accept an
offer of privately-sponsored, officially-connected travel must
submit all required paperwork to the Committee at least 30 days
prior to the start of the trip.\5\ However, the 30-day
requirement does not apply to certain types of trips, and the
Committee retains authority to approve requests submitted after
that deadline in exceptional circumstances.\6\ When the
Committee opts to approve a request filed after the general
deadline, the approval letter sent to the traveler--which must
ultimately be publicly disclosed--notes that fact.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\House Rule XXV, clause 5(i).
\5\Travel Regulations at Part 500--Committee Approval Process.
\6\ Id. at Sec. 501.1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Under the travel approval process established by the
Committee to implement this rule, the Committee reviewed more
than 1,200 requests to accept privately-sponsored, officially-
connected travel, and issued letters approving more than 1,000
such requests in 2021. In 2022, the Committee reviewed over
2,100 requests to accept privately-sponsored, officially-
connected travel, and issued letters approving over 1,800 such
requests.
House Rules and the Committee's Travel Regulations require
all House Members, officers, and employees who receive
Committee approval to accept privately-sponsored, officially-
connected travel to file detailed paperwork about the trip with
the Clerk within 15 days of the conclusion of the trip.\7\ The
Committee also reviewed the post-travel disclosure forms filed
by the traveler for each approved trip and requested amendments
or other remedial action by the traveler when deemed
necessary.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\House Rule XXV, clause 5(b)(1)(A)(ii); Travel Regulations at
Part 600--Post-Travel Disclosure.
\8\From time to time, a traveler may inadvertently fail to file all
of the required paperwork with their post-travel submission. That is
not an indication that the information was not provided to the
Committee prior to the trip and before the Committee approved the
request, only that the traveler's subsequent submission was incomplete.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The post-travel filings are made available to the public in
a searchable online database on the Clerk's website, at http://
clerk.house.gov/public_disc/giftTravel-search.aspx. The public,
the media, and outside groups have used this valuable resource
for years, and the Committee anticipates that they will
continue to do so. The Committee requires those Members,
officers, and employees who are required to file financial
disclosure statements, as discussed in Section III, to also
provide information about privately-sponsored, officially-
connected travel on their financial disclosure filings, but the
public should be aware that much more detailed and timely
public filings regarding such travel are required, and the most
authoritative source of those filings is the Clerk's website.
III. FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
Title I of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (EIGA), as
amended (5 U.S.C. app. 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 in 2012 to add a requirement that
financial disclosure filers must report certain securities
transactions over $1,000 within 30 days of notice, but no later
than 45 days after the transaction. The Committee has termed
these interim reports ``Periodic Transaction Reports'' or
``PTRs.''
Financial disclosure filings are not intended to be net
worth statements, nor are they well suited to that purpose. As
the Commission on Administrative Review of the 95th Congress
stated in recommending broader financial disclosure
requirements: ``The objectives of financial disclosure are to
inform the public about the financial interests of government
officials in order to increase public confidence in the
integrity of government and to deter potential conflicts of
interest.''\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\House Comm'n on Admin. Review, Financial Ethics, H. Doc. 95-73,
96th Cong., 1st Sess. 6 (1977).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
All Members of the House, including Members who are serving
the first year of their first term, are required to file a
Statement. In addition, any officer or employee of the House
who was paid at or above 120 percent of the minimum pay for
Executive Branch GS-15 (the ``senior staff'' rate) for at least
60 days in a calendar year must file a Statement on or before
May 15 of the following year. Certain other employees,
including those designated by a Member as a ``principal
assistant'' for financial disclosure purposes and employees who
are shared staff of three or more offices, are also subject to
some financial disclosure filing requirements.
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, nearly all
Members and staff used the online electronic filing system to
submit their calendar year 2021 Statements. Specifically, 95%
of Members and House staff used the online system to draft and
submit their 2021 Statements.
The Committee engages in substantial training efforts to
assist filers with completing their Statements and PTRs. In
2021, the Committee held two briefings for Members, officers,
and employees. In 2022, the Committee held three briefings for
Members, officers, and employees and three walk-in clinics to
support filers' use of the electronic filing system for
Statements and PTRs.
For the 117th 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 encourages all financial disclosure
filers to avail themselves of opportunities to seek and receive
information and assistance.
For calendar year 2021, the Legislative Resource Center of
the Clerk's office referred a total of 4,048 Financial
Disclosure Statements to the Committee for review. Of those,
3,405 were Statements filed by current or new House Members or
employees, and 643 were Statements filed by candidates for the
House. The Clerk's office also referred a total of 1,514 PTRs
to the Committee for review. The Committee received 653 PTRs
from Members and 861 PTRs from officers and employees.
For calendar year 2022, the Legislative Resource Center of
the Clerk's office referred a total of 4,596 Statements to the
Committee for review.\10\ Of those, 3,597 were Statements filed
by current or new House Members or employees, and 999 were
Statements filed by candidates for the House. The Clerk's
office also referred a total of 1,397 PTRs to the Committee for
review. The Committee received 590 PTRs from Members and 807
PTRs from officers and employees.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\In 2021, due to the unprecedented challenges created by the
COVID-19 pandemic, the Committee exercised its authority under EIGA to
automatically grant all House Members and employees who were required
to file an annual Financial Disclosure Statement the full 90-day
extension permitted by law.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 after the
amendment has been filed. Amendments are made publicly
available in the same manner as other financial disclosure
filings. 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.
On February 28, 2022, and March 2, 2022, the Committee
received referrals from the Office of Congressional Ethics
(OCE) regarding allegations that several Members may have
failed to timely file Periodic Transaction Reports (PTRs) for
various reportable transactions. These referrals are discussed
in more detail below. The Committee voted to dismiss the
referrals. The Committee concluded that there was not clear
evidence that the errors and omissions in the Members' PTRs
were knowing or willful and that the Members were generally
unclear on the requirements relating to PTR filings. The
Committee worked with each Member, and they all made diligent
efforts to take appropriate remedial actions and ensure their
continued compliance with applicable financial disclosure
requirements. Accurate and timely FD filings are an important
part of the House's conflict of interest protections, and the
Committee takes the statutory FD requirements and its oversight
of them very seriously. The Committee is working to address
various programmatic issues raised by the referrals.
More information about financial disclosure, including the
Committee's instruction booklet for filers and blank copies of
Statement and PTR forms, is available on the Committee's
website, at https://ethics.house.gov/financial-dislosure. In
addition, financial disclosure filings of Members and
candidates and other information about financial disclosure is
available on the Clerk's website, at http://clerk.house.gov/
public_disc/financial.aspx.
IV. COMMITTEE RULES
After the beginning of each Congress, the Committee must
adopt rules for that Congress. On February 25, 2021, the
Committee met and adopted the Committee rules for the 117th
Congress. The substance of the Committee rules for the 117th
Congress was largely identical to the amended rules adopted in
the 116th Congress.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\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. 21 (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A copy of the Committee Rules for the 117th Congress is
included as Appendix III to this Report.
VI. FINE APPEALS
On January 12, 2021, the House passed House Resolution 38,
which stated, in part, that during a period in which the
Speaker has announced a public health emergency due to a novel
coronavirus to be in effect, ``the Sergeant-at-Arms [(SAA)] is
authorized and directed to impose a fine against a Member,
Delegate, or the Resident Commissioner for the failure to wear
a mask in contravention of the Speaker's announced policies of
January 4, 2021.''\12\ A fine imposed under House Resolution 38
``shall be treated as though imposed under clause 3(g) of rule
II.''\13\ The relevant portion of House Rule II, adopted in the
115th Congress, establishes a process for fines imposed by the
SAA against Members for the use of electronic devices to take
recordings on the House floor; the Rule provides for a $500
fine for the first offense and a $2,500 fine for any subsequent
offense. Under House Rule II, a Member who is fined by the SAA
pursuant to that rule ``may appeal the fine in writing to the
Committee on Ethics not later than 30 calendar days'' after
notification of the fine.\14\ The Committee has 30 calendar
days to consider the appeal, and a fine will be upheld unless
the appeal is agreed to by a majority of the Committee.\15\
Upon a determination regarding the appeal, the Chair of the
Committee shall notify the Member, the Speaker, the SAA, and
the Chief Administrative Officer, and shall make the
notification publicly available.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\H. Res. 38 Sec. 4(a)(1) (117th Cong.).
\13\See id. Sec. 4(a)(2); see also H. Res. 85 Sec. 8(b) (117th
Cong.).
\14\House Rule II, clause 3(g)(3)(B).
\15\House Rule II, clause 3(g)(3)(C).
\16\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On February 2, 2021, the House passed House Resolution 73,
which directed the SAA to fine Members for failure to complete
security screening prior to entrance to the House Chamber.
Fines pursuant to House Resolution 73 operated in a similar
manner to fines pursuant to House Resolution 38. A Member who
was fined pursuant to House Resolution 73 could appeal the fine
to the Committee; the Committee had 30 days to consider any
appeal; if a majority of the Committee did not agree to the
appeal within that time, the fine was upheld; and upon a
determination on the appeal, the Chair of the Committee was
directed to notify the Member, the Speaker, the SAA, and the
Chief Administrative Officer, and to make the notification
publicly available.\17\ Unlike House Resolution 38 fines, the
Chair of the Committee was also required to make public the
initial notification of the fine, prior to the Committee's
determination on the matter.\18\ House Resolution 73 also
provided for a $5,000 fine for the first offense and a $10,000
fine for any subsequent offense.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\H. Res. 73. Sec. 1(a)-(b) (117th Cong.).
\18\H. Res. 73. Sec. 1(a)(3) (117th Cong.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation and adjudication of the fine appeal process
under House Resolution 38 and House Resolution 73 was a
significant drain on the Committee's resources in the 117th
Congress. On March 9, 2021, the Committee adopted its ``Special
Policies and Procedures Relating to Fine Notifications and
Appeals.'' The SAA sent the Committee 101 notifications of
fines pursuant to House Resolution 38 and 10 notifications of
fines pursuant to House Resolution 73. The Committee received
37 timely appeals of fines pursuant to House Resolution 38 and
10 timely appeals of fines pursuant to House Resolution 73. The
Committee held 5 executive session meetings in which 9 Members
met with the Committee to present their arguments for their
appeal. The Committee voted on each timely appeal, including
holding votes at 11 executive session meetings. A majority of
the Members of the Committee did not agree to the any of the
appeals of fines pursuant to House Resolution 38. A majority of
the Members agreed to six appeals of fines pursuant to House
Resolution 73.
VII. DISSEMINATION OF MANIPULATED MEDIA
On January 8, 2021, the House passed House Resolution 8,
which stated, in part, that the Committee was directed to
report to the House, not later than December 31, 2021, any
recommended amendments to the Code of Official Conduct, as well
as any accompanying regulations, intended to address the
circumstances and instances, if any, for which a Member,
Delegate, Resident Commissioner, officer, or employee of the
House ``may be subject to discipline for dissemination by
electronic means, including by social media, of any image,
video, or audio file that has been distorted or manipulated
with the intent to mislead the public.''\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\H. Res. 8 Sec. 3(y) (117th Cong.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee did not recommend any amendments to the Code
of Official Conduct or any accompanying regulations. However,
the Committee has previously issued guidance on this topic.
On January 28, 2020, the Committee circulated a general
advisory opinion to the House community addressing the
``Intentional Use of Audio-Visual Distortions & Deep
Fakes.''\20\ In that general advisory opinion, the Committee
advised that Members ``must exercise care in communicating,
especially when using electronic communication[.]''\21\ The
Committee explained that ``Members have a duty, and a First
Amendment right, to contribute to the public discourse,
including through parody and satire. However, manipulation of
images and videos that are intended to mislead the public can
harm the discourse and reflect discreditably on the House,''
and ``Members, officers, and employees posting deep fakes or
other audio-visual distortions intended to mislead the public
may be in violation of the Code of Official Conduct.''\22\
Accordingly, the Committee advised that ``[p]rior to
disseminating any image, video, or audio file by electronic
means, including social media, Members and staff are expected
to take reasonable efforts to consider whether such
representations are deep fakes or intentionally distorted to
mislead the public.''\23\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\Comm. on Ethics, Intentional Use of Audio-Visual Distortions &
Deep Fakes (Jan. 28, 2020).
\21\Id. at 1.
\22\Id.
\23\Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
VIII. 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.
As a general matter, the Committee's investigative
jurisdiction extends to current House Members, officers and
employees.\24\ When a Member, officer, or employee, who is the
subject of a Committee investigation, resigns, the Committee
loses jurisdiction over the individual. In the 117th Congress,
four individuals resigned from the House while the Committee
had an open investigation regarding them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\24\House Rule XI, clause 3(a)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee may not undertake an investigation of an
alleged violation that occurred before the third previous
Congress unless the Committee determines that the alleged
violation is directly related to an alleged violation that
occurred in a more recent Congress.\25\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\House Rule XI, clause 3(b)(3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In most cases, the Committee only investigates matters that
allegedly occurred while the individual was a House Member,
officer, or employee. However, the Committee has asserted
jurisdiction over alleged conduct that may have violated laws,
regulations, or standards of conduct, which occurred prior to a
Member's swearing-in but in connection with a successful
campaign for the House of Representatives. Further, the
Committee is required to investigate whenever a Member,
officer, or employee of the House is convicted of a felony,
regardless of whether the underlying conduct occurred while the
individual was a Member, officer, or employee of the House.
As a general matter, the Committee's investigations are
conducted either pursuant to authorization by the Chair and
Ranking Member, under Committee Rule 18(a), or pursuant to a
vote by the Committee to impanel an ISC. Most investigations
are conducted pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).\26\ 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 is 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.\27\ Members of the Committee can, and do,
attend and participate in voluntary interviews with witnesses
in both 18(a) and ISC investigations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\26\An investigation of a formal complaint or information offered
as a complaint pursuant to Committee Rule 15 is conducted pursuant to a
similar rule, Committee Rule 16(c), until an ISC is impaneled or the
question of whether to impanel one is placed on the Committee's agenda.
\27\The mechanism for issuing a subpoena by the Committee or an ISC
does differ. Where an ISC has been impaneled, it can authorize a
subpoena, to be signed by the Committee's Chair 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 Chair.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 impanel
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 past 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.\28\ Maintaining a confidential
investigation also avoids unnecessarily tarnishing a Member's
reputation before a determination of wrongdoing has been made.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\See, e.g., House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations
Relating to Representative Laura Richardson, H. Rept. 112-642, 112th
Cong. 2d Sess. (2012).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The fact that an investigation is conducted in a
confidential manner does not preclude the Committee from making
a public statement at the end of the investigation. For
example, in recent Congresses, the Committee has issued public
reports to the House and/or letters of reproval in a number of
investigative matters that were initiated by the Committee and
that had not previously been publicly disclosed by the
Committee.\29\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\See, e.g., House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations
Relating to Elizabeth Esty, H. Rept 115-1093, 115th Cong. 2d Sess.
(2018); House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to
Representative David McKinley, H. Rept. 114-795, 114th Cong. 2d Sess.
(2016); House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to
Representative Phil Gingrey, H. Rept. 113-664, 113th Cong. 2d Sess.
(2014).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\30\ However, most Committee investigations begin
when the Committee, on its own initiative, undertakes an
investigation. In the 117th Congress, the Committee commenced
or continued investigative fact-gathering regarding 72 separate
investigative matters, most of which were begun at the
Committee's initiative. Those matters also included referrals
from the OCE. In the 117th Congress, the OCE referred 18
matters to the Committee, 15 with a recommendation for further
review, 2 with a recommendation that all of the allegations be
dismissed, and one that was referred without a recommendation
due to a tie vote of OCE's Board.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\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;
(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).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In the 116th Congress, the House issued a reprimand and a
fine at the recommendation of the Committee and an
investigative subcommittee in one matter. The Committee also
issued a reproval in one matter. Including those two matters,
since 2008, the Committee has recommended that the House issue
a censure in one matter, recommended in two matters that the
House issue a reprimand, and issued 15 reprovals. Nine of those
resolutions followed investigations initiated by the Committee
under its own authority, while nine of those resolutions
followed recommendations by the OCE that the Committee review
the allegations. In addition to these formal sanctions, the
Committee has admonished 6 Members, officers, and employees
since 2008.\31\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\31\An admonishment is not a formal sanction of the Committee or
the House. It is a warning that certain conduct can be found in
violation of House Rules and potentially lead to sanction.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The OCE is 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).\32\
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\Special Task Force on Ethics Enforcement, Report of the
Democratic Members of the Special Task Force on Ethics Enforcement, (H.
Rept. 110-1, 110th Cong. 1st Sess.) (Comm. Print 2007).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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 believed that ``the timeline
requirements instituted by the new process are critical:
matters will spend at most three months under consideration by
the Board of the OCE before being referred to the Committee for
resolution.''\33\ 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\33\Id. at 14. The 18 OCE referrals received by the Committee in
the 117th Congress were transmitted an average of 122 days after the
start of the preliminary review phase.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.''\34\ 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 116th Congress one investigation that spanned multiple
Congresses required the Committee to review more than 200,000
pages of documents to resolve the matter.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\Committee Rule 17A(a).
\35\House Comm. on Ethics, In the Matter of Allegations Relating to
Representative David Schweikert, H. Rept. 116-46, 116th Cong. 2d Sess.
(2020).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
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.\36\
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 117th
Congress, the Committee did opt to defer several investigations
at the request of DOJ, as described further below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\DOJ will not lose jurisdiction to continue an investigation and
pursue prosecution, if it determines that is appropriate, in the event
that a Member or employee leaves the House, whether through resignation
or defeat for reelection.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee also received information offered as a
referral from the Select Committee to Investigate the January
6th Attack on the United States Capitol. The information was
received by the Committee on December 27, 2022.
The Committee publicly addressed 50 investigative matters
during the 117th Congress. In addition to confidential matters,
the Committee also carried over several public matters from the
116th Congress. In the 117th Congress, the Committee continued
to address the matters concerning Representative Sanford
Bishop, Representative Bill Huizenga, Representative Steven
Palazzo, and Delegate Michael San Nicolas. A chronological
overview of public statements made by the Committee in the
117th Congress regarding investigative matters follows.
On March 1, 2021, the Committee made public the OCE Report
in the matter of Delegate Michael F.Q. San Nicolas.
On March 1, 2021, the Committee announced that, pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review allegations
referred by the OCE regarding Representative Steven Palazzo.
On April 9, 2021, the Committee announced that, pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a), it would review allegations that
Representative Matt Gaetz may have engaged in sexual misconduct
and/or illicit drug use, shared inappropriate images or videos
on the House floor, misused state identification records,
converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or accepted a
bribe, improper gratuity, or impermissible gift.
On April 9, 2021, the Committee announced that, pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a), it would review allegations that
Representative Tom Reed may have engaged in sexual misconduct.
On May 20, 2021, the Committee announced it had unanimously
voted to re-authorize an ISC for the 117th Congress to review
allegations involving Delegate Michael F.Q. San Nicolas.
On July 26, 2021, the Committee transmitted a Report to the
House regarding allegations relating to Representative Joyce
Beatty.
On July 30, 2021, the Committee transmitted a Report to the
House regarding allegations relating to Representative Hank
Johnson.
On September 28, 2021, the Committee transmitted a Report
to the House regarding allegations relating to Representative
Al Green.
On September 28, 2021, the Committee transmitted a Report
to the House regarding allegations relating to Representative
Sheila Jackson Lee.
On October 21, 2021, the Committee announced that, pursuant
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review
allegations referred by the OCE regarding Representative Tom
Malinowski.
On October 21, 2021, the Committee announced that, pursuant
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review
allegations referred by the OCE regarding Representative Alex
Mooney.
On October 21, 2021, the Committee announced that, pursuant
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review
allegations referred by the OCE regarding Representative Jim
Hagedorn.
On November 29, 2021, the Committee announced that,
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review
allegations referred by the OCE regarding John Sample.
On December 3, 2021, the Committee announced it had
unanimously voted to establish an ISC with regard to
allegations that Representative Jeff Fortenberry accepted
illegal campaign contributions and engaged in a scheme to
falsify or conceal material facts and/or made false statements,
during a federal investigation into his campaign committee's
alleged acceptance of illegal campaign contributions.
On January 24, 2022, the Committee announced that, pursuant
to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review
allegations referred by the OCE regarding Rep. Doug Lamborn.
On February 7, 2022, the Committee transmitted a Report to
the House regarding allegations relating to Representative
Jamaal Bowman.
On March 22, 2022, the Committee announced that a majority
of the Committee did not vote to dismiss allegations referred
by the OCE regarding Representative Ilhan Omar.
On April 1, 2022, the Committee released a statement that
Representative Jeff Fortenberry had resigned from Congress,
and, as a consequence, the ISC and the Committee no longer had
jurisdiction over him.
On May 23, 2022, the Committee transmitted a Report to the
House regarding allegations relating to Representative Madison
Cawthorn.
On May 23, 2022, the Committee announced it had unanimously
voted to establish an ISC with regard to allegations that
Representative Madison Cawthorn improperly promoted a
cryptocurrency in which he may have had an undisclosed
financial interest, and/or engaged in an improper relationship
with an individual employed on his congressional staff.
On May 23, 2022, the Committee announced that, pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review allegations
referred by the OCE regarding Representative Ronny Jackson.
On May 23, 2022, the Committee announced that, pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review allegations
referred by the OCE regarding Representative Alex Mooney.
On May 31, 2022, the Committee announced that, pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review allegations
referred by the OCE regarding Representative Pat Fallon.
On May 31, 2022, the Committee announced that, pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review allegations
referred by the OCE regarding Representative Chris Jacobs.
On May 31, 2022, the Committee announced that, pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review allegations
referred by the OCE regarding Representative John Rutherford.
On June 24, 2022, the Committee transmitted a Report to the
House regarding allegations relating to Delegate Michael F.Q.
San Nicolas, and announced its referral of substantial evidence
of potential violations of federal criminal law to the
Department of Justice.
On July 22, 2022, the Committee transmitted a Report to the
House regarding allegations relating to Representative Judy
Chu.
On July 29, 2022, the Committee transmitted a Report to the
House regarding allegations relating to the arrests of Members
of the House during a protest outside the United States Supreme
Court on July 19, 2022.
On July 29, 2022, the Committee announced its dismissal of
allegations referred by OCE regarding Representatives Pat
Fallon, Chris Jacobs, and Thomas Suozzi.
On July 29, 2022, the Committee transmitted a Report to the
House regarding allegations relating to Representative Andy
Levin.
On August 24, 2022, the Committee announced its dismissal
of allegations referred by OCE regarding Representative John
Rutherford.
On November 21, 2022, the Committee announced that,
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review
allegations referred by the OCE regarding Representative
Carolyn Maloney.
On November 28, 2022, the Committee announced that,
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), it would continue to review
allegations referred by the OCE regarding Representative
Kaiali'i Kahele.
On December 6, 2022, the Committee transmitted a Report to
the House regarding allegations relating to Representative
Madison Cawthorn.
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. Those statements, along with any
attachments referenced in the statements, are available on the
Committee's website. All of the Committee's Reports as filed
with the House are also available on the Committee's website.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to the Arrests of Members of the
House During a Protest Outside the United States Supreme Court
on July 19, 2022
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on July 27, 2022, to consider
the arrests of Representatives Alma Adams, Cori Bush, Katherine
Clark, Madeline Dean, Veronica Escobar, Sara Jacobs, Barbara
Lee, Andy Levin, Carolyn Maloney, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,
Ilhan Omar, Ayanna Pressley, Jan Schakowsky, Jackie Speier,
Rashida Tlaib, Nydia Velazquez, and Bonnie Watson Coleman for
crowding, obstructing, or incommoding, during a protest outside
the United States Supreme Court Building in Washington, D.C.,
on July 29, 2022. Each Member paid or stated that they intended
to pay a $50 collateral payment, whereupon the local court
would dispose of the charge. The legal proceedings related to
the arrests were expected to be resolved with no further
action.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of the
Members. In reaching this decision, the Committee considered
the scope and nature of the violations, and determined it to be
one for which review by an ISC was not warranted. On July 29,
2022, the Committee submitted a Report to the House describing
the facts and its findings regarding this matter, as well as
its determination to take no further action in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Joyce Beatty
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on July 20, 2021, to consider
the arrest of Representative Joyce Beatty for crowding,
obstructing, or incommoding, during a protest inside a Senate
Office Building in Washington, D.C., on July 15, 2021.
Representative Beatty forfeited a $50 collateral payment,
whereupon the local court disposed of the charge. The legal
proceedings related to Representative Beatty's arrest were thus
resolved.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of
Representative Beatty. In reaching this decision, the Committee
considered the scope and nature of the violations, and
determined it to be one for which review by an ISC was not
warranted. On July 26, 2021, the Committee submitted a Report
to the House describing the facts and its findings regarding
this matter, as well as its determination to take no further
action in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Sanford Bishop,
Jr.
On February 10, 2020, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Sanford Bishop, Jr.'s campaign
committee reported disbursements that were not attributable to
bona fide campaign or political purposes, and that
Representative Bishop authorized expenditures from his Members'
Representational Allowance (MRA) that were not for permissible
official expenses, in violation of federal law, House rules and
other standards of conduct.
On July 31, 2020, the Committee released the OCE Report and
Findings, along with Representative Bishop's response, 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 117th Congress, the Committee
had not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Bishop was reelected to the House for the 118th
Congress.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Jamaal Bowman
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on February 4, 2022, to
consider the arrest of Representative Jamaal Bowman for
unauthorized entry during a protest outside the Capitol
Building in Washington, D.C., on January 20, 2022.
Representative Bowman stated he intended to pay a $200
collateral payment, whereupon the local court would dispose of
the charge. The legal proceedings related to Representative
Bowman's arrest were expected to be resolved with no further
action.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of
Representative Bowman. In reaching this decision, the Committee
considered the scope and nature of the violations and
determined it to be one for which review by an ISC was not
warranted. On February 7, 2022, the Committee submitted a
Report to the House describing the facts and its findings
regarding this matter, as well as its determination to take no
further action in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Madison
Cawthorn
On May 23, 2022, the Committee announced that it had
unanimously voted on May 11, 2022, to establish an ISC with
jurisdiction to investigate whether Representative Madison
Cawthorn may have: improperly promoted a cryptocurrency in
which he had an undisclosed financial interest, and/or had an
improper relationship with a member of his congressional staff.
At the completion of its investigation, the ISC unanimously
concluded there was substantial evidence that Representative
Cawthorn promoted a cryptocurrency in which he had a financial
interest in violation of rules protecting against conflicts of
interest; that he failed to file timely reports to the House
disclosing his transactions relating to the cryptocurrency; and
that his purchase of the cryptocurrency was on more generous
terms than were available to the general public, resulting in
an improper gift. The ISC also unanimously concluded that
Representative Cawthorn did not engage in an improper
relationship with a member of his congressional staff.
On November 16, 2022, the ISC unanimously voted to adopt
and transmit a Report to the full Committee detailing the
violations and the facts giving rise to those violations. The
ISC Report also recommended the Report serve to admonish
Representative Cawthorn, and that the Committee direct
Representative Cawthorn to repay the approximate value of the
gift he received to a suitable charity and to pay applicable
late fees for his late filings of PTRs.
On December 6, 2022, the Committee made public its Report,
in which it adopted the ISC's Report and recommendations,
directing that Representative Cawthorn repay $14,237.49 to a
suitable charity not later than December 31, 2022, and to pay
$1,000 in late filing fees to the U.S. Treasury and file an
additional PTR related to a sale of the cryptocurrency not
later than December 20, 2022. Representative Cawthorn filed the
additional PTR and has publicly stated that he donated $15,000
to two nonprofit organizations.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Madison
Cawthorn
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on May 11, 2022, to consider
misdemeanor charges filed against Representative Madison
Cawthorn for driving with a revoked license and speeding in
North Carolina. Representative Cawthorn has paid a fine to
resolve one of the charges and intends to pay any fines
associated with the remaining charges.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of
Representative Cawthorn. In reaching this decision, the
Committee considered the scope and nature of the violations,
and determined it to be one for which review by an ISC was not
warranted. On May 24, 2022, the Committee submitted a Report to
the House describing the facts and its findings regarding this
matter, as well as its determination to take no further action
in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Judy Chu
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on July 20, 2022, to consider
the arrest of Representative Judy Chu for crowding,
obstructing, or incommoding, during a protest outside the
Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., on June 30, 2022.
Representative Chu forfeited a $50 collateral payment,
whereupon the local court disposed of the charge. The legal
proceedings related to Representative Chu's arrest were thus
resolved.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of
Representative Chu. In reaching this decision, the Committee
considered the scope and nature of the violations, and
determined it to be one for which review by an ISC was not
warranted. On July 26, 2022, the Committee submitted a Report
to the House describing the facts and its findings regarding
this matter, as well as its determination to take no further
action in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Pat Fallon
On March 2, 2022, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Pat Fallon may have violated
House rules, standards of conduct, and federal law by failing
to file timely PTRs for various reportable transactions. On May
31, 2022, the Committee released the OCE Report and Findings,
along with Representative Fallon's response, and noted in a
public statement that the Committee was continuing to review
the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
On July 29, 2022, the Committee released a public statement
noting it found no clear evidence that the errors and omissions
in Representative Fallon's PTRs were knowing or willful and
that he was generally unclear on the requirements relating to
PTR filings. Accordingly, the Committee unanimously voted to
dismiss the matter and to take no further action.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Jeff
Fortenberry
On October 19, 2021, criminal charges against
Representative Jeff Fortenberry were filed in the United States
District Court for the Central District of California. The
Committee unanimously voted to establish an ISC to determine
whether Representative Fortenberry 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
allegations that: Representative Fortenberry's 2016
congressional campaign may have accepted illegal contributions;
and Representative Fortenberry engaged in a scheme to falsify
and conceal material facts and/or made false statements, during
a federal investigation into his campaign committee's alleged
acceptance of illegal campaign contributions. The Committee,
following precedent, unanimously recommended to the ISC that it
defer consideration of the matter in response to a request from
DOJ.
On March 26, 2022, Representative Fortenberry announced his
resignation from the House, effective March 31, 2022, at which
time the ISC and the Committee lost jurisdiction to continue
its investigation.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Matt Gaetz
On April 9, 2021, the Committee announced that it was
investigating, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), allegations
that Representative Matt Gaetz may have engaged in sexual
misconduct and/or illicit drug use, shared inappropriate images
or videos on the House floor, misused state identification
records, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or
accepted a bribe, improper gratuity, or impermissible gift. The
Committee, following precedent, deferred consideration of the
matter in response to a request from DOJ.
At the conclusion of the 117th Congress, the Committee had
not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Gaetz was reelected to the House for the 118th
Congress.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Al Green
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on September 22, 2021, to
consider the arrest of Representative Al Green for crowding,
obstructing, or incommoding, during a protest outside the
Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., on August 3, 2021.
Representative Green stated he intended to pay a $50 collateral
payment, whereupon the local court would dispose of the charge.
The legal proceedings related to Representative Green's arrest
were expected to be resolved with no further action.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of
Representative Green. In reaching this decision, the Committee
considered the scope and nature of the violations, and
determined it to be one for which review by an ISC was not
warranted. On September 28, 2021, the Committee submitted a
Report to the House describing the facts and its findings
regarding this matter, as well as its determination to take no
further action in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Jim Hagedorn
On July 23, 2021, OCE forwarded to the Committee a Report
and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Jim Hagedorn may have used
official funds to contract for franking services with companies
owned or controlled by his staff members and that
Representative Hagedorn's campaign committee, Friends of
Hagedorn may have used private office space at no cost or for a
rate below market value. The Committee released the OCE Report
and Findings, along with Representative Hagedorn's response, on
October 21, 2021, and noted in the public statement that the
Committee was continuing to review the allegations pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a). On February 17, 2022, Representative
Hagedorn passed away, at which time the Committee lost
jurisdiction to continue its investigation.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Bill Huizenga
On August 16, 2019, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Bill Huizenga's campaign
committee reported campaign disbursements that may not be
legitimate and verifiable campaign expenditures attributable to
bona fide campaign or political purposes and accepted
contributions from individuals employed in his congressional
office, in violation of federal law, House rules and other
standards of conduct. The OCE also reviewed an allegation that
Representative Huizenga authorized expenditures from his MRA
for impermissible official expenses, but the OCE recommended
the Committee dismiss that allegation. On November 14, 2019,
the Committee released the OCE Report and Findings 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 117th Congress, the Committee
had not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Huizenga was reelected to the House for the
118th Congress.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Ronny Jackson,
Jr.
On December 22, 2021, OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Ronny Jackson, Jr.'s campaign
committee reported campaign disbursements that may not be
legitimate and verifiable campaign expenditures attributable to
bona fide campaign or political purposes.
On May 23, 2022, the Committee released the OCE Report and
Findings, along with Representative Jackson's response, 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 117th Congress, the Committee
had not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Jackson was reelected to the House for the 118th
Congress.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Sheila Jackson
Lee
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on September 22, 2021, to
consider the arrest of Representative Sheila Jackson Lee for
crowding, obstructing, or incommoding, during a protest outside
a Senate Office Building in Washington, D.C., on July 29, 2021.
Representative Jackson Lee forfeited a $50 collateral payment,
whereupon the local court disposed of the charge. The legal
proceedings related to Representative Jackson Lee's arrest were
thus resolved.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of
Representative Jackson Lee. In reaching this decision, the
Committee considered the scope and nature of the violations,
and determined it to be one for which review by an ISC was not
warranted. On September 28, 2021, the Committee submitted a
Report to the House describing the facts and its findings
regarding this matter, as well as its determination to take no
further action in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Chris Jacobs
On February 28, 2022, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report regarding allegations that Representative Chris Jacobs
may have violated House rules, standards of conduct, and
federal law by failing to file timely PTRs for various
reportable transactions. OCE did not make a recommendation
regarding the allegations because of a tie vote of the OCE
Board. On May 31, 2022, the Committee released the OCE Report,
along with Representative Jacobs's response, and noted in a
public statement that the Committee was continuing to review
the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
On July 29, 2022, the Committee released a public statement
announcing it found no clear evidence that the errors and
omissions in Representative Jacobs's PTRs were knowing or
willful and that he was generally unclear on the requirements
relating to PTR filings. Accordingly, the Committee unanimously
voted to dismiss the matter and to take no further action.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Hank Johnson
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on July 28, 2021, to consider
the arrest of Representative Hank Johnson for crowding,
obstructing, or incommoding, during a protest outside a Senate
Office Building in Washington, D.C., on July 22, 2021.
Representative Johnson forfeited a $50 collateral payment,
whereupon the local court disposed of the charge. The legal
proceedings related to Representative Johnson's arrest were
thus resolved.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of
Representative Johnson. In reaching this decision, the
Committee considered the scope and nature of the violations,
and determined it to be one for which review by an ISC was not
warranted. On July 30, 2021, the Committee submitted a Report
to the House describing the facts and its findings regarding
this matter, as well as its determination to take no further
action in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Kaiali'i Kahele
On August 30, 2022, OCE forwarded to the Committee a Report
and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Kaiali'i Kahele may have
misused official resources for campaign or political purposes.
The OCE also reviewed an allegation that Representative Kahele
took official action motivated by financial interest or that he
dispenses special favors or privileges, but recommended
dismissal of that allegation.
On November 28, 2022, the Committee released the OCE Report
and Findings, along with Representative Kahele's response, and
noted in a public statement that the Committee was continuing
to review the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
Representative Kahele did not seek reelection to the House,
and the Committee will not have jurisdiction to continue the
investigation after January 3, 2023.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Mike Kelly
On July 23, 2021, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Mike Kelly's wife may have
purchased stock based on confidential or material nonpublic
information that Representative Kelly had learned during his
official job duties. The Committee released the OCE Report and
Findings, along with Representative Kelly's response, on
October 21, 2021, and noted in a public statement that the
Committee was continuing to review the allegations pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a).
At the conclusion of the 117th Congress, the Committee had
not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Kelly was reelected to the House for the 118th
Congress.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Doug Lamborn
On October 25, 2021, the Committee received a Report and
Findings from OCE recommending further review of allegations
that Representative Doug Lamborn may have misused official
resources for personal and non-official purposes; and that
Representative Lamborn may have solicited or accepted improper
gifts from subordinates. The Committee released the OCE Report
and Findings, along with Representative Lamborn's response, on
January 24, 2022, and noted in a public statement that the
Committee was continuing to review the allegations pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a).
At the conclusion of the 117th Congress, the Committee had
not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Lamborn was reelected to the House for the 118th
Congress.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Andy Levin
In accordance with the requirements of Committee Rule
18(e)(2), the Committee convened on July 27, 2022, to consider
the arrest of Representative Andy Levin for crowding,
obstructing, or incommoding, during a protest outside the
Capitol Building in Washington, D.C., on July 20, 2022.
Representative Levin forfeited a $50 collateral payment,
whereupon the local court disposed of the charge. The legal
proceedings related to Representative Levin's arrest were thus
resolved.
After reviewing and considering this matter, the Committee
voted against impaneling an ISC related to the conduct of
Representative Levin. In reaching this decision, the Committee
considered the scope and nature of the violations, and
determined it to be one for which review by an ISC was not
warranted. On July 29, 2022, the Committee submitted a Report
to the House describing the facts and its findings regarding
this matter, as well as its determination to take no further
action in this matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Tom Malinowski
On July 23, 2021, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Tom Malinowski may have
violated House rules, standards of conduct, and federal law by
failing to properly disclose stocks that he purchased or sold
or failing to properly file PTRs for any of the stock
transactions he made between 2019 and 2020. On October 21,
2021, the Committee released the OCE Report and Findings, along
with Representative Malinowski's response, 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 117th Congress, the Committee
had not completed its review into this matter. Representative
Malinowski lost his bid for reelection to the House and the
Committee will no longer have jurisdiction to continue its
investigation after January 3, 2023.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Carolyn Maloney
On June 23, 2022, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Carolyn Maloney may have
solicited or accepted impermissible gifts associated with her
attendance at the Metropolitan Museum of Art's Met Gala. The
Committee released the OCE Report and Findings, along with
Representative Maloney's response, on November 21, 2022, and
noted in a public statement that the Committee was continuing
to review the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
At the conclusion of the 117th Congress, the Committee had
not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Maloney lost her bid for reelection to the House
and the Committee will no longer have jurisdiction to continue
the investigation after January 3, 2023.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Alex Mooney
On July 23, 2021, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that: Representative Alex Mooney's campaign
committees reported campaign disbursements that are not
legitimate and verifiable campaign expenditures attributable to
a bona fide campaign or political purposes; and Representative
Mooney's campaign committees omitted required information from
its Federal Election Commission candidate committee reports.
The Committee released the OCE Report and Findings on October
21, 2021, and noted in a public statement that the Committee
was continuing to review the allegations pursuant to Committee
Rule 18(a).
On December 22, 2021, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
second Report and Findings in which it recommended further
review of allegations that: Representative Mooney's campaign
committees reported campaign disbursements that may not be
legitimate and verifiable campaign expenditures attributable to
bona fide campaign or political purposes; Representative Mooney
may have authorized expenditures from his MRA that were not for
permissible official expenses; Representative Mooney may have
used official resources, including staff time, for unofficial
or campaign purposes; and Representative Mooney may have
withheld, concealed, or otherwise falsified information during
the prior OCE review. The Committee released the OCE Report and
Findings on May 23, 2022, and noted in a public statement that
the Committee was continuing to review the allegations pursuant
to Committee Rule 18(a).
At the conclusion of the 117th Congress, the Committee had
not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Mooney was reelected to the House for the 118th
Congress.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Marie Newman
On October 25, 2021, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Marie Newman promised federal
employment to a potential primary opponent for the purpose of
procuring political support. The Committee released the OCE
Report and Findings, along with Representative Newman's
response, on January 21, 2022, and noted in a public statement
that the Committee was continuing to review the allegations
pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
Representative Newman lost her bid for reelection to the
House and the Committee will no longer have jurisdiction to
continue the investigation after January 3, 2023.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Alexandria
Ocasio-Cortez
On June 23, 2022, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings regarding Representative Alexandria Ocasio-
Cortez.
At the conclusion of the 117th Congress, the Committee had
not completed its investigation into this matter.
Representative Ocasio-Cortez was reelected to the House for the
118th Congress.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Ilhan Omar
On December 22, 2021, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report in which it recommended dismissal of allegations that
Representative Ilhan Omar may have omitted required information
from her annual financial disclosure reports and may have
received an advance payment on royalties relating to her
memoir. On March 22, 2022, the Committee released the OCE
Report. OCE did not transmit findings to the Committee, so no
findings were published. The Committee noted in the public
statement that a majority of the Committee did not vote to
dismiss the matter, House Rule XI, clause 3 and Committee Rule
17A provide for no specific further action, and that the
Committee would not further review the matter.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Steven Palazzo
On September 2, 2020, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Steven Palazzo's principal
campaign committee, Palazzo for Congress, made disbursements
that were not for legitimate and verifiable campaign
expenditures; Representative Palazzo improperly used or
authorized the use of his MRA for personal and/or campaign
purposes; and Representative Palazzo used his official position
and/or congressional resources to procure special assistance
for his family member. The Committee released the OCE Report
and Findings, along with Representative Palazzo's response, on
March 1, 2021, and noted in the public statement that the
Committee was continuing to review the allegations pursuant to
Committee Rule 18(a).
Representative Palazzo lost his bid for reelection to the
House and the Committee will no longer have jurisdiction to
continue the investigation after January 3, 2023.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Tom Reed
On April 9, 2021, the Committee announced that it was
investigating, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), allegations
that Representative Tom Reed may have engaged in sexual
misconduct, in violation of House Rules, laws, or other
standards of conduct. On March 10, 2022, Representative Reed
announced his resignation from the House, effective
immediately, at which time the Committee lost jurisdiction to
continue its investigation.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative John Rutherford
On February 28, 2022, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative John Rutherford may have
violated House rules, standards of conduct, and federal law by
failing to file timely PTRs for various reportable
transactions. On May 31, 2022, the Committee released the OCE
Report and Findings, along with Representative Rutherford's
response, and noted in a public statement that the Committee
was continuing to review the allegations pursuant to Committee
Rule 18(a).
On August 24, 2022, the Committee released a public
statement noting it found no clear evidence that the errors and
omissions in Representative Rutherford's PTRs were knowing or
willful and that he was generally unclear on the requirements
relating to PTR filings. Accordingly, the Committee unanimously
voted to dismiss the matter and to take no further action.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to John Sample
On August 26, 2021, OCE forwarded to the Committee a Report
and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that John Sample may have been involved in and
benefited from the use of official funds to procure services
from companies owned or controlled by congressional staff
members, including himself. The Committee released the OCE
Report and Findings on November 29, 2021, and noted in the
public statement that the Committee was continuing to review
the allegations pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a).
On August 9, 2022, Mr. Sample resigned from the office of
the First Congressional District of Minnesota, at which point
the Committee lost jurisdiction to continue its investigation.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Delegate Michael F.Q. San
Nicolas
On October 24, 2019, the Committee announced that it was
investigating, pursuant to Committee Rule 18(a), allegations
that Delegate Michael F.Q. San Nicolas may have engaged in a
sexual relationship with an individual on his congressional
staff, converted campaign funds to personal use, and/or
accepted improper or excessive campaign contributions.
On June 12, 2020, the Committee announced that it had
unanimously voted on March 11, 2020, to establish an ISC with
jurisdiction to investigate whether Delegate San Nicolas may
have: engaged in a sexual relationship with an individual on
his congressional staff; converted campaign funds to personal
use; accepted improper and/or excessive campaign contributions;
reported campaign disbursements that may not be legitimate and
verifiable campaign expenditures attributable to bona fide
campaign or political purposes; omitted required information
from or disclosed false information in reports filed with the
Federal Election Commission; made false statements to
government investigators or agencies; and/or improperly
interfered or attempted to interfere in a government
investigation of related allegations. The Committee determined
to take that action following the receipt of a Report and
Findings from OCE regarding the matter.
On May 20, 2021, the Committee announced that it
unanimously voted to re-authorize an ISC for the 117th Congress
to review the same allegations involving Delegate San Nicolas.
At the completion of its investigation, the ISC unanimously
concluded that there was ``substantial evidence that Delegate
San Nicolas: accepted improper and/or excessive campaign
contributions; engaged in a conspiracy to hide the proceeds of
an illicit campaign contribution; knowingly caused his campaign
committee to file false or incomplete reports with the FEC; and
attempted to interfere with [the] Committee's investigation
(including OCE's referral to the Committee) by causing his
congressional staff to contact a likely witness in the
Committee's investigation in an attempt to persuade the witness
to lie.'' The ISC considered whether to seek a House-level
sanction but, in light of the ``potential violations of federal
criminal law'' and the applicable statutes of limitations,
recommended that the Committee refer the matter to DOJ for
further review.
On June 23, 2022, the Committee submitted to the House its
Report regarding this matter, in which the Committee agreed
with the ISC's findings and recommendations. The Committee
concluded that Delegate San Nicolas' conduct may have violated
several campaign finance laws, federal conspiracy law, and laws
against witness tampering and obstruction of Congress. The
Committee voted unanimously to refer this matter to DOJ.
In the Matter of Allegations Relating to Representative Thomas Suozzi
On February 28, 2022, the OCE forwarded to the Committee a
Report and Findings in which it recommended further review of
allegations that Representative Thomas Suozzi may have violated
House rules, standards of conduct, and federal law by failing
to file timely PTRs for various reportable transactions. On
July 29, 2022, the Committee released the OCE Report and
Findings, along with Representative Suozzi's response, and
noted in a public statement that the Committee found no clear
evidence that the errors and omissions in Representative
Suozzi's PTRs were knowing or willful and that he was generally
unclear on the requirements relating to PTR filings.
Accordingly, the Committee unanimously voted to dismiss the
matter and to take no further action.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]