Flake presses on with demand for earmark investigation information

For the second time, the House used a parliamentary procedure to refer
Rep. Jeff Flake’s (R-Ariz.) resolution on earmarks to the ethics
committee.

Flake has vowed to continue to re-offer the resolution in the weeks and months ahead until the committee produces the information about its investigation of lawmakers with ties to PMA Group, a lobbying firm known for showering members with campaign cash in return for receiving multimillion-dollar earmarks for its clients.

{mosads}“There’s a perception out there that earmarks create easier access to members,” Flake said. “It’s in the House’s best interest, as we enter the appropriations season, to correct [that perception] somehow, or some kind of guidance should be issued by the committee.”

Allowing a straight up-or-down vote would have forced the committee to act. Democrats instead used a parliamentary maneuver sending the resolution to the ethics panel for review on a vote of 406-1 as a way to punt the issue to the committee. Because it’s a non-binding resolution, the committee would not be forced to produce the information. Rep. Nick Rahall (D-W.Va.) was the lone “no” vote.

Flake, as well as outside watchdog groups, has voiced deep frustration over the brevity of the ethics panel’s report exonerating seven lawmakers with ties to PMA Group. His resolution would require the ethics committee to show its hand and produce the number of interviews it conducted and subpoenas it sent out in the probe.

The five-page ethics committee report on PMA exonerated all seven members of a defense spending panel of any wrongdoing even though a preliminary report by the Office of Congressional Ethics, created to make recommendations to the full ethics panel, showed evidence that PMA Group lobbyists believed campaign donations helped them open doors on Capitol Hill and win earmarks for their clients.

The ethics committee’s report did not include information about any interviews the committee conducted or subpoenas for information it sent out. Flake and others want to know if the panel did any real investigative work, especially considering that the committee never launched an investigative subcommittee, a sign that it is seriously delving into a matter.

Democrats last year fended off nine different attempts by Flake to force more action by the committee.

With each vote, however, more Democrats sided with Flake, including 29 Democrats in May of last year.

Eventually, Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) offered his own resolution referring the matter to the ethics committee, the same political maneuver used last week. After the Hoyer resolution and added political pressure, the panel publicly announced it was reviewing the PMA controversy.