Plenty of reasons for congressional ethics office to take shape

Did you hear the popping of champagne corks on Capitol Hill when the panel of the new Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) was announced last week? Probably not, but in this case, late — OK, real late — is probably better than never even though we are more than three-quarters of the way through the 110th Congress. After all, the House task force led by Rep. Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) that came up with the OCE was almost a year late in putting forth its recommendation. So the hope that the OCE would be up and running by now, staffed and ready to go was probably a bit too optimistic. As a result, with just few months before the November elections, it looks like for all intents and purposes the 110th Congress will have come and gone with the same discredited ethics enforcement process with which it started.

But there is reason for hope. The individuals named to the OCE panel, while heavy on former members of Congress, represent a good-faith effort by the House leaders. For example, former Rep. David Skaggs (D-Colo.), the panel’s chairman, had established a reputation as a thoughtful House member who in his post-Congress work looked closely at issues surrounding public service. (The Campaign Legal Center worked with Skaggs on redistricting reform when he was at the Council for Excellence in Government.

Now that the panel has been named, it remains an open question whether the OCE will turn out to be an effective, independent, third-party agency that takes its responsibility to investigate alleged ethics violations seriously.  To show its good faith, perhaps the OCE can start by taking a close look at the collection of rent-stabilized apartments in Manhattan held by Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.). Or they can dive into Rep. John Murtha’s (D-Pa.) prolific use of earmarks and reports that note that every beneficiary of his many earmarks in a 2007 defense appropriation bill also gave him a campaign contribution. Or they may look at the multiple foreclosures on three different homes owned by Rep. Laura Richardson (D-Calif.) along with reports she allegedly diverted personal funds to her campaign accounts instead of paying her mortgages. Or what about the questions surrounding Countrywide’s VIP home-loan program for members of Congress?

Here are some the questions that will be key in determining whether the OCE will be an instrument for greater transparency and efficacy in ethics enforcement.

 1.  Perhaps most important, will the lack of subpoena power doom OCE’s efforts to meaningfully investigate more serious allegations of violations?  

2.  Will this panel dominated by former members, especially on the Democratic side, be perceived by the public as sufficiently disconnected from the “old boys club” of the Congress to attain credibility for their investigative efforts?

3.  Will the Office, with its makeup of three Republicans and three Democrats, simply mirror the dysfunctional ethics committee, and replicate the problems with the current process? This problem is endemic to the OCE because of the way it is structured.

4. Will the Office not only get itself organized quickly, but also be able to quickly find and hire qualified staff? This isn’t as easy as it sounds. The list of truly qualified candidates for this position is not as long as some might expect. A few years ago, when the House ethics committee faced the same task, the process broke down for months over whom to hire. Compounding the problem, the staff director of the House ethics committee recently announced his imminent departure.

5. Will the OCE panel take the initial steps to expeditiously and enthusiastically investigate allegations of ethics violations and help repair the tattered reputation of the House ethics process?

The current congressional ethics process has lost its credibility. And while Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) deserves credit for recognizing on both political and policy grounds that the House ethics process needed an overhaul, the truth is that since the passage of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act, the momentum for ensuring real reform is implemented has slowed to a crawl. All eyes have turned toward the November elections.

Until the OCE is fully staffed, Congress and the public can continue to expect more of the same, with no place for a member to go to clear his or her name and no place for the public to look or believe when questions of impropriety arise.

When all is said and done, this Congress will have maneuvered remarkably unscathed through the shoals of ethics enforcement. Perhaps the upcoming sentencing of Jack Abramoff, the indictment of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) and the growing list of other scandals will provide the impetus for House leaders from both parties to avoid relegating ethics enforcement to the back burner in their rush to fight the upcoming fall elections. 

McGehee is policy director of the Campaign Legal Center and also heads McGehee Strategies, a public-interest consulting business.  Gomez is a law student at American University’s Washington College of Law.