House Republicans tried to silence the Office of Congressional Ethics in a pre-session secret caucus vote
House Republicans came under fire this week for announcing that they would reduce the role of the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE). Republicans reneged within a day, due to public outcry led by advocates such as Daniel Schuman of Demand Progress. Still, the newfound attention on congressional ethics puts a new spotlight on OCE and its mission.
What has OCE done since its creation, and what would it mean if OCE indeed shuts down?
A brief history of the OCE
Created in March 2008 through a House resolution, a measure which does not need Senate approval but does not have the force of law, OCE is an independent office that does preliminary investigations and makes referrals to the House Ethics Committee.
Passed during the first Congress in which Democrats had majority control since 1994, it was spearheaded by then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA12) to clear up what she called “a culture of corruption.” This was right on the heels of three members of Congress going to jail on corruption charges, the infamous bribery scandal of lobbyist Jack Abramoff which took down more than 20 members of Congress and congressional aides, and Republican leaders not being charged in 2006 by the House Ethics Committee — not to be confused with OCE — in what many Democrats saw as a leader-led cover-up of former Congressman Mark Foley’s sex scandal.
Most House Republicans saw the OCE’s mandate of nonpartisanship as a farce, viewing it instead as a partisan body created by Democrats to ensnare Republicans. Republicans voted 33–159 against the OCE’s creation, while Democrats voted 196–23 in favor. Today, OCE is run by an eight-person board co-chaired by two former members of Congress, Colorado Democrat David Skaggs and Illinois Republican Judy Biggert — who voted against establishing the office as a congresswoman in 2008.
Ironic votes don’t stop there. Republican Reps. Sam Graves (R-MO6) and Vern Buchanan (R-FL16) both voted in favor, even though they both ended up being the subject of a House Ethics Committee investigation themselves. Perhaps more presciently, Democratic Reps. Maxine Waters (D-CA43) and Pete Stark (D-CA13) both voted against, and were later subjects of ethics investigations themselves.
The OCE today and what it’s done
OCE investigates complaints of violation of federal rules by members of the House of Representatives and their staff. Though they can’t subpoena and or issue legally-binding rulings, the board issues public reports and votes on whether to refer the issue to the House Ethics Committee. The House Committee on Ethics is a congressional committee made up of an equal number of representatives from each party. The committee, but not the OCE, has the power to take enforcement actions. But because it is made up of the representatives the committee has to enforce actions on, it wouldn’t always do so without OCE. The House Ethics Committee has held 36 investigations since OCE’s January 2009 start. However, that’s far less than the more than 150 investigations conducted by OCE.
Among the more notable OCE reports in the just-concluded Congress include findings that Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-IN3) used campaign funds to pay for a trip to Universal Studios theme park and that Rep. Roger Williams (R-TX25) voted on a transportation bill in a way that would personally benefit the car dealership he owns.
What Republicans tried to do
Congressional Republicans in a pre-session caucus meeting voted to rename and significantly revise and shrink the OCE, with no advance notice or official vote from the full House, as was held when creating the office in the first place. In its place would be have been a new Office of Congressional Complaint Review, which watchdogs say would have significantly weakened oversight. Since Republicans hold a majority in the House, the pre-session vote guaranteed the OCE change could have been made on the first day of the Congressional session without the input of Democrats. The OCE change would have been proposed as a part of a broader package of changes to the House’s rules of procedure.
The new office would have been overseen by the House Ethics Committee instead of being an independent body of long-term non-political staff, giving the Ethics Committee the ability to stop investigations before they were finished. Even if they were finished, the new office would not be required to make public their final reports, initial complaints to the office could no longer be made anonymously, and the office could not directly contact law enforcement.
The two highest-ranking House Republicans, Speaker of the House Paul Ryan (R-WI1) and House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-CA23), both reportedly opposed the measure. Republicans quickly backtracked, as Ryan threatened to force a public vote.
Much of the public thought the party was trying to evade responsibility or potential punishment for their actions, while Donald Trump tweeted half-hearted opposition: “With all that Congress has to work on, do they really have to make the weakening of the Independent Ethics Watchdog, as unfair as it……..may be, their number one act and priority. Focus on tax reform, healthcare and so many other things of far greater importance! #DTS.” (“#DTS” is an acronym for Drain The Swamp, a Trump campaign slogan.)
Could the OCE still be abolished?
Could the OCE still be abolished? Yes.
A well-orchestrated advocacy effort was at least as important, and probably more important, than Trump’s tweet in preventing the weakening of OCE. But the move happened on January 2, a slow news day just before the new Congress took effect and before Trump took office. If House Republicans attempt to end OCE again, it may not spur the same level of public advocacy and be approved more under the radar.
Rep. Steve King (R-IA4) told Huffington Post Politics that the OCE has “damaged or destroyed a lot of political careers in this place and it has cost members of Congress millions of dollars to defend themselves against anonymous allegations.” He also claimed that 100 Democrats would be open to at least OCE reform, if not outright repeal.
Plus Trump’s issue did not appear to be that he supported the OCE — which he called the Independent Ethics Watchdog — but rather that it shouldn’t have been House Republicans’ first move on their first day of the new Congress. After a few months or so, especially past the crucial “first 100 days,” Trump may not raise a finger if House Republicans try to pull the same move again.
But the consequences could be more dire than many realize. As Huffington Post Politics reporter Matt Fuller wrote: “If it appears a member really has done something wrong, the Ethics Committee often just waits to issue rulings until the member is retiring… The Ethics Committee often sits on investigations, and the one mechanism of transparency and accountability has been the OCE. So eliminating OCE’s ability to issue reports to the public would have removed one of the only real consequences for questionable behavior. And one last thing: The Ethics Committee sometimes drags its feet for years. Cathy McMorris Rodgers has been under investigation since 2013. Here’s the OCE referral report on №4 Republican Cathy McMorris Rodgers. The Ethics Committee hasn’t resolved it.”
This article was written by GovTrack Insider staff writer Jesse Rifkin.
