Ethics investigations in the House, 1798-2011 “Politics by other means” = conventional framework for looking at ethics investigations misses the content of the investigations – what behavior was considered as possibly crossing a line

My focus: Unethical behavior as “socially constructed”— What we think of as unethical varies over time. Explore how…

Subjects of the investigations *Improper Financial gain *Improper Political gain *Sexual gain *Other categories (insults, slavery and Reconstruction-related investigations) Especially before 1922 (most of nation’s history), most investigations did not fit into the first 3 categories

Disappearing categories Insults (verbal or physical) – many related to tensions over slavery and civil rights immediately after the Civil War Violating the gag rule Other investigations related to language used to describe Reconstruction policies or politicians

Types of cases still around today Financial Gain Cases - A constant over 206-year period. Political Gain cases – none before 1971 – why? Then some in every period from 1972 on (44% of total in period from 1994-2004). Sexual impropriety – None before 1972 either

Case Studies: Three Legislative Leaders (1998-2004)

Speaker James Wright Mostly improper personal (financial) gain. Became Speaker 1987, almost immediately ethics charges filed against him with House Ethics Committee (by Newt Gingrich, Republican seeking to overturn the longstanding Democratic majority, who used ethics as a weapon against Wright)

Main ethics issues considered Lobbying on behalf of constituent with whom he had a joint financial interest in a private gas well 2. Publication of his book - received 55% royalties for each copy sold; sold largely to groups not individuals (e.g. Teamsters) – over $50,000 in royalties; attempt to skirt honoraria law (also charge he used government resources to work on the book)

3. Use of condo in Texas provided by Texas businessman for free 4 3. Use of condo in Texas provided by Texas businessman for free 4. Possible exercise of undue influence in intervening before federal agency on behalf of four Texas businessmen who donated to his campaign. MOSTLY FINANCIAL GAIN (#1,2,3) End result: Resigned.

Newt Gingrich Became speaker in 1995. “What goes around comes around…” Founded GOPAC (political action committee that gave campaign $ and advice to House candidates) – sponsored TV show about reforming government. Produced by a non-profit, which legally could take tax deductible contributions. PACs can’t do that

Use of tax-deductible donations for other courses College course (he had been a history professor) – “Renewing American Civilization” – funded by tax-deductible contributions to a foundation even though the course had clear political overtones

Complaint that wouldn’t go away= Use of tax exempt contributions for college course. Outside counsel hired. Investigation expanded into different direction: did Gingrich lie when he provided info to the ethics committee?

Re: violation of tax laws: ethics committee said they were violated – Gingrich’s expert disagreed. IRS ultimately ruled in Gingrich’s favor several years later. Committee concludes Gingrich gave inaccurate info about the role of his PAC in funding the college course. Gingrich statement admitting to 2 violations

End result: Committee recommends 1) Sanction (reprimand) 2) A $300,000 penalty – cost to cover additional work prompted by inaccurate info he gave 3) House votes to discipline speaker. He didn’t resign immediately (only after Republican losses in 1998 did he step down and retire). Note: Case mostly about political, not financial gain.

Becomes House majority leader 2000. Tom DeLay Becomes House majority leader 2000. Set up PAC to give to Republican candidates. To get around rules on donations to PACs, set up tax exempt organizations which were supposed to avoid political activity but didn’t – shut down by FEC

2001- sets up new PAC (TRMPAC) to help elect Republicans to Texas House of Representatives (in part so they could vote for redistricting plan) Over $600,000 of funds raised came from corporations- violated Texas law. DeLay denies knowledge of corporate fundraising activities, but indicted for conspiracy to violate state laws and money laundering.

Ethics complaint filed Charges Appearance of creating special access for energy company Funneling illegal corporate contributions to candidates in Tx (TRMPAC) Improperly using political influence to have FAA track a plane carrying Democratic legislators

End result DeLay admonished by Ethics Committee -for creating appearance of special treatment/access -using government resources for political purpose -deferred action on PAC due to criminal investigation

DeLay case about political gain, not financial gain. Additional complaint Ethics committee found DeLay was wrong in offered to endorse a fellow member’s son for office, as he wanted the guy’s vote on a bill (violated House rule because behavior did not reflect “creditably on the House”) DeLay case about political gain, not financial gain.

DeLay convicted 2010 of money laundering and conspiracy (re: illegal campaign finance activities aimed at helping Republican candidates for Texas state office). Conviction later overturned. END RESULT: resigned