A Question of Ethics: A Year in Congressional Ethics Retrospective
The final 2011 installment of A Question of Ethics looks back at the year's big stories in government ethics.
A Question of Ethics: Are All Communications With Lawyers Privileged?
There is an important lesson within the sixty-eight pages of the report recently released by the Senate Ethics committee regarding the investigation of former Senator John Ensign. Not all communications with attorneys are protected by the attorney-client privilege. When Members include staffers in communications with attorneys, they run the risk that the attorney-client privilege will not apply. To understand why, see the latest Question of Ethics.
A Question of Ethics: A Look Back at the Year in Congressional Ethics
Despite the unprecedented scheduling of two adjudicatory hearings in 2010 in connection with ethics charges against Members of the House of Representatives, there are some signs that the ethics fervor that began in 2006 may be fading. For example, the future of the Office of Congressional Ethics appears uncertain as some lawmakers seek to limit its ability to initiate investigations of ethics complaints. The latest Question of Ethics looks back on the year in congressional ethics.
A Question of Ethics: How Do House Ethics Trials Work?
It has been more than eight years since the last House "ethics trial." The upcoming ethics trials of Reps. Charlie Rangel and Maxine Waters have raised questions about how such proceedings work. The latest Question of Ethics provides a crash course in House ethics trial procedure.
Facing Ethics Charges, What Are Rangel's Options?
For the first time in years, a Member of the House faces formal ethics charges. While the charges against Rep. Charles Rangel have caught some by surprise, perhaps the strongest signal that they were a real possibility was the growth in Rangel's legal fees over the last two years. Last summer, Rangel topped the million dollar mark in legal fees relating to the investigations to which he has been responding. That total is now in the neighborhood of $2 million.
What's next for Rangel is anyone’s guess. According to the ethics committee's July 22 statement (pdf), it has formed an adjudicatory committee to make findings of fact and to determine whether there is “clear and convincing evidence” of the violations for which Rangel is charged. Committee rules provide that, at such a hearing, the subcommittee may take evidence and testimony as it deems necessary. Rules also provide that these hearings are usually public.
If Rangel wants to avoid the public spectacle of a hearing before the subcommittee, there are now really only two ways that he could do so. First, he could reach a settlement with the committee. Eric Lipton and David Kocieniewski have reported that last week’s charges were actually a result of settlement talks breaking down. Those talks could resume, and settlement remains a possibility.
Second, Rangel could leave the House. The jurisdiction of the House Ethics committee generally does not extend to former Members. This is why, for example, the committee could not sanction former Rep. Mark Foley after its investigation regarding his alleged improprieties with House pages. Foley left the House before the committee concluded its investigation, and the committee acknowledged in its report that this meant it had no “disciplinary authority” over him.
A Question of Ethics: Are Contributions Allowed With a Bill Pending?
There are reports that the Office of Congressional Ethics is investigating eight Representatives for holding fundraisers immediately before a key House vote on financial reform last December. Does this mean that donors now need to be careful not to make contributions while important legislation is pending? The latest Question of Ethics has answers.
A Question of Ethics: Are Proceedings Before the OCE Confidential?
Suppose the Office of Congressional Ethics requests documents from your company. The Office cannot force you to comply. But, should you do so anyway? One issue to consider is whether your documents will remain confidential. See the June 8 edition of A Question of Ethics for answers.
Add this blog
