House Hesitates on Ethics Changes

On Enforcement, Some Lawmakers Favor the Status Quo

Democratic-led efforts to overhaul the House's oft-criticized ethics enforcement system have stumbled over a familiar obstacle: lawmakers afraid of outside scrutiny.

The promise to end the "culture of corruption" they said developed in Washington under Republican rule helped propel Democrats into the majority in November elections. But after a promising start, lawmakers appear to be backing off a proposal for an independent entity to investigate ethics charges.

An outside monitor would be a first for the House. But after weeks of meetings, a House task force studying the issue says the group has not begun discussing a plan and will probably miss its May 1 reporting deadline. On Monday, task force chairman Michael Capuano (D-Mass.) and ranking Republican member Lamar Smith (Tex.) sent an "options menu" to task force members "should we decide to pursue any changes to the current ethics process." The group's next meeting is on Tuesday, to be followed by its first public meeting on Thursday, according to communiques sent to its members this week.

"We were asked to consider whether there is a need for, a desire for this," Capuano said. "The answer we might come up with is, 'No, we don't need one.' "

House members monitor their own conduct through an ethics committee made up of five Democrats and five Republicans. And although outsiders can submit an ethics complaint in the Senate, only House members can request ethics probes in that chamber. Members seldom do -- which, observers say, contributed to many scandals, including the ties of former congressman Bob Ney (R-Ohio) to jailed lobbyist Jack Abramoff; the bribery allegations against former congressman Duke Cunningham (R-Calif.) and Rep. William Jefferson (D-La.); and the improper contact Mark Foley (R-Fla.) had with pages for years while he was in the House.

Now, as the role of legislators in the firings of eight U.S. attorneys raises fresh questions about House ethics, oversight experts say fixing the system should be a top priority.

"I told them they better not take a large amount of time, for their own protection," said Norman Ornstein, a scholar at the American Enterprise Institute who has appeared before the ethics task force. If there were "an explosion of indictments . . . then it looks like you're responding defensively."

In their first week in the majority, House Democrats tightened the rules on accepting gifts, travel and meals from lobbyists. The Senate followed suit, then passed tighter rules on lobbying by senators' spouses and increasing the time that a senator who leaves office must wait before lobbying his or her former colleagues from one year to two.

A House proposal that tracks the lobbying reform portion of the Senate bill has been delayed for weeks amid quibbling over details. A proposal by Reps. Marty Meehan (D-Mass.) and Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) would require disclosure of "bundled" campaign contributions, in which a lobbyist or other individual solicits many small campaign contributions for a candidate. Meehan also proposed disclosure rules on campaigns to influence Congress that seem to spring from the grass roots but are actually organized by lobbyists. Staffers working on the bill hope it will reach the floor in May.

But the true acid test, watchdogs say, is whether the House is willing to make substantial changes to the way it polices ethics.

"If this failed ethics enforcement process is left in place, we are bound to see problems arising in the future," said Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, one of a dozen government-oversight groups that have appeared before the House task force. "What we've seen so far raises very serious questions as to whether this task force is prepared to come up with real, basic change ."

The task force has held 10 meetings with the groups but has yet to begin formulating proposals, Capuano said, "The product is more important than a deadline."

Several people close to the task force say Capuano, a close Pelosi ally, would like an independent entity of some kind. The "options menu" contains dozens of possibilities for the entity's powers, composition, even funding. But some lawmakers have referred to the proposed body as an "independent counsel," and fear long, disruptive investigations that may or may not bear fruit. Others worry that the monitor will embark on politically motivated "fishing expeditions." Some lawmakers have suggested splitting part of the current ethics committee into an investigative unit or keeping the committee as is, with more money for enforcement.

A key mover in the latter group is House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio). "While Mr. Boehner has long believed that a functioning and effective ethics committee can sufficiently enforce the rules of the House, he supported creating a bipartisan task force to study the merits of an outside entity as well," said Boehner spokesman Kevin Smith. "He'll consider its conclusions before making any final decisions."

Watchdogs say the dismissals of the federal prosecutors highlight trouble with the current system. The Senate has begun a preliminary investigation into the role of Sen. Pete Domenici (R-N.M.) in the firing of New Mexico prosecutor David Iglesias. But because the House ethics committee keeps its probes secret, it is unclear whether the lower chamber is looking into the similar allegations concerning Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.), a close ally of Domenici. The committee, officially known as the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, is also mum on allegations that Rep. Doc Hastings (R-Wash.) acted improperly when his chief of staff called the Washington federal prosecutor with questions about an investigation involving Democrats in the state.

Hastings's situation is particularly sticky; he is the ethics committee's ranking Republican.

"Members don't see that inherent conflict of interest," said Sarah Dufendach of Common Cause, who has met with the House task force twice. In one meeting, she cited Foley as an example of problems with the current system. "They said, 'But he didn't break any House rules.' I wanted to say, 'Do you really think he didn't [discredit] the House?' "

"We've got to do something or be wildly ridiculed," said a staffer working on the issue. "But members are always going to be worried about giving up some of their power."