IEC Journal

Federal Eye

The Washington Post's Federal Eye blog reports on the Federal Government, including this post on the latest developments concerning Inspectors General.

Controversy Over Ethics Pledge Waivers

A Politico story discusses the controversy over waivers of the Obama ethics pledge. Here's an excerpt:

Robert Cusick, director of the Office of Government Ethics, told POLITICO he did not know definitively how many ethics waivers had been granted, but he said “there’s been no great surge of waivers.”

Unlike waivers, which have to be approved by White House ethics lawyer Norm Eisen and are on file at the White House, letters of recusal are kept at the agency employing the official and are more difficult to track, Cusick said.

Cusick, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush in 2006 to a five-year term, said Obama’s ethics order has taxed his agency’s capacity. “We have quite a number of things that we’re required to do under the ethics executive order, which we’re still gearing up for,” he said.

Nonetheless, he disagreed with Grassley’s contention that the administration has not lived up to its promises of openness when it comes to the ethics order.

Thanks to Paul Bergstrand for the lead. We live or die by reader contributions, and appreciate those like Paul who help us keep this site fresh and useful.

IG Independence Allegations

The Washington Post reports that Senator Grassley and his staff are looking into allegations of infringement on Inspector General independence at some federal agencies.

Australian Def. Minister quits over Std of Conduct breach

The minister quit after allowed his brother to use a gov't office for a commercial meeting.  The underlying suggestion is that he misused his public office for the private benefit of his brother's employer, allowing them special access to gov't officials and inferring some form of preferential treatment.  See full article at  http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601081&sid=aPPicSOAGh0c&refer=australia .  But that isn't all, he also failed to properly report gifts received from foreign businesswoman. 

Kerik Indicted for False Statements to White House Vetters

A New York TV station reports:

According to the new indictment, Kerik, in 1999 and 2000 when he was NYPD commissioner, spoke to city regulators on behalf of contractors who were seeking one or more permits to do business in and with the city.

The contractors then spent more than $255,000 renovating Kerik's apartment in Riverdale. In 2004, when Kerik was under consideration by the White House for the Homeland Security position, he gave false and misleading answers to questions by White House officials about his relationship with the contractors.

The indictment alleges that Kerik falsely denied that there was any possible concern the president should have about his relationship with the contractors, and that as a public official he had had any financial dealings with individuals seeking to do business with the City.

It also alleges Kerik sent an e-mail to a White House official containing false and misleading statements concerning the renovations to the apartment in Riverdale.

Recovery Act Restrictions on Lobbyists

The President's memo on implementing the Recovery Act contains the restrictions below on lobbyists. OMB has issued interim guidance, and OMB Watch's analysis is also available.

Sec. 3. Ensuring Transparency of Registered Lobbyist Communications. (a) An executive department or agency official shall not consider the view of a lobbyist registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1601 et seq., concerning particular projects, applications, or applicants for funding under the Recovery Act unless such views are in writing.

(b) Upon the scheduling of, and again at the outset of, any oral communication (in-person or telephonic) with any person or entity concerning particular projects, applications, or applicants for funding under the Recovery Act, an executive department or agency official shall inquire whether any of the individuals or parties appearing or communicating concerning such particular project, application, or applicant is a lobbyist registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act of 1995. If so, the lobbyist may not attend or participate in the telephonic or in-person contact, but may submit a communication in writing.

(c) All written communications from a registered lobbyist concerning the commitment, obligation, or expenditure of funds under the Recovery Act for particular projects, applications, or applicants shall be posted publicly by the receiving agency or governmental entity on its recovery website within 3 business days after receipt of such communication.

(d) An executive department or agency official may communicate orally with registered lobbyists concerning general Recovery Act policy issues; provided, however, that such oral communications shall not extend to or touch upon particular projects, applications, or applicants for funding, and further that the official must contemporaneously or immediately thereafter document in writing: (i) the date and time of the contact on policy issues; (ii) the names of the registered lobbyists and the official(s) between whom the contact took place; and (iii) a short description of the substance of the communication. This writing must be posted publicly by the executive department or agency on its recovery website within 3 business days of the communication.

(e) Upon the scheduling of, and again at the outset of, any oral communications with any person or entity concerning general Recovery Act policy issues, an executive department or agency official shall inquire whether any of the individuals or parties appearing or communicating concerning such issues is a lobbyist registered under the Lobbying Disclosure Act. If so, the official shall comply with paragraph (d) above.

Legislation of Interest

At today's meeting two new legislative efforts were notified of interest of the ethics community:

• S. 49 - Public Corruption Prosecution Improvements Act (Reported in Senate) was introduced by Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and committee member John Cornyn (R-TX).  It was recently approved by the panel and is awaiting Senate action.  It is intended to provide new tools to help prosecutors target corruption among public officials.  It would rewrite and expand the "illegal gratuities" statute ( 18 USC 201) by eliminating the requirement that there be a linkage between a gift and an official action by a public official.  Under this provision, the gratuities statute would be violated whenever a gift is given to a public official "for or because of the official's or person's official position," regardless of whether any official action was taken.  It would effectively overrule Sun-Diamond holding. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c111:2:./temp/~c111J85Vvd::

• HR 2128 was reintroduced.  This bill would require Public Financial Disclosure Report filers to report their residence and mortgage. http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.2128:

WH Special Counsel May 5 Presentation on Ethics

Norm Eisen, White House Special Counsel for Ethics and Government Reform, recent presentation at the George Washington University on May 5, 2009.  See video at: http://undertheinfluence.nationaljournal.com/2009/05/white-house-ethics-adviser-lob.php (approx. 13 minutes long).

Interesting Article on Improving the Ethics Pledge

In this commentary in the Washington Examiner, Gary Bass of OMB Watch offers 4 steps the President can take to address problems with the Pledge, if there was clearer WH guidance on implementation (e.g., clear principles on waivers).

See full article at http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columns/More-OpEd-Contributors/How-to-improve-Obamas-ethics-and-lobbying-executive-order-44482042.html.

DOD Policy on Ethics Pledge & Holdovers

Thanks to Paul Bergstrand for alerting us to a Government Executive story about the Department of Defense's application of the Obama ethics pledge to Bush Administration holdovers. A senior DOD official explained in an April 7 e-mail to them:

Those who choose not to sign the ethics pledge and leave before April 30, 2009 (or those who choose to sign the pledge and are replaced after April 30, 2009), will be asked to submit their resignations, and the department will treat their separations as involuntary.