Rep. Mark Meadows awaits ethics judgment on payments to chief of staff
WASHINGTON — The House Ethics Committee is unlikely to announce before the November elections a decision on whether Rep. Mark Meadows broke House rules by paying severance to a former staffer accused of improper behavior toward female employees of the North Carolina Republican.
The committee, made up of five Democrats and five Republicans, normally doesn’t announce its findings within 60 days of an election, a blackout period that starts in early September, just a few days after Congress returns from August recess.
Meadows is running for a third term against Democrat Rick Bryson.
The Meadows case also illustrates how House members are increasingly opting to bypass the independent investigation into possible ethics violations and deal only with a panel made up of their House colleagues.
An initial investigation by the Office of Congressional Ethics, which Meadows refused to cooperate with, found there was reason to believe Meadows improperly paid his former chief of staff for more than four months after he left the job.The OCE referred its findings to the Ethics Committee, which has the final word over whether House rules were broken and what, if any, punishment is warranted.
Prep for the polls: See who is running for president and compare where they stand on key issues in our Voter Guide
The OCE report was released Wednesday and showed that Meadows allowed his chief of staff to remain on the payroll even after he was banned from the office for inappropriate behavior toward female staff.
Kenny West of Hayesville was removed as chief of staff on April 1, 2015, but was paid $58,125 through Aug. 15.
House rules say staff can only be compensated for official duties commensurate with the compensation received. Meadows filed personnel paperwork to change West’s title to senior adviser and keep him on the regular payroll, but he did not submit any requests to pay West a severance, according to the OCE report.
Meadows refused to cooperate with the OCE’s investigation and instead reported the issue to the Ethics Committee directly in November 2015. By doing so, Meadows is the latest example of lawmakers avoiding the independent 8-year-old ethics office and going straight to a panel of their congressional colleagues for final judgment.
Meadows, through his lawyer, said he chose to deal directly with the Ethics Committee because the separate OCE process is “duplicative, costly and burdensome.” But the decision also highlights the concern among members of Congress that the OCE process — created in 2008 after charges that Congress was not adequately policing itself — does not treat members fairly.
“In self-reporting, Congressman Meadows asked the committee to investigate the matter and has been consistently proactive in addressing these allegations and voluntarily provided relevant documents to the committee last month,” lawyer Elliot Burke wrote to the Ethics Committee in May in the first detailed response from Meadows.
The letter also says Meadows “took issue with the OCE’s longstanding practice of publishing entire transcripts of interviews even when they contain irrelevant, ancillary and personal content.”
The OCE report includes transcripts of interviews with three unidentified former Meadows' staffers. Their statements detail some of the allegations against West, as well as the confusion in the office over whether West was still employed.
Meadows was informed of the concerns about West in October 2014. Burke, the attorney, said Meadows conducted an internal review, arranged for an independent review, changed West’s official responsibilities, transferred his supervisory functions and “ultimately came to an agreement with Mr. West that resulted in his resignation.”
Meadows continued to pay West “to ensure a smooth transition of his official responsibilities” and believed the payments were consistent with House rules, according to the letter.
Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist with the watchdog group Public Citizen, said the practice of lawmakers refusing to participate in OCE inquiries is becoming more common.
“OCE has earned a reputation for conducting thorough investigations untainted with favoritism,” Holman said. “The House Ethics Committee, on the other hand, consists of members overseeing colleagues and has a history of showing greater interest in protecting members than uncovering wrongdoing.”
Another key difference? OCE reports are public record, “whereas investigations by the House Ethics Committee may never see the light of day,” Holman said.
In releasing the OCE report on Wednesday, the House Ethics Committee did not announce it was creating a special investigative subcommittee, which is the sign of a formal inquiry. However, the Ethics Committee doesn’t have deadlines to act, and such an announcement could come later, or never.
Ethics probe of Rep. Mark Meadows continues
Rep. Roger Williams, R-Texas, also refused to participate in an OCE investigation of his conduct, the findings of which were released last week.
“The public now knows that Meadows and Williams are under investigation and refuse to cooperate with OCE,” Holman said. “Their lack of cooperation may in the end be more problematic for the members themselves.”
A spokesman for Meadows said Thursday the lawmaker will fully comply with the Ethics Committee’s investigation and await recommendations.
“Congressman Meadows is fully confident that the committee will find that he acted in good faith, and moving forward, he remains committed to continuing the people’s work in the House,” Ben Williamson said.
Meadows is using his campaign account to pay for his legal defense. From Jan. 25 through April 28 of this year, Meadows’ campaign account paid $30,690 to a Baltimore law firm.