House Republicans back off plan to gut ethics panel after Trump comments

President-elect said GOP should focus on other issues.

Less than 24 hours after approving a rule that critics said would gut an independent congressional ethics watchdog created in the aftermath of the Jack Abramoff scandal, House Republicans withdrew it Tuesday, bowing to pressure from watchdogs, calls from constituents and even President-Elect Donald Trump.

During a day that is typically marked by plenty of ceremonial procedure but little drama, House Republicans were forced to begin a new session of Congress by scuttling a rule change putting the independent Office of Congressional Ethics under partial jurisdiction of the House Ethics Committee. Supporters of the change said it would keep bureaucrats from policing lawmakers, sometimes unfairly. But watchdogs said it would essentially put House members in charge of enforcing behavior. The rule change came with little notice and was backed by 119 House Republicans. Democrats, in the minority, did not get to vote on the change.

Ohio Republicans weren’t required to disclose their votes – the meeting was closed door –but Reps. Pat Tiberi, Brad Wenstrup, Bill Johnson, Steve Chabot and Warren Davidson said they voted against the rule change, putting them among 74 Republicans to oppose it. Rep. Jim Jordan said he voted in support of the changes.

“While I certainly understand the importance of due process, I believe this change is a mistake,” Johnson, R-Marietta, said. “It is critically important that all public servants - across the public spectrum - are held to the highest ethical standards.”

Tiberi, R-Genoa Township, said he also opposed the rule change.

“In the GOP conference meeting last night, I opposed the measure to change the Office of Congressional Ethics, and wished more members had done the same," he said. "I am pleased that the conference came together today and stripped this ill-advised provision from our rules package. If there is a better way for this office to operate, those changes should be made in an open, transparent and bipartisan way. Sunlight is the best disinfectant and we should absolutely continue to hold members to the highest ethical standards.”

Davidson, R-Troy, said he wants to do ethics reform "in a more open manner."

He said proponents of the change had "valid concerns that unelected bureaucrats were making decisions without due process as well as the committee was being used for political attacks. I support reforms that resolve these issues. In any case, these reforms should be done out in the open.”

Chabot, R-Cincinnati, voted to create the office in 2008 and voted against the rules changes Monday. "I believe it serves an important purpose," he said of the office. "That said, there are some reforms that could be made to the manner in which the Office functions and operates. But I think those changes should be made in an open, bipartisan process, rather than behind closed doors.”

Wenstrup, who voted against the change, said the panel needs to be reviewed.

“Since the Office of Congressional Ethics serves an important oversight function, I believe it would beneficial to conduct a thorough review and evaluation to ensure its doing its job fairly. However, any review must be an open, bipartisan conversation that includes the American people.”

Jordan, R-Urbana, defended the move.

“The House Ethics Committee is completely bipartisan, and I know the members of that committee take their jobs very seriously," he said. "I am confident they will continue to work together in a nonpartisan way to make sure Members of Congress follow the rules of the House, and that they don’t receive any special treatment under the law.”

Watchdogs said that the move would’ve gutted the congressional ethics system and sent a terrible message to voters after Trump and others vowed to “drain the swamp” in Washington, D.C.

“Before the creation of the office, the House Ethics Committee was a black box of inaction,” said Lisa Gilbert, director of Public Citizen’s Congress Watch division. “The office has brought transparency and action to a moribund process and received nothing but praise from those watching the congressional ethics system.”

Trump had also criticized the move, tweeting that “unfair” as the office “may be,” Congress should’ve focused instead on tax reform and repealing President Obama’s health care bill first.

Democrats did not vote on the change because they do not hold the majority.

About the Author