Members of Congress who stick around after accepting new jobs raise ethics concerns

Ethics watchdogs are raising concerns about lawmakers who remain in Congress after accepting a new job, highlighting the lack of transparency of congressional ethics rules currently on the books when it comes to alternative employment opportunities and job negotiations.

The list of House lawmakers who have decided to leave their seats ahead of the next congressional session is now at 42, based on a list from the House press gallery, which includes planned retirements, resignations, and deaths. The list of senators is now at eight. But not all of these members are leaving office right away, even after announcing their next gig.

DESANTIS CAMPAIGN ON THE BRINK AS IOWA CAUCUSES NEAR

For example, Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH) announced in late November he would leave office early in 2024 to become president of Youngstown State University. Rep. Brian Higgins (D-NY) also announced in November he would not be finishing his term, and instead will be leading the Buffalo Performing Arts Center beginning in February. Sen. Ben Sasse resigned in January of this year to become president of the University of Florida, a position he accepted in October 2022.

Craig Holman, a government affairs lobbyist at Public Citizen, said there are major ethical problems that arise when lawmakers remain in office after accepting a new job to work for another employer.

“The privilege of serving in Congress entails a sworn duty to represent the public’s interest. But if the member is simultaneously obliged to represent a private employer, that member is wearing two hats: one to represent the public’s interest, yet another to represent their own financial interest and that of the private employer,” Holman said in an email to the Washington Examiner.

The Honest Leadership and Open Government Act was passed in 2007, which requires all retiring representatives who plan on working after they leave Congress to notify the House Ethics Committee within three days of starting negotiations for future employment. Disclosures are only made available to the public when they are accompanied by a commitment to recuse from matters that could pose a conflict of interest.

The rules are different in the Senate, where lawmakers are barred from negotiating for jobs involving lobbying activity until their successor is elected. For non-lobbying jobs, outgoing senators are required to notify the Senate secretary of negotiations within three days.

Holman has studied these issues for years and put out a report in 2017 that found out of 408 lawmakers who retired, resigned, or lost their elections between 2007 and 2017, only 16 disclosed the negotiations for future employment.

“The damage caused by the conflict of interest could be significantly mitigated if the outside employment were fully disclosed and the member revised from any official actions that could benefit the private employer. But congressional ethics rules require neither,” Holman added.

A biannual report from the committee found it received 101 recusals and 287 negotiation disclosures from lawmakers and staff in the last Congress. Only one employment negotiation disclosure is available from former North Carolina Democratic Rep. David Price, who is now a professor at Duke University, and one recusal notice from former Texas Democratic Rep. Filemon Vela, who is a partner at a lobbying firm in Washington, D.C., that has been made available to the public for the last Congress.

When lawmakers return in January, they will likely vote on appropriations bills to fund departments of Labor, Health, and Education, which will include funding for public universities. Experts note this could be a conflict of interest for some lawmakers leaving to accept positions at public universities or at entities that receive funding from the federal government.

“Whose interest will prevail in the course of official congressional duties is a matter of speculation and doubt, further eroding the public’s confidence in Congress,” Holman said.

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER

However, some experts emphasize certain kinds of jobs raise more alarm bells than others.

“If you’re going to go be a professor, that doesn’t really seem like a big conflict,” said Daniel Schuman, governance director at POPVOX Foundation, in an interview with Roll Call. “But if you’re going to go work at a lobby shop … more conflicts could arise.”