Rep. Charlie Rangel temporarily resigned his chairmanship of the House Ways & Means Committee pending the completion of various ethics probes into his personal finances and other activities. (For a previous Sunlight Foundation exposé on Rangel's financial disclosures see here.) Aside from the political repercussions that are being discussed there are a variety of other lines of inquiry that Rangel's troubles have exposed. One of the most important is who will succeed him as chair of the House's tax-writing panel.

Next in line in seniority is Rep. Pete Stark of California. Stark was recently subjected to an Ethics Committee investigation and, while cleared by the committee of charges that he inappropriately received a tax break on his Maryland home, the congressman does not come across nearly as well according to the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE), an independent ethics body that recommends investigations to the Ethics Committee.

When the Office of Congressional Ethics staff came to Stark’s second-floor Cannon office in July 2009, investigators noticed a video camera recording — but Stark had not informed the interviewers that he had the camera running.

As the interview went on, Stark was contradictory in his answers to the investigators from the OCE, which is an outside congressional office and does not have the same power as the House ethics committee.

“Throughout the interview, Rep. Stark was extremely belligerent and frequently insulted the OCE staff members interviewing him,” Kedric Payne, the investigative counsel, wrote in a memorandum deep in the 122-page report. “Approximately 15 minutes into the interview, it also became apparent to the OCE interviewers that Rep. Stark was videotaping the exchange.” It is not standard for members to record interviews with the OCE, but members have the option of having a court reporter present for interviews.

OCE also had issues with the Ethics Committee investigation and issued this statement:

“The OCE conducted a thorough and professional review and accurately reported the facts gathered in the course of its review. The document the Standards Committee is citing, in order to claim that the OCE ‘s review was inadequate, was never provided to the OCE by Representative Stark. In fact, according to the Anne Arundel County Finance Office, such documents are not even mailed to homeowners until the end of November 2009 — almost three months after the OCE review concluded.

“Further, the OCE’s review concerned the following allegation, ‘Representative Stark’s conduct may have violated Maryland law and the Code of Ethics for Government Service if he misrepresented information on the Application for Homestead Credit Eligibility in order to prove eligibility.’ Thus, the OCE review focused on what steps Representative Stark took or did not take to secure the credit not whether he was successful in securing the credit.

“At no time did the OCE subject Representative Stark to unfounded criminal allegations.”

House Democratic leadership may also be weighing the political ramifications of a Stark chairmanship. Peter Stone of National Journal explained back in December 2009:

In June, Stark voted against Pelosi's "signature" cap-and-trade energy legislation. He has been mostly a loyal lieutenant in support of health reform as chairman of the Ways and Means Health Subcommittee, though Pelosi pre-empted many key decisions on that measure, especially in the endgame leading up to its passage in the House.

In an October profile, the Los Angeles Times noted Stark's "big mouth" and called him "one of Congress' most impolitic politicians." Stark told the reporter, "It's difficult for me" when he is under attack, and that his responses are rarely planned. "I don't suffer people who disagree with me that well," he said.

With Stark's problems, and amid growing speculation that Rangel may use passage of health reform as a capstone to conclude his 40-year House career, it may be possible for Democrats to move more comfortably to a new Ways and Means chairman. Next in line following Stark are Reps. Sander Levin, D-Mich., who also is 78, plus 73-year-old Jim McDermott, D-Wash., and 69-year-old John Lewis, D-Ga. All fit comfortably in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party. After Lewis in committee seniority is 60-year-old Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass., who has closer working relationships with many lobbyists and K Street interests.

The House Ethics Committee admonished Rep. Charles Rangel for trips he took in 2007 and 2008 to a business-funded event in the Caribbean. Last year, I wrote an article examining the curious case of the word "Caribbean" being the most used word in the Congressional Record for an entire day. It turns out that it was Rangel who was using the word and his word choice is actually connected to those trips he took to the Caribbean that led to an ethics investigation. Here's the full article from last April reposted:

According to Carl Malamud, Sunlight is “truly styling” due to our appearance in the Reliable Source in an article about Capitol Words and the top words used by a smattering of lawmakers. I thought I’d provide a little, friendly correction to the gossip mavens at the Washington Post regarding the use (overuse) of the word “Caribbean” by Rep. Charles Rangel — something that piqued my interest a while back.The Reliable Source notes correctly that the word most often released from Rangel’s mouth over the past year was “Caribbean.” However, they claim this is due to his being under investigation for failure to pay taxes on a Dominican villa. This isn’t correct, but the reality does have a connection to Rangel’s troubles.

Now we need to first note that the word use is according to the Congressional Record, which I think we’ve mentioned before includes a whole bunch of words that were never actually spoken on the floor of either chamber of Congress. (You can even fabricate an entire conversation as Sam Brownback and Lindsey Graham once did.) Instead of speaking words, congressmen can insert them into the Record during debate or in the Extension of Remarks. Rangel’s use of the word falls into this latter category and mostly due to his insertion of articles penned for the New York CaribNews (he uses a variety of different spellings for this news outlet).

During the 110th Congress, Rangel inserted articles by the New York CaribNews 45 times. The word “Caribbean,” inserted by Rangel, appears on a total of 77 separate insertions into the Exetensions of Remarks.

The New York CaribNews is a heavily circulated paper in New York City, providing news to the very large Caribbean community in the city. Rangel’s Harlem district also hosts a large number of people of Caribbean descent and recent immigrants.

So what does this mean? Where is the connection to anything related to Rangel’s ethical troubles? The New York CaribNews is owned by the New York Carib News Foundation, which came under fire for hosting a business getaway for members of the Congressional Black Caucus, including Rangel, that may have violated congressional ethics rules. According to the New York Post and The Hill, private companies provided the money to the New York Carib News Foundation to spend directly on the travel of the lawmakers. This would be in violation of House ethics rules preventing private companies from providing lawmakers with in kind contributions.

I’m not sure what this says about anything. Is Rangel using the Extension of Remarks to curry favor with the Carib News Foundation? Does this constant reference in the official Congressional Record help with their corporate sponsorships? Perhaps readers have other questions — or answers.

Last week, the cable news networks were blanketing their shows with stories about the leaking of a report from the House Ethics Committtee detailing the nearly 30 lawmakers under investigation by the committee. Despite all of the bombast of cable news anchors over the investigations, the totality of the leak is less than meets the eye. Seventeen out of the twenty-nine lawmakers investigated by the committee have already been reported on and a number more had been connected to investigations previously, but their investigation had not previously been reported. In total, only seven investigations were released that were previously unreported, mostly for what would be minor infractions. This amounts to a pretty small amount of unknown investigations for what has turned into a big story.

Importantly, as many are highlighting, the leaked report does show that the Ethics Committee is doing its job. For years, the committee has taken heat for failing to investigate lawmakers and slow-walking those investigations when it does. Despite early clashes, it appear that the new, independent Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) has prompted the committee to investigate and review a number of cases regarding potential ethical misconduct by lawmakers. This is a positive development, however, the leaking may cause problems as many lawmakers are now associated with ethical problems despite the fact that they have not had a full hearing and could well find these ethics complaints dismissed.

On the actual investigations, the biggest information from the leak is that half of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee is under investigation for allegedly trading earmarks for campaign contributions. Previously, the public was aware that federal investigators and the committee were likely looking at Reps. John Murtha, Pete Visclosky and Jim Moran. Now we know that the committee is investigating those three lawmakers plus Reps. Bill Young, Marcy Kaptur, Norm Dicks and Todd Tiahrt. Aside from the probe of Rep. Charlie Rangel, this investigation involves the most serious allegations and could cause trouble for this bipartisan cast of lawmakers. Furthermore, it continues to show that the appropriations process, particularly for defense spending, is a failed process. This is now the third major investigation into defense appropriations in the past five years. Previously, Rep. Duke Cunningham was sentenced to prison for trading earmarks and appropriations for goodies and Rep. Jerry Lewis has been the subject of a similar federal investigation.

The other investigations involve four lawmakers probed for improperly receiving a tax break on their homes in Maryland or the District of Columbia; North Carolina Rep. Heath Shuler is under investigation for a land swap deal; Florida Rep. Connie Mack is under investigation in connection to an earmark for Coconut Road that was submitted by Rep. Don Young; Rep. Joe Barton was under investigation for gifts given to a non-profit that he operates by companies with business before his committee, but he has since been exonerated. All the other lawmakers under investigation have been previously publicly reported.

Here are some of the more interesting media mentions of Sunlight and our friends and allies over the past week:

CQ Politics' Richard Rubin reports how House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel (N.Y.), already beset by a series of ethics investigations, recently disclosed more than $500,000 in previously unreported assets. Rubin notes that earlier this year, Bill Allison, Sunlight's senior fellow, found similar problems with Rangel’s previous disclosure reports. According to Bill’s analysis, Rangel failed to report purchases, sales or his ownership of assets at least 28 times since 1978 on his personal financial disclosure forms. Assets worth between $239,026 and $831,000 appeared and disappeared with no disclosure of when they were acquired, how long they were held or when they were sold, as House rules require. “I understand being sloppy, missing an asset once or twice,” Bill said. “But what this shows is he doesn’t take financial disclosure seriously. How else can you year after year have these inaccuracies? It doesn’t look like there is a lot of care put it into compared to other members. It makes people suspicious when all of a sudden you double your wealth. Without knowing how a member accumulated that wealth, people are going to ask questions.” The New York Times' David Kocieniewski reported on Rangel's discrepancies and quotes Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, saying the New York lawmaker’s haphazard approach to his finances had undermined his credibility in Congress. “Sloppy bookkeeping is not a valid excuse for a sophisticated member of Congress who is chairman of the committee that handles complex financial issues like the tax code,” she said. Glenn Reynolds, at his popular "Instapundit" blog, has followed the various Rangel stories and picks up on Bill's Real Time Investigations post responding to the CQ Politics report.

Halimah Abdullah, with McClatchy Newspapers, reported on a study conducted by the Center for Public Integrity that found more than half the $1.1 million in campaign contributions the Democratic Party's Blue Dog Coalition received so far this year came from the pharmaceutical, health care and health insurance industries. The report cites Center for Responsive Politics data to show how, on average, Blue Dog Democrats net $62,650 more from the health sector than other Democrats, while hospitals and nursing homes also favor them, giving, respectively, $5,680 and $5,550 more. Abdullah used Party Time data to show how coalition members are raising campaign cash at fundraisers.  McClatchy papers across the country ran the story.

Wired's "Epicenter" blog highlighted the Apps for America 2 contest finalists. Government Computer News quotes Clay Johnson, Sunlight Labs' director, discussing the finalists.

Russia Today reported on ProPublica's and Sunlight's Foreign Lobbying Influence Tracker, which allows anyone to search the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) to quickly learn what governments are lobbying our government and about what. "It's amazing how much lobbyist really do have an impact on public policy," Bill Allison is quoted as saying. "You can follow lobbying campaigns online and see policies changing." The whole interview can be listened to here. The blog of the Legal Times also highlighted the Foreign Lobbying Influence Tracker, which they write "creates ways to search those records by legislator contacted, country, lobbying firm, client and issue. Previously, the filings were only available online via a Department of Justice Web site as non-searchable .pdf files."

MAPLight.org launched Money Near Votes, "a new government transparency tool making it easy to track special-interest contributions to legislators given within a month, a week, or a day of when a vote occurred." This new tool promises a new level of transparency by honing in on the role special interests play in shaping public policy. "Never before have these 'well-timed' campaign donations been highlighted in such an exhaustive, easy-to-locate format," MAPLight asserts.

According to Carl Malamud, Sunlight is "truly styling" due to our appearance in the Reliable Source in an article about Capitol Words and the top words used by a smattering of lawmakers. I thought I'd provide a little, friendly correction to the gossip mavens at the Washington Post regarding the use (overuse) of the word "Caribbean" by Rep. Charles Rangel -- something that piqued my interest a while back.

The Reliable Source notes correctly that the word most often released from Rangel's mouth over the past year was "Caribbean." However, they claim this is due to his being under investigation for failure to pay taxes on a Dominican villa. This isn't correct, but the reality does have a connection to Rangel's troubles.

Now we need to first note that the word use is according to the Congressional Record, which I think we've mentioned before includes a whole bunch of words that were never actually spoken on the floor of either chamber of Congress. (You can even fabricate an entire conversation as Sam Brownback and Lindsey Graham once did.) Instead of speaking words, congressmen can insert them into the Record during debate or in the Extension of Remarks. Rangel's use of the word falls into this latter category and mostly due to his insertion of articles penned for the New York CaribNews (he uses a variety of different spellings for this news outlet).

During the 110th Congress, Rangel inserted articles by the New York CaribNews 45 times. The word "Caribbean," inserted by Rangel, appears on a total of 77 separate insertions into the Exetensions of Remarks.

The New York CaribNews is a heavily circulated paper in New York City, providing news to the very large Caribbean community in the city. Rangel's Harlem district also hosts a large number of people of Caribbean descent and recent immigrants.

So what does this mean? Where is the connection to anything related to Rangel's ethical troubles? The New York CaribNews is owned by the New York Carib News Foundation, which came under fire for hosting a business getaway for members of the Congressional Black Caucus, including Rangel, that may have violated congressional ethics rules. According to the New York Post and The Hill, private companies provided the money to the New York Carib News Foundation to spend directly on the travel of the lawmakers. This would be in violation of House ethics rules preventing private companies from providing lawmakers with in kind contributions.

I'm not sure what this says about anything. Is Rangel using the Extension of Remarks to curry favor with the Carib News Foundation? Does this constant reference in the official Congressional Record help with their corporate sponsorships? Perhaps readers have other questions -- or answers.

Anyways, looking up an odd word used by a lawmaker in the Congressional Record can sometimes take you down the rabbit hole. Go to Capitol Words to see how far you can get.

Sunlight's Bill Allison was on New York's WNYC to discuss his latest investigation of Charles Rangel's finances. You can read Bill's report here. And listen to the interview below:

Happy New Year! The Sunlight blog is back after the holidays and here's a look back at some stories we missed covering over the past week and a half:

Gov. Rod Blagojevich, man of multiple criminal conspiracies and multiple toupees, appointed former Illinois Attorney General Roland Burris to fill the open Senate seat vacated by President-Elect Barack Obama that Blagojevich was wont to sell to the highest bidder. The press conference announcing the pick was one of the best media spectacles of 2008 (and that's saying a lot). The Senate has threatened to not seat Burris despite varying degrees of legal certainty regarding their power to refuse membership.

The stimulus package is in many ways turning into a bailout for the rest of us (us meaning people - ie: organizations - other than you and me). Zoos, bicycle companies, alternative energy, mayors, eroded beaches, you name it, they're lobbying for money in the as yet unfinished stimulus package.

'Twas the season of giving and we the followers of the Charlie Rangel saga were presented with more stories about the embattled Ways and Means Committee Chairman. The New York Times reported that Rangel pushed bailout magnate/insurer AIG for a contribution to the Charles B. Rangel School for Public Service as AIG pushed Rangel for a tax break. They both got what they were asking for. On the more mundane side, Rangel was found to use campaign funds to pay for his parking tickets.

USA Today reported what we already knew, one-third of all top staffers become lobbyists when they leave the halls of Congress.

Harlem Rep. Charles Rangel continues to receive tough press coverage for a multitudinous list of potential improprieties and abuses of office. Today, The Hill picks up on a weeks old story about the possible ethics violations involved in a privately-paid trip to the Caribbean taken by Rangel and other members of the Congressional Black Caucus (I wrote about it two weeks ago here). My colleague Bill Allison, meanwhile, has summarized most of the allegations made against Rangel and asks whether reporters will stick with the coverage for much longer.

What strikes me most about the Rangel allegations is how much they mirror the stream of scandal stories that plagued and brought down his predecessor Adam Clayton Powell. It's often overlooked that Rangel came to hold his congressional seat by defeating the scandal plagued Powell in a Democratic primary election in 1970. Powell's many dalliances with scandal included a 1960 income tax violation trial, a constant failure to show up for votes, and using House funds to pay family members and ex-wives and for Caribbean vacations with his many mistresses. Ultimately, Powell was forced into a showdown, led heavily by the white supremacist wing of the Democratic Party (who were likely guilty of many of the same ethical improprieties*), where he was expelled from the House, only to win his seat back in a special election and then through the support of the Supreme Court (Powell v. McCormack).

Now, I'm not saying that Rangel's alleged improper actions are necessarily comparable to Powell's; although the allegations about blocking tax legislation for a donor does rise to the level of Powell's alleged abuses. It is just astounding that Charles Rangel finds himself in a similar position of being hit with article after article revealing potential improprieties just like the man he toppled 38 years ago.

Notes:

* Southern conservatives despised Powell, the first African-American elected to Congress from New York, as he was a leading proponent of civil rights and the end of segregation in public education. He was the author of amendments that became Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 banning federal funds from going to racially segregated institutions.

** While not one of Congress' white supremacists, Rep. Wayne Hays led the investigative subcommittee that alleged numerous ethical abuses against Powell. Hays would later face a similar fate when it was revealed that he used House funds to hire as a secretary his mistress, Christina Ray (the Jessica Cutler of her day). The only problem: she couldn't type. Her direct quote: "I can't type, I can't file, I can't even answer the phone."

Since there are so many unflattering stories about lawmakers right now, I figured they could be condensed into one quick post.

Sen. Norm Coleman, still subject to a recount in his Minnesota Senate race, is facing a possible FBI probe as the Bureau announced that they are undertaking a preliminary investigation into the role a long time Coleman benefactor may have played in steering money to the senator. The preliminary investigation is based on allegations that Nasser Kazeminy attempted to steer $100,000 to Coleman through his wife's employer.

The House Ethics Committee is expanding its investigation into Rep. Charles Rangel to include allegations that contributions made to the Charles B. Rangel School for Public Service induced the congressman to change his position on legislation that would effect the donor.

The Chicago Tribune reports that Rep. Luis Gutierrez has made close to half a million dollars in real estate deals with campaign contributors. In some instances Gutierrez purchased the property and then, a few months later, sold the property back to the previous seller for tens, and sometimes hundreds, of thousands of dollars. You can review the congressman's personal finances at Open Secrets.

Rules for giving campaign cash to family members:

1. First, don't do it. It's not against any rules, but it looks just terrible.
2. If you are going to pay family members to help in your campaign, make sure they are competent and qualified.
3. Also, make sure that it does not look like they are simply pocketing the money you are giving them while doing little or no work.

Rep. Charles Rangel has violated all of these rules by paying $80,000 in campaign cash to his son to make some of the worst campaign and PAC web sites imaginable. Here's a screen shot of Rangel's National Leadership PAC, one of the two offending web sites (really, you would think they would pull these down):

If you look at what I've circled on this image, you'll see that they haven't even used spell check. "Maintenace." "Give Contribuition."

How far away are we from a viral "Leave Rangel Alone" YouTube video?