Report suggests wrongdoing by lawmaker, staff
D.C. — An independent congressional investigation found “substantial reason to believe” that Rep. Mike Honda and his government staff used taxpayer resources to benefit his 2014 reelection campaign, according to a report released Thursday afternoon.
But the committee that reviews such reports, made up of Honda’s colleagues, has not yet determined whether the congressman, a San Jose Democrat, should face any penalties. A statement Thursday from Rep. Charles Dent (R-Pa.) and Rep. Linda Sanchez (DWhittier), the committee chairwoman and ranking Democrat, said that it would take more time to review the initial report.
Honda said the report “draws no conclusions” and that “the issues addressed in the report simply do not represent congressional ethics violations.”
Honda has been facing scrutiny over the issue for nearly a year, dating to his costly and contentious reelection campaign against Ro Khanna, a fellow Democrat who is once again challenging him.
Allies of Khanna filed the complaint after a September 2014 media report that revealed emails between Honda’s chief of staff, Jennifer Van der Heide, and Lamar Heystek, who was Honda’s campaign manager when the emails were exchanged. The email discussions related to potential donors whom Honda’s office might invite to an official State Department roundtable discussion that he cohosted in 2013.
Thursday marked the first time that official details of the initial investigation, conducted by the Office of Congressional Ethics, have been made public. The 41page report, completed in June, depicts an office with blurry lines between official and campaign duties. The report also said “there is substantial reason to believe that Representative Honda improperly tied official events” to potential donations for his campaign.
Members of Honda’s con-WASHINGTON, gressional staff told investigators there was an expectation that they would help with campaign work.
One unnamed former staff member told investigators that she could have declined, but “I think that would have probably meant, though, that I needed to find a new job.”
The report says Honda’s staff ordered several members of the office to read a book written by Khanna and held regular “coffee breaks” to discuss campaign business. A former campaign manager, it says, gave a presentation about the campaign during a 2013 office retreat, in which he suggested using office events to raise money for the campaign.
The report details a 2013 incident in which Honda’s office helped “someone associated with the San Jose Sharks professional hockey team” with a constituent issue and then passed on the constituent’s personal contact information to the campaign, “suggesting that the campaign seek contributions from the individuals involved.”
Notes from a 2012 retreat refer to a fundraising effort that “will likely be transactional — i.e., help me with the visa for my grandma,” the report stated.
Honda’s office, in a news release, asked for patience and called the issues raised in the report “largely clerical in nature, involving sloppiness by staff relating to administrative rules.”
“I’m rightfully proud of my staff for being extraordinarily hard-working public servants, dedicated to constituent service, but they are not flawless. As a result of the OCE investigation, I have instituted one of the most aggressive policies in Congress on the use of staff,” Honda said in his statement. “Even though the House Rules permit congressional staff to volunteer on their members’ campaign, I’ve erected a firewall in my office prohibiting this activity. I know of no other congressional office with such a strict policy.”
Honda’s attorneys, in a detailed response to the congressional ethics committee, said “the report addresses actions which either do not violate applicable ethics rules or, at worst, present narrow concerns. Most importantly, the report clearly establishes that Representative Honda acted ethically and had no participation in, knowledge of, or reason to know about any of the allegations at issue.”
The July 8 legal response — written by Andrew Herman on behalf of Honda and Stanley Brand on behalf of Van der Heide and another former staff member — says the investigative report ignored explicit reminders issued during the retreats to act ethically.
“The report also focuses on discrete discussions during the ‘coffee breaks’ and retreats that were either permissible or inconsequential,” the response states. “Further, no subsequent inappropriate conduct by either office or campaign staff occurred as a result of these tangential conversations.”