Ethics panel to examine Schweikert spending

The House Ethics Committee has unanimously voted to create a panel to investigate possible misspending authorized by U.S. Rep. David Schweikert or his chief of staff.

The rare decision, made earlier this month and publicly announced Thursday, escalates the seriousness of the alleged violations involving the fourterm Arizona Republican. But given the committee’s usual work pace, the public may know little more about the matter until well after the November elections.

For his part, Schweikert welcomed the subcommittee’s review.

“It’s almost wonderful, because this is the process we needed so we could present,” he said in an interview. “There’s really no mechanism to say, ‘Look, here’s our clerical screw-up and here’s how we fixed it.’ You need the subcommittee, because that’s the way you get to present what you’ve taken care of.”

The Ethics Committee acted on an investigation by the House Office of Congressional Ethics, an independent body that only refers cases where it has already found substantial evidence of a violation.

On Thursday, the Ethics Committee sketched out the parameters of what it wants a special subcommittee to review. That includes:

❚ Whether Schweikert or his chief of staff, Oliver Schwab, used or allowed expenditures from Schweikert’s office budget for impermissible purposes.

❚ Whether Schweikert’s campaign committees received improper campaign contributions from Schwab and other staffers in his office.

❚ Whether Schwab received income in excess of the outside earned income limit for senior staff.

❚ Whether Schwab failed to file full and complete financial disclosure statements.

Schweikert said he viewed the matter as a “bookkeeping issue” that has been solved and looks forward to quickly presenting evidence of that after the House returns from its Fourth of July recess.

Schwab’s income and spending habits came into question last year in a report in the Washington Examiner. In April, he repaid Schweikert’s campaign more than $50,000 for what was described as “erroneous reimbursement.”

The Schweikert campaign in December changed the company that oversees its compliance with campaign finance matters.

Laurie Coe, a Scottsdale woman active in Democratic politics, requested in January an ethics probe of Schweikert involving Schwab’s spending and income, noting that he reported receiving more outside money than congressional rules permit.

Last month, Schwab told The Arizona Republic that the allegations have been distorted and asked for patience as the matter was investigated.

“Most of what I have seen reported in the press on this matter is unfortunate and inaccurate speculation,” he said. “While I am not in a place to speak publicly with any further specificity, what I can share with The Republic is that when the campaign became aware of an unintentional reporting mistake, we immediately set to rectify the situation. Please know that we are working with all of the appropriate parties to provide a timely solution.”

The spending questions largely revolve around Chartwell Associates, a consulting firm operated by Schwab. The firm took in more than $133,000 in consulting fees since 2014 and billed another $57,000 in “consulting/travel” fees to the campaign, according to Coe’s complaint to the committee.

Schwab told the Examiner that Chartwell is a one-man shop. “Anytime you see Chartwell, that’s Oliver Schwab,” he told the Examiner.

The consulting fees, when combined with his annual income working for Schweikert, exceeded caps on outside income, the complaint claims. Schwab’s salary was $168,000 in 2016, according to Coe’s complaint to the Ethics Committee.

“Such behavior on the part of Rep. Schweikert and Mr. Schwab represents a pattern of flagrant violations of federal law and House Rules, which undermines the integrity of the House,” the complaint said.

Any misspending could be a problem for Schweikert, a member of the taxwriting House Ways and Means Committee. He is also believed to be considering a gubernatorial run in 2022, something that could be hampered by mismanagement allegations.

Schweikert represents the northeastern Valley district that includes Scottsdale. It is a seat Democrats have targeted for months because collegeeducated, suburban Republican districts are seen as more up for grabs in the era of President Donald Trump.

The district collectively voted for Trump by 10 percentage points in 2016, about half the margin it provided Republican Mitt Romney in 2012.

Three Democrats submitted enough signatures to qualify for the August primary ballot: Anita Malik, Garrick McFadden and Heather Ross.