May 11, 1999

By this memorandum, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct undertakes to remind House Members and staff of one of the fundamental rules of ethics for government service. That rule is that government officials, including House Members and staff, are prohibited from taking or withholding any official action on the basis of the partisan affiliation or the campaign contributions or support of the involved individuals, or the prospect of personal gain either for oneself or anyone else. House Members and staff are likewise prohibited from threatening punitive action on the basis of such considerations.

As detailed below, questions in this area have arisen most frequently on the matter of casework. The Committee has long advised that in responding to constituents’ requests for casework assistance, House Members and staff are to disregard such considerations as the individual’s partisan affiliation, political support, or campaign contributions. Under this guidance, House offices are not to give preferential treatment to casework requests made by the Member’s supporters or contributors, but rather are to handle all requests for casework assistance according to their merits.

With this memorandum, the Committee stresses that –

• these rules apply generally to all official actions taken by a Member or his or her congressional office, and not merely to casework matters, and

• these rules preclude the taking of official actions, either in favor of or against individuals or organizations, based on such considerations, and also preclude threatening to take punitive actions based on such considerations.

Standards of conduct applicable to casework matters, including the rule requiring that partisan and political matters be disregarded in the handling of those matters, were set out in Advisory Opinion No. 1 of this committee, which was issued in 1970. That opinion, which is reprinted in the House Ethics Manual, 102d Cong., 2d Sess. (at pp. 263-66), states that one of the basic standards of conduct regarding casework is the following:

The manual elaborates on the point, stating (at p. 250), "Because a Member’s obligations are to all constituents equally, considerations such as political support, party affiliation, or campaign contributions should not affect either the decision of a Member to provide [casework] assistance or the quality of help that is given." Thus while a congressional office is certainly free to give casework assistance to a constituent who has been a supporter of or contributor to the Member, the nature and level of assistance should be the same as the office would provide to any other constituent having a similar problem.

The manual also quotes (on pp. 250-51) from a report issued by the Senate Select Committee on Ethics in connection with the "Keating Five" case, as follows:

Another of the basic standards of conduct enunciated in Advisory Opinion No. 1 is that the use of threats of reprisal, or promises of benefits, in pursuing casework matters constitutes an abuse of the powers of the congressional office and is prohibited:

While the guidance set forth above is specifically addressed to the handling of casework matters, that guidance is applicable to all official actions taken by Members and staff, including with regard to legislation. This is so because this guidance reflects certain basic standards of ethical conduct that apply to government officials in all of their activities.

Specifically, one of the key provisions of the Code of Ethics for Government Service states, in ¶5, that government officials should "[n]ever discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for remuneration or not." The Code further provides, in ¶10, that "public office is a public trust," and as the House Ethics Manual observes in this regard (at p. 24), "The public has a right to expect Members, officers, and employees to exercise impartial judgment in performing their duties." The manual further notes (at pp. 18-19) that the provisions of the Code of Ethics for Government Service are applicable to House Members, and that formal charges may be brought against a Member for violating the code.

More generally, as the manual notes (at p. 4), one of the ultimate purposes of the ethics rules is to help ensure that each governmental action is taken on the merits of the particular question, rather than any extraneous factors. Thus the manual quotes one of the leading authorities on government ethics as stating, "Ethics rules, if reasonably drafted and reliably enforced, increase the likelihood that legislators (and other officials) will make decisions and policies on the basis of the merits of issues, rather than on the basis of factors (such as personal gain) that should be irrelevant."

Furthermore, this guidance does not only preclude Members and staff from bestowing benefits on the basis of the recipient’s status as a supporter or contributor, or partisan affiliation. This guidance equally prohibits Members and staff from taking punitive action, or threatening punitive action, on the basis of such considerations. In this regard, one of the regulations issued by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics for the Executive Branch provides as follows:

5 C.F.R. §2635.702(a). House Members and staff should likewise adhere to this rule.

Any questions on this memorandum should be directed to the Committee’s Office of Advice and Education at extension 5-7103.