The case against Rep. Maxine Waters

The case against Rep. Maxine Waters is available here in the form of the Office of Congressional Ethics’ report.

NATURE OF THE ALLEGED VIOLATION: Representative Maxine Waters made a request in September 2008 to then Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson that Treasury Department officials meet with representatives from the National Bankers Association. A meeting was in fact granted shortly thereafter. However, at the meeting, and in the follow-up activity that occurred through Representative Waters’ Congressional office, the discussion centered on a single bank—OneUnited. Representative Waters’ husband had been a board member of OneUnited from 2004 to 2008 and, at the time of the meeting, was a stock holder of the bank. Representative Waters’ conduct may have violated House Rule 23, clause 3 (by permitting  compensation to accrue to her beneficial interest) and House precedent regarding conflicts of interest.

The file has some points of interest, not all of high importance.  Who’s Representative A?  Chairman of the Financial Services Committee Barney Frank.  (See p. 7 of the report.)  Representative A, according to the report, told investigators that it was clear that Waters’ situation was a “conflict of interest problem.”  There’s one fundraising event mentioned in  the document.   Did OneUnited file a lobbyist disclosure report (if it needed to)?   A lot more to come as the House Ethics Committee’s work moves on.


The case against Rep. Maxine Waters — 1 Comment

  1. Pingback: The case against Rep. Maxine Waters | Political Activity Law … | The Daily Conservative