BURSTLast Thursday, the House considered not one, but two question of privilege resolutions to publicly release the “draft report” of the House Ethics Committee on its investigation into allegations of misconduct by former Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.).
Gaetz had resigned from the House on Nov. 13 while his nomination by President-elect Donald Trump for U.S. attorney general was pending before the Senate. On Nov. 16 he subsequently withdrew his nomination under considerable pressure.
On April 9, 2021, the House Ethics Committee began its investigation of allegations Gaetz had engaged in sexual misconduct, illicit drug use and related illegal activities. At the time of his resignation from the House the committee was preparing to issue its final report.
Once Gaetz withdrew his nomination, the relevancy of the report lessened, though some interest remains given his announced plans to remain in public life in some capacity, though not as a member in the next Congress.
It is possible he could still be appointed by to a non-confirmation position in government. The truth of the allegations will remain of some interest no matter what career path he pursues.
That is why two House members offered back-to-back questions of the privileges of the House as highly privileged matters on Dec. 5. The first was offered by Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.) and the second by Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.). Neither representative is a member of the Ethics Committee, though any House member can raise such a highly privileged question if the Speaker determines (on the advice of the parliamentarian), that “the resolution qualifies.”
Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) had earlier indicated that a Speaker cannot become involved in issues before the Ethics Committee. However, a week later, he urged the committee to not publicly release the report because it would set a “terrible precedent” and “open a pandora’s box.”
Casten, in the preamble of his resolution, disputed that argument. He cited three instances in which past Ethics Committees had released reports on members who had already left Congress, and another instance in which the committee continued its inquiry after the member being investigated had resigned from the House.
The Casten and Cohen resolutions were offered at the end of the business day last Thursday. In both instances were preempted and disposed of by motions offered by Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) to refer them back to the Ethics Committee — essentially to kill the matter. Though Scalise was recognized for an hour’s debate on each, he dismissed the first cursorily by observing that, with Gaetz’s resignation, “the question is moot.” He then moved the question on voting to refer.
On the second resolution, Scalise confined himself to observing that the House could debate the resolution “for an hour, for four hours … but the bottom line is … Why don’t we get back to work for the people of this country.” According to one press account, that observation drew some laughter from the few members present in the chamber as it had been a relatively light legislative work week.
For instance, on Wednesday, the House considered and passed 20 bills renaming postal facilities across the nation. It saved one additional such bill for Thursday: renaming a post office in Plains, Ga., the Jimmy and Rosalynn Carter Post Office.
The votes on referring both Gaetz resolutions back to committee were close to being party-line, with all but one Republican voting to refer and all Democrats voting against. What was especially surprising was the high number of members “not voting.” On Casten’s resolution the vote to refer was 206-198, with 29 members not voting (13 Republicans and 16 Democrats). On Cohen’s resolution, the vote to refer was 204-198, with 15 Republicans and 16 Democrats not voting.
Questions of House privileges under House Rule IX are those “that affect the rights of the House, its safety, its dignity, and the integrity of its proceedings.” They ordinarily attract a high level of interest and heated debates — quite often along fiercely partisan lines. They are one tool the minority party sometimes uses to embarrass the majority.
Several reasons can account for the paucity of attendance at last week’s late-in-the-day votes, including member illnesses, family emergencies and meeting conflicts. There were also a number of member-office Christmas parties going on and the official White House Christmas tree lighting.
The fact remains there was a clear flagging of interest in pursuing the release of the report. While it is possible that Gaetz’s reentry into a high-level appointment could reignite calls for its release, at this point, at least, it appears to be a dead letter politically.
Don Wolfensberger is a 28-year congressional staff veteran culminating as chief-of-staff of the House Rules Committee in 1995. He is author of, “Congress and the People: Deliberative Democracy on Trial” (2000), and, “Changing Cultures in Congress: From Fair Play to Power Plays” (2018).