Q: I work for an ethics watchdog group that has been seeking reform for
years. The recently passed Honest Leadership and Open Government Act included
many of the changes we have sought, but it did not go far enough. Most
importantly, although it is now a federal crime for a lobbyist to make a gift
that violates the Congressional gift rules, the act does not assign criminal
liability to the official receiving such a gift. Is it really the case that,
while a lobbyist’s violation of the gift rules is a crime, a Member’s violation
is merely a rules violation? Or might Members and staff somehow face criminal
liability for violations of Congressional gift rules?
A: You are right that the act, on its face, does not subject Members and
staff to criminal liability. However, the good news for you and bad news for
Members and staff is that, with a little nifty legal footwork, a prosecutor
might use the act to expose Members and staff to criminal liability for
violations of the gift rules that involve lobbyists. But before turning to the
reasons why, we should first be careful to distinguish between the federal
bribery statute and the Congressional gift rules. These are two completely
different animals, and your question concerns only the Congressional gift rules.
The federal bribery statute criminalizes gifts to public officials in
exchange for, or in recognition of, some official act. The statute applies to
Congressional officials who receive gifts as well as individuals who offer them.
The critical element for liability is the linkage of a gift to an official act.
In contrast, unlike the bribery statute, the Congressional gift rules apply
even in the absence of a link to an official act. The House and Senate
established the gift rules to define when Congressional officials may and may
not receive gifts.
Given the rules’ purpose, it is no surprise that, until recently, they
applied only to Members and staff. The House and Senate ethics committees
administer the rules, investigate alleged violations and recommend sanctions
where deemed appropriate. The possible sanctions for violations of the gift
rules include censure, reprimand, a fine and even expulsion. The ethics
committees cannot, however, impose criminal sanctions.
This is where the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act comes in. For the
first time, the Congressional gift rules extend to individuals and entities
outside Congress. Lobbyists and employers of in-house lobbyists now face stiff
civil penalties for knowingly making a gift to a covered official that violates
the Congressional gift rules. As you point out, they also face criminal
liability, including up to five years in jail, if they violate the rules
In light of these changes, lobbyists and employers of in-house lobbyists are
rushing to learn a complex set of rules that were designed to apply only to
Members and staff, and that, until now, never exposed anyone to criminal
Yet, as you point out, the act does not extend criminal liability for gift
rule violations to Members and staff. The act makes clear that such liability
applies only to lobbyists and businesses that employ them. In fact, a strong
argument exists that Congress’ omission of Members and staff from the list of
individuals who face criminal liability signals its legislative intent that
Members and staff should not be criminally liable for gift rule violations.
Despite the strength of this argument, Members and staff still might face a
risk of criminal liability for violations of Congressional gift rules.
Prosecutors might attempt to use other criminal statutes to link the gift rules
to the act.
For example, under the federal conspiracy statute it is a crime to make an
agreement to violate another federal criminal statute. A prosecutor might argue
that, if a lobbyist knowingly and corruptly makes a gift to a Member that
violates the gift rules, and the Member agrees to receive the gift, the Member
and lobbyist have made an agreement to violate the act. The prosecutor could
contend that the Member’s participation in the agreement therefore subjects him
to criminal liability.
Likewise, it is a crime to aid and abet the commission of any federal crime.
While it might sound odd to charge the recipient of a gift with aiding and
abetting the donor in giving the gift, prosecutors might see this as another
source of potential criminal liability. Under this theory, the prosecutor would
argue that, where a Member takes some affirmative step to help a lobbyist’s
violation of the act, the Member aids and abets the lobbyist’s commission of a
In sum, historically the only penalties that Members and staff have faced for
violations of the gift rules were the sanctions recommended by the House and
Senate ethics committees. In passing the Honest Leadership and Open Government
Act, Members may have unwittingly opened an avenue for federal prosecutors to
investigate and prosecute them for gift rule violations involving lobbyists.
© Copyright 2007, Roll Call Inc. Reprinted with permission. Widely regarded
as the leading publication for Congressional news and information, Roll Call has
been the newspaper of Capitol Hill since 1955. For more information, visit