Request for Investigation of Representative Dan Burton

Congressional Accountability Project
1611 Connecticut Ave. NW Suite #3A
Washington, DC 20009
(202) 296-2787
fax (202) 833-2406

December 28, 1998

Honorable James Hansen, Chairman
Honorable Howard Berman, Ranking Member
House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
HT-2, The Capitol
U. S. House of Representatives
Washington, DC 20515

RE: Request for Investigation of Representative Dan Burton

Dear Representatives Hansen and Berman:

This letter constitutes a formal request for an inquiry into whether Representative Dan Burton (R-IN), Chairman of the House Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, has:

A. Defrauded the federal government by keeping a ghost employee, Claudia Keller, on his congressional payroll, in violation of federal law and House Rules;
B. Defrauded his own campaign committee, and converted campaign funds to personal use, by keeping two ghost employees, Claudia Keller and Sharon Delph, on his campaign payroll, in violation of federal law and House Rules;
C. Extorted campaign contributions, along with a member of his staff, Dan Moll, and solicited campaign funds in congressional offices, in violation of federal law; and,
D. Misused congressional funds, offices, resources and staff for campaign purposes, in violation of federal law and House Rules.

This request for inquiry is pursuant to House Rule 10, which authorizes the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct ("Ethics Committee") to investigate "any alleged violation, by a Member...of the Code of Official Conduct or of any law, rule, regulation or other standard of conduct applicable to the conduct of such Member...in the performance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities..."⁽¹⁾

We provide this information to prompt the Ethics Committee to appoint an investigative subcommittee and an outside counsel to investigate these matters. Ethics Committee Rule 19(a) states that "the Committee may consider any information in its possession indicating that a Member...may have committed a violation of the Code of Official Conduct or any law, rule, regulation, or other standard of conduct applicable to the conduct of such Member...in the performance of his or her duties or the discharge of his or her responsibilities."

A: Call For Investigation to Determine Whether Chairman Burton Defrauded the Federal Government by Hiring a Ghost Employee

A Salon Magazine article by Russ Baker suggests that Chairman Burton may have kept a ghost employee, Claudia Keller, on his congressional payroll, perhaps as part of a larger effort by Chairman Burton to provide financial resources for Keller and her family. According to Salon,

An additional serious issue for Burton is his close relationship with a former model, Claudia Keller, who until recently was his campaign manager, a position she carried out from the Dan Burton for Congress campaign office, located in her Indianapolis home -- which is outside his congressional district. Although the nondescript ranch-style house in a residential area bears no external signs, Burton has paid from $2,400 to $4,000 a year in rent for it since 1991, according to his campaign disclosure forms. In addition, Burton pays Keller an annual salary of more than $40,000, as well as expenses and bonuses of several thousand dollars; regular payments totaling $2,500 in 1993 to a business called Buttons & Bows (not listed in the Indianapolis telephone directory, but identified on Burton's forms as being located at Keller's address) for her appearances as a clown at campaign events; and an annual salary of more $10,000 to Elizabeth Keller, Claudia Keller's sister, who lived a block away. Burton's campaign has also made payments to Claudia Keller's daughter, aunt and ex-husband. In addition to the full-time campaign salary, Keller has also received a salary for part-time employment in Burton's congressional district office. Last fall, a Burton spokesman had trouble explaining what Keller's job entailed; he said he would need to look into it.

Burton's frequent visits to Keller's home were ostensibly to discuss business, though he often arrived dressed as if he were headed to the golf course, according to Denise Range, a neighbor, and was sometimes greeted at the door by Keller wearing a teddy. Melissa Bickel, another neighbor, recalls that Keller would often send her daughter over to their house when Burton came calling, which she says was as often as three or four times a week.

* * * * *

After Burton was reelected in November, Keller moved to Washington to join his staff there, where she now works as his "scheduler," according to a Burton spokesperson.⁽²⁾

The Indianapolis Star asked Chairman Burton about Claudia Keller's official work product:

At first, Burton's office would not reveal no details [sic] about her duties with the congressional staff. Pressed over a period of weeks, Burton's office delivered a small sampling of notes that she had written and letters she had typed for the congressman during her eight years with the office.

* * * * *

Last year, Keller made $ 21,736 in her public job, which Burton's office said averaged two days a week. Her total federal earnings since taking the job in 1990 amounted to $ 157,664 as of the end of last year.

* * * * *

It's in her campaign role that Keller is known best. Some former employees of Burton's congressional office, in fact, told The Indianapolis Star that was the only role they knew her in. But Burton's chief of staff, Kevin Binger, called Keller one of Burton's best employees who does more than her share of work.⁽³⁾

The Washington Post quoted Burton spokesman John Williams describing Keller's official work:

But Williams said that Keller, along with her campaign duties, "worked in the district office, which is not an uncommon arrangement. She handled all the campaign fund-raising. She did constituent work -- answering letters, special events, helped people to get visas."⁽⁴⁾

The Ethics Committee should evaluate whether Claudia Keller performs official work commensurate with her salary, and whether she is or has been a ghost employee. If she is or has been a ghost employee, then Chairman Burton and Keller may have engaged in a conspiracy to defraud the United States government. Such a conspiracy may have existed if Chairman Burton has submitted payroll forms for Claudia Keller, and Keller collected salary from the federal government while performing little or no official work. Criminal law, at 18 U.S.C. § 371, creates an offense,

If two or more persons conspire either to commit any offense against the United States, or to defraud the United States, or any agency thereof in any manner or for any purpose...

Furthermore, federal law broadly prohibits the use of government resources -- including congressional staff time -- for personal or non-official purposes. The Ethics Committee should determine whether Claudia Keller's congressional employment is consistent with this prohibition. If Keller is or has been a ghost employee, Chairman Burton is likely in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 1301(a):

Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law.

Similarly, the House Code of Official Conduct states that:

⁽⁵⁾

The House Ethics Manual contains a parallel warning that:

⁽⁶⁾

Finally, a recent Ethics Committee memorandum states that:

The Committee recommends that employees who do significant campaign work while remaining on the House payroll carefully document the time they spend on official activities and on campaign activities. Such time records are the best way to defend against any claim that the congressional office is subsidizing the campaign (or vice versa).⁽⁷⁾

The Ethics Committee should determine whether Claudia Keller kept such time records, and should scrutinize those records, if they exist, to discover whether she has performed sufficient official work to justify her taxpayer-funded salary. In any case, the Ethics Committee should determine whether Chairman Burton has cheated the federal government out of money by hiring a ghost employee.

B: Call For Investigation to Determine Whether Chairman Burton Defrauded His Own Campaign Committee and Converted Campaign Funds to Personal Use by Hiring Ghost Employees

The Salon article suggests that Chairman Burton may have maintained two ghost employees, Claudia Keller and Sharon Delph, on his campaign payroll:

For the past decade, Burton has exhibited an unusual pattern: Though he has had no serious opposition, he has paid campaign salaries every single month, even in non-election years, to two people: Claudia Keller and Sharon Delph. Delph knew Burton back in high school, and served as secretary to Burton when he was president of the Young Republicans in the 1960s. When Delph's ex-husband, who maintains regular contact with her, was asked what she did for her regular Burton campaign salary, he expressed amazement she was being paid at all, noting that she has a full-time job in a bank. Her son, John, who Burton recommended for graduate school and hired onto his Washington staff immediately upon his graduation, also said that he was unaware that his mother did any work for Burton's campaign.

The Ethics Committee should determine whether Chairman Burton's employment, on his campaign payroll, of Claudia Keller, members of Keller's family, and Sharon Delph, constitutes conversion of campaign funds to personal use and hiring ghost campaign employees, and whether it is part of a larger pattern of fraudulent misuse of campaign funds. Federal law prohibits the conversion of campaign funds to personal use:

Amounts received by a candidate as contributions that are in excess of any amount necessary to defray his expenditures....[may not be] converted by any person to any personal use, other than to defray any ordinary and necessary expenses incurred with his or her duties as a holder of Federal office.⁽⁸⁾

Similarly, the House Code of Official Conduct states that:

A Member shall convert no campaign funds to personal use in excess of reimbursement for legitimate and verifiable campaign expenditures and shall expend no funds from his campaign account not attributable to bona fide campaign or political purposes.⁽⁹⁾

C: Call For Investigation to Determine Whether Chairman Burton and/or Dan Moll Have Extorted Campaign Contributions

The Salon article, as well as previous accounts of Chairman Burton's fundraising practices, suggest that there may be a pattern of extortion emanating from Chairman Burton's congressional offices. According to Salon,

A former computer technician for Burton's committee, Jeffrey Senter, claims that he listened while Dan Moll, general counsel for the civil-service subcommittee, made telephone calls soliciting campaign contributions for Burton from subcommittee offices during the workday. "His tone was the hard sell: You will give us money or we will never help you again," the technician recalls. Senter, a registered Democrat who has done computer work both for the Clinton-Gore 1992 campaign and inauguration and for a committee chaired by a Republican, says that he would be willing to testify before a grand jury.

Senter says he mentioned the calls to several other staffers, who told him that they had complained about similar calls by Moll from the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service affairs, which was later merged into Government Oversight. Steve Williams, another former committee staffer, says he remembers running into Moll in hallways, and Moll telling him he was busy raising money for Burton. Senter says Moll was calling postal industry political action committees. Moll declined to comment for this article.

Ray O'Malley, a lobbyist and attorney who formerly worked for the prominent Washington firm of Cassidy & Associates, tells of receiving calls from Burton staffers urging him to attend fund-raisers for their boss. This lobbyist is certain that Moll called him from the congressional-committee offices, since, he claims, messages left for him to call back had phone numbers whose prefixes ring only inside the Capitol. Also, he believes other Burton solicitations came from Capitol fax machines. The lobbyist says he complained to Burton himself about the calls. "I did advise him personally that he shouldn't be calling from there," he says. But Burton shrugged off his complaints, he recalls.

The seriousness of the Salon report is heightened by a previous account of Chairman Burton's efforts to extort campaign contributions. In 1997, The Washington Post reported that:

Mark A. Siegel, then a lobbyist for the government of Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto, said he was approached by Burton early last year to raise "at least $ 5,000" for Burton's reelection campaign. When he was unable to do so, Siegel said, the congressman complained to the ambassador for the Bhutto government here and later threatened to make sure "none of his friends or colleagues" would meet with Siegel or his associates.

"I should tell you," Siegel wrote on July 25, in a two-page memo to a Bhutto aide in Islamabad, "that I worked in Washington for over 25 years and have never been shaken down by anyone before like Dan Burton's threats. No one has ever dared to threaten me into contributing money, and no one has ever followed through on such threats by contacting one of my clients.⁽¹⁰⁾

The Salon article quotes Mark Siegel's descriptions of Chairman Burton's fundraising tactics:

In a recent interview, Siegel elaborated that Burton may have committed other violations, including making illegal telephone solicitations from federal premises. Siegel says the calls clearly came from Burton's Capitol Hill office; and notes that the return phone numbers left were for that office. Siegel says he has told this to the grand jury.

"I've spoken to Burton many times," says Siegel, who says the congressman called him at least five times to ask for money. "He always made the calls; he always left the office number as his return phone number...." Siegel says Burton's language was both inappropriate and inelegant: "Several times he said, 'If you know what's good for you, you'll get me my money.' My money, as if it was his."

The Ethics Committee should investigate the fundraising practices of Chairman Burton and Dan Moll to ascertain whether they have extorted campaign contributions from persons with official business pending before the Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, or Congress. If the accounts described in Salon and The Washington Post are correct, then Chairman Burton and/or Dan Moll may have triggered the Hobbs Act, which prohibits:

the obtaining of property from another, with his consent, induced by wrongful use of actual or threatened force, violence, or fear, or under color of official right."⁽¹¹⁾

Both the accounts in Salon and The Washington Post contain elements of coercion and quid pro quo which suggest that a violation of the Hobbs Act may have occurred.

Irrespective of any extortion that may have taken place, congressional offices are intended for congressional work, not campaign solicitations. The Ethics Committee should determine whether Chairman Burton and Dan Moll have solicited campaign contributions from congressional offices. If they have solicited campaign contributions from Chairman Burton's personal or committee offices, they are likely in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 607(a):

It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or receive any contribution within the meaning of section 301(8) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by any person mentioned in section 603, or in any navy yard, fort, or arsenal.

A recent Ethics Committee memorandum further clarifies the application of this statute to the House of Representatives:

Regarding, first, the matter of soliciting political contributions, the basic rule is straightforward: Members and staff may not solicit political contributions in their office or elsewhere in the House buildings, whether in person, over the telephone, or otherwise. This rule applies with regard to the Capitol, the House office buildings, and district offices.

The rule bars all political solicitations in these House buildings. Thus a telephone solicitation would not be permissible merely because, for example, the call is billed to the credit card of a political organization or to an outside telephone number, or it is made using a cellphone in the hallway. Similarly, where a House Member or employee makes solicitation calls somewhere else, such as at one of the campaign committee offices, and has to leave a message, the individual should not leave his or her House office number for the return call.⁽¹²⁾

The Ethics Committee should interview Jeffrey Senter, Ray O'Malley, Mark Siegel, Steve Williams, and former members of Chairman Burton's personal and committee staff to assess whether Chairman Burton and Dan Moll have extorted campaign contributions, or solicited campaign contributions from congressional offices.

D: Call for Investigation Into Whether Chairman Burton Misused Congressional Funds, Offices, Resources and Staff for Campaign Purposes

The Salon article suggests that Chairman Burton and his staff may be misusing official congressional resources - including staff, offices, phones, and fax machines - for campaign purposes. Any such campaign use of official resources would likely be in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 1301(a):

Appropriations shall be applied only to the objects for which the appropriations were made except as otherwise provided by law.

Similarly, a recent Ethics Committee memorandum states that:

The basic proposition is that official House resources may be used for official purposes only. The House resources covered by this rule include official staff time, House offices and rooms, the computers, fax machines and other office equipment, and office supplies. Accordingly, the use of these resources for political or campaign purposes is generally prohibited.⁽¹³⁾

The Ethics Committee should interview Jeffrey Senter, Ray O'Malley, Mark Siegel, Steve Williams, and Chairman Burton's former personal and committee staff to determine the extent of Chairman Burton's use of official resources for campaign purposes.

E: Conclusion

We urge the Ethics Committee to promptly appoint an investigative subcommittee and outside counsel investigate the matters set forth above. Outside counsel should be a routine part of congressional ethics investigations, but it is imperative in this case, which involves an investigation of a powerful chairman of a full House committee.

Sincerely,

Gary Ruskin
Director

ENDNOTES 1. House Rule 10, clause 4(e)(2).

2. Russ Baker, "Portrait of a Political 'Pit Bull.'" Salon Magazine, 22 December 1998. See Attachment #1.

3. Mary Beth Schneider and John Strauss, "Sixth U.S. District; Sub-plots Enrich a Race of Strange Political Twists." The Indianapolis Star, 18 October 1998. See Attachment #2.

4. Juliet Eilperin and Howard Kurtz, "Burton Aide's Dual Roles Questioned; Records Show Nearly $500,000 Has Gone to Staffer Since 1990." The Washington Post, 23 December 1998. See Attachment #3.

5. House Rule 43, clause 8.

6. House Ethics Manual at 193.

7. James V. Hansen, Chairman; Howard L. Berman, Ranking Democratic Member; House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Memorandum on "Rules and Standards of Conduct Relating to Campaign Activity." 14 September 1998.

8. 2 U.S.C. § 439(a). See also 11 C.F.R. part 113.

9. House Rule 43, clause 6.

10. Charles R. Babcock, "Pakistan Lobbyist's Memo Alleges Shakedown by House Probe Leader." The Washington Post, 19 March 1997. See Attachment #4.

11. 18 U.S.C § 1951.

12. James V. Hansen, Chairman; Howard L. Berman, Ranking Democratic Member; House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Memorandum on "Rules Governing (1) Solicitation by Members, Officers and Employees in General, and (2) Political Fundraising Activity in House Offices." 25 April 1997.

13. James V. Hansen, Chairman; Howard L. Berman, Ranking Democratic Member; House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Memorandum on "Rules and Standards of Conduct Relating to Campaign Activity." 14 September 1998.