House Ethics Committee Launches Investigation Into Florida Congresswoman

A Florida Democratic in the United States House of Representatives is officially under investigation for possible violations of campaign finance laws.

In a Dec. 27 press release, the United States House Committee on Ethics announced that it will launch an investigation into allegations that U.S. Rep. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick (D-Fla.) violated campaign finance laws and committed other possible violations.

“Pursuant to Committee Rule 7,” the release states, Committee Chairman Michael Guest (R-Mississippi) and Ranking Member Susan Wild (D-Pennsylvania) confirmed that “in accordance with House Rule XI, clause 3, and Committee Rules 10(a)(2) and 17A, the Committee unanimously voted to establish an Investigative Subcommittee” to investigate and determine whether Ms. Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick “violated the Code of Official Conduct or any law, rule, regulation, or other applicable standard of conduct in the performance of her duties or the discharge of her responsibilities, with respect to allegations that she may have violated campaign finance laws and regulations in connection with her 2022 special election.”

The probe will also examine whether she “failed to properly disclose required information on statements to be filed with the House” and whether she “accepted voluntary services for official work from an individual not employed in her congressional office.

Cherfilus-McCormick was elected to represent Florida’s 20th Congressional District in a special election in 2022 to fill the vacancy created by the death of Democratic Rep. Alcee Hastings.

The details of the allegations have yet to be confirmed.

However, a June 30, 2022, report by Inside Elections revealed that some of Ms. Cherfilus-McCormick’s campaign ads had come under scrutiny.

Campaign Ads Appear to Cross Ethics Line

While members of Congress are permitted to use official funds for TV ads that cover official business and avoid campaign content, efforts by Ms. Cherfilus-McCormick appeared to cross the line.

While most campaign ads end with the familiar phrase, “I’m [candidate stating name], and I approve this message,” each of the three separate commercials, which aired in South Florida during Ms. Cherfilus-McCormick’s campaign, began and ended the same way, including a telling disclaimer: “Paid for with official funds from the office of Congresswoman Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick.”

According to House ethics rules, “Official resources of the House must, as a general rule, be used for the performance of official business of the House, and hence those resources may not be used for campaign or political purposes. The laws and rules referenced in this section reflect “the basic principle that government funds should not be spent to help incumbents gain reelection.”

“The misuse of the funds and other resources that the House of Representatives entrusts to Members for the conduct of official House business is a very serious matter,” the website states. “Depending on the circumstances, such conduct may result in not only disciplinary action by the House, but also criminal prosecution.”

“Among the specific activities that clearly may not be undertaken in a congressional office or using House resources (including official staff time) are the solicitation of contributions; the drafting of campaign speeches, statements, press releases or literature; the completion of FEC reports; the creation or issuance of a campaign mailing; and the holding of a meeting on campaign business,” the website clarifies further, adding, “The same prohibition applies to any activity that is funded to any extent with campaign funds, even if the activity is not overtly political in nature.”

In the contracts Cherfilus-McCormick signed with television providers to place the ads, Inside Politics indicated that she identified herself as a political candidate and her campaign office as the addressee in one contract.

The House Committee on Administration’s Members’ Congressional Handbook says, “During each session of Congress, each Member is authorized a single Members’ Representational Allowance (MRA) to support the conduct of official and representational duties to the district from which elected.”

It also states that MRA “may not pay for campaign expenses.” More importantly, the handbook limits those communications to content that relates “to official and representational duties to the district.”

The House of Representatives Communications Standards Manual also makes it clear that “all content in official communications must be related to official business,” and” “Official business includes matters which relate directly or indirectly to: the legislative process, congressional functions generally, constituent services, the day-to-day operations of Congress, Federal issues of public concern, actions taken as a representative of the district from which the Member is elected, requests for public opinion of constituents regarding policy issues, and the facilitation of interaction between constituents and the Federal government.”

The Communications Guidelines for the Committee on House Administration reiterates that “All content in official communications must be related to official business” and “Official communications should not be used for political or personal business,” prohibiting “campaign content or electioneering” and “content laudatory of a Member on a personal or political basis.”

“The Committee notes that the mere fact of a referral or an extension, and the mandatory disclosure of such an extension and the name of the subject of the matter, does not itself indicate that any violation has occurred, or reflect any judgment on behalf of the Committee.”

The Committee also said it would “announce its course of action in this matter on or before Wednesday, December 27, 2023.”