House Ethics Committee to weigh case against Rep. David Schweikert, chief of staff

Ronald J. Hansen | The Republic | azcentral.com

The U.S. House Ethics Committee acknowledged Thursday it is weighing a complaint against Rep. David Schweikert and his chief of staff, who has faced allegations of taking more money than House rules permit.

By rule, the committee won't publicly disclose how it intends to proceed against Schweikert until Nov. 14, eight days after the Arizona Republican faces voters seeking a fifth term. But the preliminary findings relating to Oliver Schwab, his chief of staff, could be made public by mid-July.

The Ethics Committee is acting on an investigation by the House Office of Congressional Ethics, an independent body that only refers cases where it has already found substantial evidence of a violation. It is unclear what the scope of any inquiry involving Schweikert is for now.

Schwab's income and spending habits came into question last year in a report in the Washington Examiner. In April, he repaid Schweikert's campaign more than $50,000 for what was described as "erroneous reimbursement."

The Schweikert campaign in December changed the company that oversees its compliance with campaign finance matters.

Schweikert described it as a “bookkeeping issue” to reporters covering a border event that he participated in on Thursday.

“We’ve taken all of our documents over to the House Ethics (Committee) and it looks like things are fine,” he said. “We had some reporting issues with the previous compliance firm. It’s all been fixed now, so now we’ll all just wait for our stamp of approval.”

Laurie Coe, a Scottsdale woman active in Democratic politics, requested in January an ethics probe of Schweikert involving Schwab's spending and income, noting that he reported receiving more outside money than congressional rules permit. She could not be reached for comment.

Schwab emailed The Arizona Republic a written statement.

"Most of what I have seen reported in the press on this matter is unfortunate and inaccurate speculation," Schwab said. "While I am not in a place to speak publicly with any further specificity, what I can share with the Republic is that when the campaign became aware of an unintentional reporting mistake, we immediately set to rectify the situation. Please know that we are working with all of the appropriate parties to provide a timely solution."

National Democrats seized on the matter, saying it made Schweikert unfit for office.

"Rep. Schweikert, who represents the worst of the Washington Swamp, is unfit to represent the people of Arizona’s 6th Congressional District, and the ongoing investigation into his serious ethical problems will undoubtedly dog him through Election Day," said Amanda Sherman, a spokeswoman for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

The spending questions largely revolve around Chartwell Associates, a consulting firm operated by Schwab. The firm took in more than $133,000 in consulting fees since 2014 and billed another $57,000 in "consulting/travel" fees to the campaign, according to Coe's complaint to the Ethics Committee.

Schwab told the Examiner that Chartwell is a one-man shop.

"Anytime you see Chartwell, that’s Oliver Schwab," he told the Examiner.

The consulting fees, when combined with his annual income working for Schweikert, exceeded caps on outside income, the complaint claims.

Schwab's salary was $168,000 in 2016, according to the complaint to the Ethics Committee.

"Such behavior on the part of Rep. Schweikert and Mr. Schwab represents a pattern of flagrant violations of federal law and House Rules, which undermines the integrity of the House," the complaint said.

Any misspending could be a problem for Schweikert, a Republican member of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee. He is also believed to be considering a gubernatorial run in 2022, something that could be hampered by mismanagement allegations.

Schweikert represents the northeastern Valley district that includes Scottsdale. It is a seat Democrats have targeted for months because college-educated, suburban Republican districts are seen as more up for grabs in the era of President Donald Trump.

The district collectively voted for Trump by 10 percentage points in 2016, about half the margin it provided Republican Mitt Romney in 2012.

Three Democrats submitted enough signatures to qualify for the August primary ballot this week: Anita Malik, Garrick McFadden and Heather Ross.

The committee's action Thursday triggers the eventual release of information already investigated by the House Office of Congressional Ethics.

The committee is not bound to act on the findings of the office, but it must release the reports sent to it.

Republic reporter Rafael Carranza contributed to this story.

READ MORE: