May 3, 2018
BY FAX: 202-226-0997
Omar Ashmawy
Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Office of Congressional Ethics
1017 Longworth HOB
Washington, D.C. 20515
RE:

Request for Investigation of 12 Members for Accepting
Campaign Contributions in Exchange for Official Action

Dear Mr. Ashmawy:
Campaign for Accountability (“CfA”) respectfully requests that the Office of
Congressional Ethics (“OCE”) investigate whether the following 12 members of
Congress violated House rules and criminal law by accepting campaign contributions
from the payday lending industry shortly before or after taking official actions in support
of the industry: Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), Rep. Will Hurd (RTX), Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO), Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC), Rep. Gregory
Meeks (D-NY), Rep. Steve Pearce (R-NM), Rep. Bruce Poliquin (R-ME), Rep. Ed Royce
(R-CA), Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), Rep. Steve Stivers (R-OH), and Rep. Kevin Yoder
(R-KS).
A recent report, Payday Puppets: How More Than A Dozen Members of the U.S.
House and Senate Were Showered with Thousands of Dollars in Campaign Cash by
Payday Lenders Within Days of Taking Official Action to Benefit the Industry,1 details the
official actions each of these 12 members took in very close proximity to receiving
campaign contributions from payday lending industry executives and industry political
action committees (“PACs”). 2 Those official actions included supporting legislation that
would have impaired the ability of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”)
to regulate the payday lending industry; supporting legislation designed to weaken the
Department of Justice’s (“DOJ”) “Operation Choke Point” program that prevents payday
lenders and other unscrupulous companies from gaining access to the banking system;

1

A copy of this report is available at https://alliedprogress.org/research/paydaypuppets/.
The report also details the actions of and campaign contributions to several Senators and former Rep.
Mick Mulvaney (R-SC) who are not subject to OCE’s jurisdiction.
2

611 Pennsylvania Ave., S.E. #337 • Washington, D.C. 20003 • (202) 780-5750
campaignforaccountability.org

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 2
and sending letters to the CFPB and DOJ defending the payday lending industry. The
facts for each member are set forth below.3
Factual Background
Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer
Rep. Luetkemeyer has led many of the congressional efforts to protect the payday
lending industry. On September 29, 2016, for instance, Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer (RMO), and 11 other members of Congress, sent a letter to the CFPB expressing concern
about the agency's proposal to rein in payday lenders and other short-term loan
providers.4 Ten days before sending the letter, Rep. Luetkemeyer’s campaign committee
received $2,500 from the Cash America International Inc. PAC – an industry-supported
PAC – and $2,500 from the World Acceptance Corporation PAC – another industrysupported group.5 The day after sending the letter, on September 30, 2016, Rep.
Luetkemeyer’s campaign committee received $2,500 from the Community Financial
Services Association of America (CFSA) PAC – a trade group for the payday lending
industry.6
On July 15, 2014, Rep. Luetkemeyer voted against an amendment that would
have removed a layer of congressional obstruction from the CFPB’s budgeting process.7
Four days later, Rep. Luetkemeyer’s campaign committee received a $1,000 contribution
from Axcess Financial Services Inc. PAC – a payday lending company’s PAC.8
On July 21, 2011, Rep. Luetkemeyer voted to replace the CFPB’s director with a
five-member commission that would, in effect, curb its ability to regulate industries like

3

In October 2015, CfA submitted a similar ethics complaint regarding 11 members of the House of
Representatives. Eight of the members covered in this new complaint were also included in CfA’s previous
complaint. See https://campaignforaccountability.org/work/payday-lenders-ethics-complaint/.
4
Ian McKendry, Bipartisan Group of Lawmakers Urges CFPB to Ease Up on Payday Rule, American
Banker, September 30, 2016, available at https://www.americanbanker.com/news/bipartisan-group-oflawmakers-urges-cfpb-to-ease-up-on-payday-rule.
5
Blaine for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2016 October Quarterly Report, October 14, 2016, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/088/201610149032507088/201610149032507088.pdf.
6
Id.
7
Cristina Marcos, House rebuffs bid to limit congressional review of CFPB, The Hill, July 15, 2014,
available at http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/212319-house-rebuffs-bid-to-limit-congressionalreview-of-cfpb; Final Vote Results for Roll Call 411, Amendment to H.R. 5016, U.S. House of
Representatives, July 15, 2014, available at http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2014/roll411.xml.
8
Blaine for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2014 October Quarterly Report, Amended, November 24, 2014,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/403/14952601403/14952601403.pdf.

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 3
payday lenders.9 Three weeks before voting for the bill, on June 27, 2011, Rep.
Luetkemeyer’s campaign committee received a $5,000 contribution from CFSA’s PAC. 10
Rep. Kevin Yoder
Rep. Yoder also has been a major player in protecting the payday lending
industry. On February 4, 2016, Rep. Yoder voted for a bill that was designed to halt
DOJ’s Operation Choke Point program.11 The New York Times editorial board said
congressional efforts to limit the program amounted to “intimidation” of the justice
department.12 Three weeks after voting on the bill, on February 23, 2016, Rep. Yoder’s
campaign committee received $2,700 from an executive at QC Holdings, a payday
lending company. 13
On October 16, 2014, Rep. Yoder, and several other members of Congress, sent a
letter to the DOJ Inspector General requesting an investigation into the Operation Choke
Point program.14 Two weeks before sending the letter, on September 30, 2014, Rep.
Yoder’s campaign committee received $2,500 from CFSA’s PAC. 15 About three weeks
after sending the letter, on November 3, 2014, Rep. Yoder’s campaign committee
received $2,600 from an executive at Select Management Resources, a payday lending
company.16
On July 15, 2014, Rep. Yoder voted against an amendment that would have
removed a layer of congressional obstruction from the CFPB’s budgeting process.17
9

Consumer Financial Protection Safety and Soundness Improvement Act of 2011, H.R. 1315, 112th
Congress, April 1, 2011, available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/housebill/1315/actions; Suzy Khimm, The GOP’s New Push to Defang the CFPB, February 8, 2012, available at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/the-gops-new-push-to-defang-thecfpb/2012/02/08/gIQA1DrfzQ_blog.html.
10
Blaine for Congress 2012, FEC Form 3, 2011 July Quarterly Report, Amended, April 27, 2012, available
at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/392/12951582392/12951582392.pdf.
11
Christina Marcos, House Passes Bill to Halt 'Operation Choke Point', The Hill, February 4, 2016,
available at http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/268262-house-passes-bill-to-halt-operation-chokepoint.
12
‘Operation Choke Point’ Hits the Mark, The New York Times, October 10, 2014, available at
https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/11/opinion/operation-choke-point-hits-the-mark.html.
13
Yoder for Congress, Inc, FEC Form 3, 2016 April Quarterly Report, Amended, July 28, 2017, available
at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/811/201707289069836811/201707289069836811.pdf.
14
Letter from Rep. Kevin Yoder, et. al., to Michael Horowitz, Department of Justice Inspector General,
October 16, 2014, available at https://luetkemeyer.house.gov/uploadedfiles/10_16_14_doj_letter.pdf.
15
Yoder for Congress, Inc., FEC Form 3, 2014 October Quarterly Report, Amended, January 13, 2015,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/426/15950024426/15950024426.pdf.
16
Yoder for Congress, Inc., FEC Form 3, 2014 Post-General Report, Amended, January 9, 2015, available
at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/577/15970007577/15970007577.pdf.
17
Marcos, The Hill, Jul. 15, 2014; Final Vote Results for Roll Call 411, Amendment to H.R. 5016, U.S.
House of Representatives, July 15, 2014.

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 4
About two weeks later, on July 29 and July 31, Rep. Yoder’s campaign committee
received two contributions of $2,000 each from executives at Check Into Cash, a payday
lending company. 18
On July 21, 2011, Rep. Yoder voted to replace the CFPB’s director with a fivemember commission that would, in effect, curb its ability to regulate industries like
payday lenders.19 Three weeks later, on August 11, 2011, Rep. Yoder’s campaign
committee received $5,000 in campaign contributions from Mr. Aycox, an executive at
Select Management Resources, a payday lending company, and his wife, Leslie Aycox. 20
Ms. Aycox contributed an additional $2,500 to Rep. Yoder’s campaign committee on
September 30, 2011.21
Rep. Alcee Hastings
On September 29, 2016, Rep. Hastings and 11 other members of Congress, sent a
letter to the CFPB expressing concern about the agency's proposal to rein in payday
lenders and other short-term loan providers.22 Two weeks earlier, on September 14,
2016, Rep. Hastings’ campaign committee received $5,000 in campaign contributions
from two executives at Amscot Financial, a payday lending company.23 Two weeks after
sending the letter, on October 13, 2016, Rep. Hastings’ campaign committee received
$3,000 from CFSA’s PAC. 24
On September 28, 2015, Rep. Hastings published an op-ed in the conservative
Washington Times praising payday loans.25 Three weeks after the Times published the
piece, on October 19, 2015, Rep. Hastings’ campaign committee received $25,000 from
the payday lending industry including $10,000 from Checksmart Financial LLC PAC, a
payday lending company’s PAC, $5,000 from Ace Cash Express Inc. PAC, another
18

Yoder for Congress, Inc., FEC Form 3, 2014 October Quarterly Report, Amended, January 13, 2015,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/426/15950024426/15950024426.pdf.
19
Consumer Financial Protection Safety and Soundness Improvement Act of 2011, H.R. 1315, 112th
Congress, April 1, 2011, available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/housebill/1315/actions; Suzy Khimm, The GOP’s New Push to Defang the CFPB, February 8, 2012, available at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/the-gops-new-push-to-defang-thecfpb/2012/02/08/gIQA1DrfzQ_blog.html.
20
Yoder for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2011 October Quarterly Report, Amended, April 9, 2012, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/972/12970864972/12970864972.pdf.
21
Id.
22
McKendry, American Banker, Sept. 30, 2016.
23
Hastings for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2016 October Quarterly Report, October 15, 2016, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/039/201610159032543039/201610159032543039.pdf.
24
Hastings for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2016 Pre-General Report, October 26, 2016, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/961/201610269034631961/201610269034631961.pdf.
25
Alcee L. Hastings, Why Payday Loans Are in Consumers’ Best Interests, The Washington Times,
September 28, 2015, available at https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/28/alcee-hastingswhy-payday-loans-are-in-consumers-b/.

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 5
payday lending company’s PAC, $5,000 from the Financial Service Centers of America
(FSCA) Inc. PAC, a payday lending trade association PAC, $1,000 from PLS Good
Neighbor PAC, a payday lending company’s PAC, and $4,000 from three payday lending
executives at Amscot Financial and Moneytree. 26 The next day, FSCA’s PAC
contributed another $5,000 to Rep. Hastings’ campaign committee. 27
Rep. Jeb Hensarling
On February 4, 2015, Rep. Hensarling voted to cap funding for the CFPB and
require it to consult with the industries subject to its regulations. 28 The next day, Rep.
Hensarling’s campaign committee received $5,200 from two executives at Cottonwood
Financial, a payday lending company.29
On July 15, 2014, Rep. Hensarling voted against an amendment that would have
removed a layer of congressional obstruction from the CFPB’s budgeting process.30
Three weeks before Rep. Hensarling voted on the amendment, on June 26, 2014, Rep.
Hensarling’s campaign committee received $5,000 from the Cash America International
Inc. PAC.31
On February 27, 2014, Rep. Hensarling voted for a bill that would have weakened
the CFPB through various measures including by replacing the director with a fivemember board and subjecting the CFPB’s funding to the congressional appropriations
process. 32 One week earlier, on February 18, 2014, Rep. Hensarling’s campaign
committee received $5,000 from the Ace Cash Express Inc. PAC. 33

26

Hastings for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2015 Year End Report, Amended, February 16, 2016, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/658/201602169008472658/201602169008472658.pdf.
27
Id.
28
Joseph Lawler, House Passes Bill Targeting CFPB, Regulations, Washington Examiner, February 4,
2015, available at https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/house-passes-bill-targeting-cfpb-regulations;
Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of 2015, H.R. 50, 114th Congress, January 6, 2015,
Final Vote Results for Roll Call 65, available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/housebill/50/actions.
29
Friends of Jeb Hensarling, FEC Form 3, 2015 April Quarterly Report, April 15, 2015, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/662/15970350662/15970350662.pdf.
30
Marcos, The Hill, Jul. 15, 2014; Final Vote Results for Roll Call 411, Amendment to H.R. 5016, U.S.
House of Representatives, July 15, 2014.
31
Friends of Jeb Hensarling, FEC Form 3, 2014 July Quarterly Report, Amended, August 19, 2014,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/608/14950047608/14950047608.pdf.
32
Alan Zibel, House Passes Bill Limiting Consumer Regulator, The Wall Street Journal, February 27,
2014, available at https://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2014/02/27/house-passes-bill-limiting-consumerregulator/; Consumer Financial Freedom and Washington Accountability Act, H.R. 3193, 113th Congress,
September 26, 2013, available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/3193/actions.
33
Friends of Jeb Hensarling, FEC Form 3, 2014 April Quarterly Report, Amended, August 19, 2014,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/235/14950046235/14950046235.pdf.

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 6
Rep. Will Hurd
On July 20, 2015, Rep. Hurd signed on as an original cosponsor of a bill that
would have repealed the legislation that created the CFPB.34 Two weeks later, on August
5, 2015, Rep. Hurd’s campaign committee received $2,700 from an executive at
Cottonwood Financial, a payday lending company. 35
Rep. Patrick McHenry
On September 29, 2016, Rep. McHenry, and 11 other members of Congress, sent
a letter to the CFPB expressing concern about the agency's proposal to rein in payday
lenders and other short-term loan providers.36 One week later, on October 6, 2016, Rep.
McHenry’s campaign committee received $2,000 from CFSA’s PAC. 37
Rep. Gregory Meeks
On. February 26, 2009, Rep. Meeks signed on as an original cosponsor of a bill
that would have allowed payday lenders to charge an annual percentage rate of up to 391
percent.38 Three weeks later, on March 19, 2009, Rep. Meeks’ campaign committee
received $2,500 from the Ace Cash Express Inc. PAC.39
Rep. Steve Pearce
On October 16, 2014, Rep. Pearce, and several other members of Congress, sent a
letter to the DOJ Inspector General requesting an investigation into the Department’s
Operation Choke Point program.40 Three weeks earlier, on September 24, 2014, Rep.
Pearce’s campaign committee received $1,000 from the Cash America International Inc.
34

To eliminate the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection by repealing title X of the Dodd-Frank Wall
Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, commonly known as the Consumer Financial Protection Act
of 2010, H.R. 3118, 114th Congress, July 20, 2015, Cosponsors, available at
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/3118/cosponsors.
35
Hurd for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2015 October Quarterly Report, October 15, 2015, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/049/201510159002938049/201510159002938049.pdf.
36
McKendry, American Banker, Sept. 30, 2016.
37
McHenry for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2016, Pre-General Report, October 26, 2016, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/819/201610269034601819/201610269034601819.pdf.
38
Payday Loan Reform Act of 2009, H.R. 1214, 111th Congress, February 26, 2009, Cosponsors, available
at https://www.congress.gov/bill/111th-congress/house-bill/1214/cosponsors; 391 Percent Payday Loan,
The New York Times, April 12, 2009, available at
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/13/opinion/13mon2.html.
39
Friends for Gregory Meeks, FEC Form 3, 2009 April Quarterly Report, Amended, July 8, 2009,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/720/29934219720/29934219720.pdf.
40
Letter from Rep. Kevin Yoder, et. al., to Michael Horowitz, Department of Justice Inspector General,
October 16, 2014.

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 7
PAC.41 A week later, on September 30, 2014, Rep. Pearce’s campaign committee
received another $2,500 from the Ace Cash Express Inc. PAC. 42
On August 22, 2013, Rep. Pearce sent a letter to then-Attorney General Eric
Holder and Federal Deposit Insurance Commission Chairman Martin Gruenberg
protesting Operation Choke Point.43 Among other things, the letter accused DOJ of
“intimidating some community banks and third party payment processors” – a group that
includes payday lenders – “with threats of heightened regulatory scrutiny unless they
cease doing business with online lenders.” 44 Four days after sending the letter, Rep.
Pearce’s campaign committee received $2,000 from an executive at Check Into Cash, a
payday lending company.45
Rep. Bruce Poliquin
On February 4, 2015, Rep. Poliquin voted to cap funding for the CFPB and
require it to consult with the industries subject to its regulations. 46 In the weeks before
voting on the measures Rep. Poliquin received $3,500 from the payday lending industry
including $500 on January 29, 2015 from John Bailey Jones, an executive at Check Into
Cash,47 $1,000 on February 5, 2015 from the Advance America Cash Advance Centers
Inc. PAC, $1,000 on February 10, 2015 from CFSA’s PAC, and $1,000 on February 10,
2015 from Axcess Financial Services’ PAC. 48
Rep. Ed Royce
On February 4, 2015, Rep. Royce voted to cap funding for the CFPB and require
it to consult with the industries subject to its regulations. 49 Two weeks later, on February

41

People for Pearce, FEC Form 3, 2014 October Quarterly Report, October 15, 2014, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/635/14978270635/14978270635.pdf.
42
Id.
43
Letter from Rep. Blaine Luetkemeyer to Attorney General Eric Holder and FDIC Chair Martin
Gruenberg, August 22, 2013, available at https://campaignforaccountability.org/work/payday-lendersethics-complaint/ (Exhibit A).
44
Id.
45
People for Pearce, FEC Form 3, 2013 October Quarterly Report, October 11, 2013, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/726/13941757726/13941757726.pdf.
46
Lawler, Washington Examiner, Feb. 4, 2015; Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of
2015, H.R. 50, 114th Congress, January 6, 2015, Final Vote Results for Roll Call 65.
47
Jones Foundation Donates to Amateur Radio Club Growth, Cleveland Daily Banner, April 11, 2018,
available at http://clevelandbanner.com/stories/amateur-radio-club,78153.
48
Poliquin for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2015 April Quarterly Report, Amended, October 30, 2015, available
at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/514/201510309003254514/201510309003254514.pdf.
49
Lawler, Washington Examiner, Feb. 4, 2015; Unfunded Mandates Information and Transparency Act of
2015, H.R. 50, 114th Congress, January 6, 2015, Final Vote Results for Roll Call 65.

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 8
20, 2015, Rep. Royce’s campaign committee received $5,000 from the Cash America
International, Inc. PAC. 50
On July 15, 2014, Rep. Royce voted against an amendment that would have
removed a layer of congressional obstruction from the CFPB’s budgeting process.51
Three days later, Rep. Royce’s campaign committee received $3,000 from Axcess
Financial Services’ PAC. 52
On July 21, 2011, Rep. Royce voted to replace the CFPB’s director with a fivemember commission that would, in effect, curb its ability to regulate industries like
payday lenders.53 Two weeks later, on August 3, 2011, Rep. Royce’s campaign
committee received $1,000 from an executive at Arrowhead Investment, Inc., a payday
lending company. 54
Rep. Pete Sessions
On February 4, 2016, Rep. Sessions voted for a bill that was designed to halt
Operation Choke Point.55 Three days earlier, Rep. Sessions’ campaign committee
received $2,500 from Cash America’s PAC and $1,000 from a Cash America executive. 56
Additionally, two weeks after the vote, on February 19, 2016, Rep. Sessions’ campaign
committee received two contributions totaling $2,000 from the Ace Cash Express Inc.
PAC.57
On July 15, 2014, Rep. Sessions voted against an amendment that would have
removed a layer of congressional obstruction from the CFPB’s budgeting process.58
50

Royce Campaign Committee, FEC Form 3, 2015 April Quarterly Report, Amended, July 14, 2015,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/963/201507149000118963/201507149000118963.pdf.
51
Marcos, The Hill, Jul. 15, 2014; Final Vote Results for Roll Call 411, Amendment to H.R. 5016, U.S.
House of Representatives, July 15, 2014.
52
Royce Campaign Committee, FEC Form 3, 2014 October Quarterly Report, Amended, January 2, 2015,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/039/15950001039/15950001039.pdf.
53
Consumer Financial Protection Safety and Soundness Improvement Act of 2011, H.R. 1315, 112th
Congress, April 1, 2011, available at https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/housebill/1315/actions; Suzy Khimm, The GOP’s New Push to Defang the CFPB, February 8, 2012, available at
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/the-gops-new-push-to-defang-thecfpb/2012/02/08/gIQA1DrfzQ_blog.html.
54
Ed Royce for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2011 October Quarterly Report, October 14, 2011, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/346/11952627346/11952627346.pdf.
55
Marcos, The Hill, Feb. 4, 2016.
56
Pete Sessions for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2016 Pre-Primary Report, Amended, July 12, 2016, available
at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/385/201607129020409385/201607129020409385.pdf.
57
Pete Sessions for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2016 April Quarterly Report, Amended, March 24, 2017,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/022/201703249051887022/201703249051887022.pdf.
58
Marcos, The Hill, Jul. 15, 2014; Final Vote Results for Roll Call 411, Amendment to H.R. 5016, U.S.
House of Representatives, July 15, 2014.

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 9
Three weeks later, on August 6, 2014, Rep. Sessions’ campaign committee received a
$5,000 contribution from Cash America’s PAC and a combined $6,600 from seven Cash
America executives. 59
Rep. Steve Stivers
On September 29, 2016, Rep. Stivers, and 11 other members of Congress, sent a
letter to the CFPB expressing concern about the agency's proposal to rein in payday
lenders and other short-term loan providers.60 The day after submitting the letter, Rep.
Stivers’ campaign committee received $2,000 from CFSA’s PAC.61
On July 6, 2016, Rep. Stivers voted against an amendment that would have taken
a provision out of the 2017 financial services appropriations bill prohibiting the CFPB
from enforcing “regulations or rules with respect to payday loans, vehicle title loans, or
other similar loans.” 62 One week earlier, on June 28, 2016, Rep. Stivers’ campaign
committee received $1,000 from the Cash America International Inc. PAC. 63
Violations
The timing of the official acts each of these 12 members took, either directly
preceding or following campaign contributions from payday industry executives and
industry PACs, suggests the campaign contributions were made in exchange for
legislative assistance in violation of federal law and House rules.
Acceptance of a Bribe
Federal law prohibits public officials from directly or indirectly demanding,
seeking, receiving, accepting, or agreeing to receive or accept anything of value in return
for being influenced in the performance of an official act. 64 It is well-settled that
accepting a contribution to a political campaign can constitute a bribe if a quid pro quo
can be demonstrated. 65
59

Pete Sessions for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2014 October Quarterly Report, October 15, 2014, available at
http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/433/14978264433/14978264433.pdf.
60
McKendry, American Banker, Sept. 30, 2016.
61
Stivers for Congress, FEC Form 3, 2016 October Quarterly Report, Amended, February 24, 2017,
available at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/493/201702249050503493/201702249050503493.pdf.
62
Final Vote Results for Roll Call 369, Amendment to H.R. 5485, U.S. House of Representatives, July 6,
2016, available at http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2016/roll369.xml;
https://roe.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=398061.
63
Stivers for Congress, FEC From 3, 2016 July Quarterly Report, Amended, February 24, 2017, available
at http://docquery.fec.gov/pdf/352/201702249050503352/201702249050503352.pdf.
64
18 U.S.C. § 201(b)(2)(A).
65
McCormick v. U.S., 500 U.S. 257, 273 (1991); United States v. Biaggi, 909 F.2d 662, 605 (2d Cir. 1990),
cert. denied, 499 U.S. 904 (1991).

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 10
If, as it appears, these representatives accepted donations to their campaigns in
direct exchange for specific action on behalf of the payday lending industry, they may
have violated the bribery statute.

Illegal Gratuity
The illegal gratuity statute prohibits a public official from directly or indirectly
demanding, seeking, receiving, accepting, or agreeing to accept anything of value
personally for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such
official.66 In considering this statute, the Supreme Court has held that a link must be
established between the gratuity and a specific action taken by or to be taken by the
government official. 67
If a link is established between these 12 members sponsoring legislation, sending
letters to government agencies or taking other action and their accepting or agreeing to
accept contributions to their campaigns, they may have violated the illegal gratuity
statute.
In addition, the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct has used the
acceptance of bribes and gratuities under these statutes as a basis for disciplinary
proceedings and punishment of members, including expulsion.68
5 U.S.C. § 7353 and House Rule XXIII
A provision of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989, 5 U.S.C. § 7353, prohibits
members of the House, officers, and employees from asking for anything of value from a
broad range of people, including “anyone who seeks official action from the House, does
business with the House, or has interests which may be substantially affected by the
performance of official duties.”69 House Rule XXIII, clause 3, similarly provides:
A Member, Delegate, Resident Commissioner, or employee
of the House may not receive compensation and may not permit
compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any
66

18 U.S.C. § 201(c)(1)(B).
United States v. Sun-Diamond Growers of Cal., 526 U.S. 398 (1999).
68
In the Matter of Representative Mario Biaggi, H.R. Rep. No. 100-506, 100th Cong., 2d Sess. (1988)
(recommending expulsion of the member from the House); In the Matter of Representative Daniel J. Flood,
H.R. Rep. No. 96-856, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. (1980).
69
See House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, “Memorandum For All Members, Officers and
Employees,” Rules Governing (1) Solicitation by Members, Officers and Employees in General, and (2)
Political Fundraising Activity in House Offices, April 25, 1997.
67

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 11
source, the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence
improperly exerted from his position in the Congress.
The House Ethics Manual specifically explains that this section applies to
campaign contributions stating, a member “may not accept any contribution that the
donor links to any official action” that a member “has taken or is being asked to take.” 70
The House Committee on Ethics previously has been critical of members whose
conduct has created at least the appearance of offering special treatment to donors.
Particularly focusing on the timing of the event, the committee admonished then-Majority
Leader Tom DeLay for participating in a fundraiser just as a House-Senate conference on
major energy legislation was about to begin. According to the committee, “a Member
should not participate in a fundraising event that gives even an appearance that donors
will receive or are entitled to either special treatment or access.” 71
Similarly, here these 12 members have taken numerous official actions –
including sponsoring legislation and attempting to derail both enforcement and regulatory
efforts – to benefit the payday lending industry either following close on the heels or
slightly in advance of campaign contributions. 72 Such conduct likely violates 5 U.S.C. §
7353 and House Rule XXIII.
5 C.F.R. § 2635.702(a)
Members of the House are prohibited from “taking any official actions for the
prospect of personal gain for themselves or anyone else.”73 House members are directed

70

House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, House Ethics Manual, p. 150 (110th Cong. 2d Sess.).
Letter from House Committee on Ethics to Rep. Tom DeLay, October 6, 2004, at 1, 2, available at
https://ethics.house.gov/committee-report/2nd-session-report-105-797/letter-representative-tom-delay.
72
In 2010, OCE investigated eight members who either held fundraisers or received campaign
contributions just before a House vote on an amendment to a financial regulatory reform bill that would
have subjected the auto industry to greater regulatory oversight. See, e.g., Carol D. Leonnig, 8 House
Members Investigated Over Fundraisers Held Near Financial Reform Vote, Washington Post, June 16,
2010, available at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/15/AR2010061505643.
html. Although OCE concluded there was not substantial reason to believe any of the eight members
solicited or accepted contributions in exchange for performing an official act, the facts differed
significantly from those present here. The fundraisers in question were attended by a range of financial
groups, not limited to those just in the auto industry. Here, by contrast, the campaign contributions at issue
were all made exclusively by payday lending executives and PACs in very close proximity to official
actions on their behalf. In any event, the Menendez prosecution reinforces the significance of timing as a
key factor in deciding whether an official action was taken as a quid pro quo for a campaign contribution.
73
House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, “Memorandum For All Members, Officers and
Employees,” Prohibition Against Linking Official Actions to Partisan or Political Considerations, or
Personal Gain, May 11, 1999.
71

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 12
to adhere to 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702(a), issued by the U.S. Office of Government Ethics for
the Executive Branch, which provides:
An employee shall not use or permit use of his Government
position or title or any authority associated with his public
office in a manner that is intended to coerce or induce another
person . . . to provide any benefit, financial or otherwise,
to himself or to friends, relatives, or persons with whom the
employee is affiliated in a nongovernmental capacity.
The Code of Ethics also provides that government officials should “[n]ever
discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone whether
for remuneration or not.”74
If, as it appears, any of these 12 members took action such as sending letters to
executive agencies and/or sponsoring legislation to benefit the payday lending industry in
return for campaign and/or PAC contributions, they may have dispensed special favors in
violation of 5 C.F.R. § 2635.702(a).
Conduct Not Reflecting Creditably on the House
Rule XXIII of the House Ethics Manual requires all members of the House to
conduct themselves “at all times in a manner that reflects creditably on the House.”75
This ethics standard is considered to be “the most comprehensive provision” of the
code.76 When this section was first adopted, the Select Committee on Standards of
Official Conduct of the 90th Congress noted that it was included within the Code to deal
with “flagrant” violations of the law that reflect on “Congress as a whole,” and that might
otherwise go unpunished. 77 This rule has been relied on by the Ethics Committee in
numerous prior cases in which the Committee found unethical conduct including: the
failure to report campaign contributions, 78 making false statements to the Committee, 79

74

Id.
Rule 23, clause 1.
76
House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, House Ethics Manual, p. 12.
77
House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, Report Under the Authority of H. Res. 418, H. Rep. No.
1176, 90th Cong., 2d Sess. 17 (1968).
78
House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, In the Matter of Representative John J. McFall, H. Rep.
No. 95-1742, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 2-3 (1978) (Count 1); In the Matter of Representative Edward R.
Roybal, H. Rep. No. 95-1743, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 2-3 (1978).
79
House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, In the Matter of Representative Charles H. Wilson (of
California), H. Rep. No. 95-1741, 95th Cong., 2d Sess. 4-5 (1978); H. Rep. No. 95-1743(Counts 3-4).
75

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 13
criminal convictions for bribery, 80 or accepting illegal gratuities, 81 and accepting gifts
from persons with interest in legislation in violation of the gift rule. 82
If, as it appears, these 12 members of Congress accepted campaign contributions
in return for legislative favors such as letters to executive branch agencies and/or the
sponsorship of legislation in exchange for campaign contributions, their conduct would
not reflect creditably on the House in violation of Rule XXIII, clause 1.
Conclusion
The payday lending industry preys on some of the most vulnerable members of
our society, deliberately plunging them into a cycle of debt in order to reap high profits.
The idea that members of Congress are trading the power of their offices to help
unscrupulous payday lenders avoid badly needed oversight and regulation in return for
campaign contributions undermines public confidence in the institution as a whole. As a
result, the Office of Congressional Ethics should immediately commence an investigation
of this matter to determine whether the 12 members listed above have violated House
rules and, potentially, criminal law.
I hereby affirm that to the best of my knowledge and ability all evidence
submitted was not obtained in violation of any law, rule, or regulation. I am aware that
the False Statements Act, 18 U.S.C. § 1001, applies to information submitted to the
Office of Congressional Ethics.

80

House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, In the Matter of Representative Michael J. Myers, H.
Rep. No. 96-1387, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 2, 5 (1980); see 126 Cong. Rec. 28953-78 (Oct. 2, 1980) (debate
and vote of expulsion); In the Matter of Representative John W. Jenrette, Jr., H. Rep. No. 96-1537, 96th
Cong., 2d Sess. 4 (1980) (Member resigned); In the Matter of Representative Raymond F. Lederer, H. Rep.
No. 97-110, 97th Cong., 1st Sess. 4, 16-17 (1981) (Member resigned after Committee recommended
expulsion). In another case, the Committee issued a Statement of Alleged Violation concerning bribery and
perjury, but took no further action when the Member resigned (In the Matter of Representative Daniel J.
Flood, H. Rep. No. 96-856, 96th Cong., 2d Sess. 4-16, 125-126 (1980)).
81
House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, In the Matter of Representative Mario Biaggi, H. Rep.
No. 100-506, 100th Cong., 2d Sess. 7, 9 (1988) (Member resigned while expulsion resolution was
pending).
82

House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, In the Matter of Representative Charles H. Wilson (of
California), H. Rep. No. 96-930, 96th Cong. 2d Sess. 4-5 (1980); see 126 Cong. Rec. 13801-20 (June 10,
1980) (debate and vote of censure).

 Omar Ashmawy
May 3, 2018
Page 14
Sincerely,

Daniel Stevens
Executive Director
Campaign for Accountability