Congressional Ethics Violation by Alan Grayson

Source: Mullins and Hughes (2016)

As reported by Mullins and Hughes (2016) and (Lipton, 2016), the investigators on congressional ethics have reported that the Florida Democrat, Rep. Alan Grayson has an intensive involvement in the violation practice of ethical rules as meant for the House and the federal law of the US. As the documents get public, for examinations, the investigators are looking for the instances whereby the improperly earned profit from the businesses that are not related to Congress, during his tenure. However, the investigators failed to disclose most of the financial data and business dealings as
utilized improperly by the resources of the federal system of government, especially for the campaign for Senate seat (see details in USHR, 2016).

As reported by USHR (2016, pp. 72-73), the Board has declared “substantial reason to believe” that proves that Grayson allowed his name to be used by four entities that are related to Grayson Consulting, Inc. and his hedge fund, comprising fiduciary responsibility with huge compensation fees to Grayson Fund Management Company, LLC. Allegations were also about receiving contingent fee-interest in various legal proceedings, about omitting necessary data from financial disclosures by Grayson; his staffer utilized official amenities for unofficial activities, etc. Following the Review Report by USHR (2016), it can be well justified that Alan Grayson has violated Congressional ethical codes during his service to the US. This report is in itself a proof that that Grayson is definitely in fault, and I agree to the same. Since, United States House of Representatives (USHR) is the lower-chamber of US Congress and Senate; it is responsible for composing various legislative regulations. Its declarations and investigations are subject to remain authentic and genuine. As the members are elected for tenure of two years, all the representative of this House are committed to serve on a much unbiased manner. I believe that as the federal system of the US government offers this House with the capability to participate in Legislature and introducing necessary bills, offering services to committee, its allegations against Alan Grayson, get an obvious acceptance.

However, there still some loopholes that cannot be ignored about the allegations as made by USHR against Alan Grayson. The refusal to the allegations by Grayson appears somewhat logical, as the House Ethics Committee has not formed any ‘investigative subcommittee’ prior to these allegations (Gillin, 2016). However, the point to be noted here is that the USHR is just pushing the case of Grayson for further review and interestingly, is in itself under the review process of misconduct charges as made by its own members. This body is still at the verge of criticisms related to self-policing. Thus, any verdict that stands against Grayson is liable to get adverse impact on the trust of other members, for USHR.

Works Cited

Gillin, Joshua. "U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson downplays potential for punishment in ethics investigation."  Politifact. Web. 13th April 2016

Lipton, Eric. “Office of Congressional Ethics Cites Possible Violations by Alan Grayson.”  NYTimes. Web. 5th April 2016

Mullins, Brody and Hughes, Siobhan. "Report Details Potential Ethics Violations by U.S. Rep. Alan Grayson: Congressman says investigation is politically motivated and calls attacks ‘utterly frivolous’." The Wall Street Journal. Web. 5th April 2016

USHR. Office of Congressional Ethics. United States House of Representatives. Report 2016 Review No. 15-6530 https://ethics.house.gov/sites/ethics.house.gov/files/Rep.%20Grayson%20Report%20and%20Findings_0.pdf