When it comes to the nation’s finances, Republicans in Washington have shown, shall we say, a certain lackadaisical attitude. Deficits, debts, expensive tax giveaways, lax regulations on the financial industry, Enron-omics — when it comes to looking after our money, GOP officials don’t exactly inspire confidence.
But what about when they’re tasked with looking after their own money? Well, it’s a funny story, actually.
It’s a story that probably hasn’t generated the attention it deserves, but the National Republican Congressional Committee really has been rocked by a fairly dramatic scandal. We learned a few weeks ago, “Top House Republicans were told in recent days that a former employee of their campaign committee may have forged an official audit during the contentious 2006 election cycle and that they should brace for the possibility that an unfolding investigation could uncover financial improprieties stretching back several years.” Shortly thereafter, we learned that Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas), a CPA, had pushed for months for an internal NRCC audit, until the committee’s treasurer apparently fabricated an entire audit out of whole cloth. (Even the letterhead of the audit was a forgery.)
As of now, the FBI is in the midst of a criminal investigation of the NRCC’s finances, but the obvious question is, how could this have happened? We’re starting to get a better sense of this, too.
The accounting scandal now haunting the National Republican Congressional Committee was preceded by a series of decisions over the past decade to relax internal financial controls at the committee, according to numerous Republican sources familiar with the NRCC’s operations during those years.
Under Virginia Rep. Tom Davis and New York Rep. Thomas Reynolds, who chaired the committee from 1999 until the end of 2006, the NRCC waived rules requiring the executive committee — made up of elected leaders and rank-and-file Republican lawmakers — to sign off on expenditures exceeding $10,000, merged the various department budgets into a single account and rolled back a prohibition on committee staff earning an income from outside companies.
And wouldn’t you know it, the lack of oversight led to abuse — and apparent felonies.
A pivotal moment for the NRCC occurred in spring 2003, shortly after Reynolds took over the panel, when he ousted Donna Anderson, a longtime committee staffer who oversaw the NRCC’s accounting.
Ward then moved up to the top accounting position within the committee, making him responsible for tracking tens of millions of dollars in political contributions and expenditures each cycle.
“Clearly, after the transition from Anderson to Ward, it was a different regime for what followed,” said one GOP insider with strong ties to the NRCC.
Vendors who have done business with the NRCC, former committee aides and Republicans on Capitol Hill have argued that lax committee operations paved the way for the current trouble.
As Josh Patashnik concluded, “House Republicans can be accused of many things, but at least inconsistency isn’t one of them: They adhere to the same low standards of ethics and competence in their own affairs that they expect of the federal government as a whole.”