Fascinating weekend reading ... or even sooner. There's an expression, "You Can't Make This Stuff Up." So true:

SUBMITTED TO THE UNITED STATES SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON ETHICS BY CAROL ELDER BRUCE, SPECIAL COUNSEL

Introduction

The United States Senate Select Committee on Ethics ( SSCE or Committee ), assisted by Special Counsel, conducted a Preliminary Inquiry into certain conduct of Senator John E. Ensign.

The scope of the Preliminary Inquiry included an examination into allegations that Senator Ensign violated Senate rules and federal law, including provisions of the criminal code, and/or engaged in conduct that reflecting discredit upon the United States Senate regarding the termination of Doug Hampton s Senate employment, Mr. Hampton's post-employment contacts with the Senate, and payments made to the Hamptons, and any other matters as the Committee may direct.

On April 21, 2011, as the Preliminary Inquiry neared its conclusion, Senator Ensign announced he would resign as the 24th Senator from the State of Nevada. Senator Ensign's resignation was effective May 3, 2011, the day before his sworn deposition was scheduled to begin.

Although Senator Ensign s resignation divests the Committee of jurisdiction to  impose discipline on him as of its effective date, Special Counsel, as required by the governing Resolution and Rules of the Senate, tenders this Report to the Committee for its consideration in the exercise of its continuing authority, obligations, and discretion under the Resolution and Rules.

The Committee s investigation began after it received a complaint on June 24, 2009, from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington ( CREW ). CREW supplemented that complaint on October 6, 2009.  These filings presented allegations of sexual harassment/employment discrimination, post-employment ban violations, and issues related to payments to Douglas and Cynthia Hampton, Senator Ensign s former Administrative Assistant and campaign treasurer.

Based on these serious allegations and other information available to it, the  Committee undertook an extensive Preliminary Inquiry as provided by Rule 3 of its Supplementary Procedural Rules.  Article I, section 5, clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States of  America provides that [e]ach House may determine the rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.

Under the Committee s authorizing resolution, Senate Resolution 338, 88 th  Cong. 2d Sess.  (1964) ( S. Res. 338 ), the Committee is empowered to investigate not only violations of law, the Senate Code of Official Conduct, and the rules and regulations of the Senate, but also  improper conduct which may reflect upon the Senate. While Senators are expected to comply with all laws, Senate Rules and Standards of Conduct, the Senate and the Committee have made clear that a Senator's obligations of ethical behavior go beyond this:

Pages: 1 · 2

More Articles

• GAO Found: There Is No Single Source of Publicly Available, Comprehensive &Timely Data on Executive Branch Appointees
• Pew Trust: Voter Enthusiasm at Record High in Nationalized Midterm Environment
• The Looming Threat to Sex Education: A Resurgence of Federal Funding for Abstinence-Only Programs?
• Confessions of a Catholic (Who Doesn't Believe in Confession)
• Reprise, Bobby Kennedy, The Train: "Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope"
• Senate Confirmation Hearings Schedule for The Week Beginning on the 1/09/17 and Financial Disclosure Reports
• Building Character; A Lesson From Six Children
• When Norms Clash With Formal Laws: How Does a Society Encourage More Whistleblowing?
• For a Respected Prosecutor, An Unpardonable Failure
• Writing About Breast Cancer: From Books to Blogs