An independent Congressional watchdog wants to dig deeper into separate campaign finance allegations against two members of Congress, Rep. Andy Ogles (R-Tenn.) and Rep. Sheila Cherfils McCormick (D-Florida). I'm thinking.
The Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE), a bipartisan, independent commission that reviews allegations of misconduct against members of Congress and staff, claimed on Thursday that Ogles: You may have misrepresented your loan. The amount of money being sent to the 2022 election campaign is much lower than originally disclosed by unspecified sources.
In a separate report released Thursday, OCE said Charfilas McCormick may have been infected. Made an “unauthorized payment” The state PAC then paid various vendors and an unofficial campaign manager who was said to be “deeply involved” in producing candid communications from congressional offices, but was not compensated with official funds. Ta.
OCE also claimed that her campaign may have accepted and failed to report excessive in-kind donations and transactions with her companies.
The Hill has contacted spokespeople for Ogles and Cherfils McCormick for comment.
Ogles Suspicion: Loan or Excessive Donation?
After Ogles disclosed a $320,000 loan to his campaign in April 2022, local media noted that he had not disclosed sufficient income, assets and debts in mandatory personal financial disclosures. Questions arose about the source of funding.
OCE began its review in February. Complaints from Campaign Legal Centerbut said the Ogles were uncooperative. However, on the final day of OCE's review, the committee announced that Mr. Ogles' attorney confirmed that Mr. Ogles had transferred only $20,000 of that total to his campaign.
According to the committee's report, Congressman Ogles' attorney told OCE that “Congressman Ogles had identified approximately $320,000 in personal funds that could be used to finance his campaign, but only $20,000 was actually transferred. It was just dollars,” he said.
Ogle later told the press “All I needed to do was send $20,000, but unfortunately, the full amount of my pledge was mistakenly listed on my campaign's FEC report,” the statement said.
But OCE found, based on “limited evidence,” that Mr. Ogles may have intentionally misrepresented the total amount of money he lent to his campaign during the primary election and whether the loans came from his personal funds. said he could not judge.
“In the absence of accurate financial disclosure reports and without cooperation from Rep. Ogles, OCE has determined whether the $20,000 loan to Rep. Ogles’ campaign was made from his personal funds or whether a separate loan representing excessive contributions was made. “OCE was unable to determine whether the funds came from any other source.''
Chafferas McCormick's complex web of campaign finances
OCE on Thursday revealed several allegations regarding the flow of funds between Charfilas McCormick and various groups supporting her federal campaign.
The commission said it had obtained evidence that a limited liability company she owned made several payments to a state political committee, Leadership in Action PAC, and that the commission said it had made several payments to a state political committee, Leadership in Action PAC, that supported her campaign. He allegedly made payments to an unofficial campaign manager and various vendors on his behalf.
OCE identified the unofficial campaign manager as a person named Mark Goodrich, who continued to work for the congressman's office, including work on candid communications sent to voters. , said he was not compensated with public funds. Goodrich could not be reached for comment.
The committee found that neither Goodrich nor Charfilas McCormick cooperated with the investigation into whether or how they were compensated for their work in their congressional offices. He said he was unable to make a decision.
OCE also alleges that a Florida company, Truth & Justice, paid more than $150,000 to a printing and mailing company on behalf of Charfilas McCormick's campaign, which exceeded individual contribution limits. significantly exceeds. $2,900 per election In 2022.
The committee also said it identified three instances in which Charfilas McCormick may have failed to report apparent money transfers between her campaign and business accounts, even though she also opened business accounts. “We cannot confirm whether other unreported transactions have taken place,” he said. Her campaign supported this review.
