A new House ethics rule passed in early June is coming back to haunt Democrats.

The House ethics committee must empanel an investigative subcommittee to review the assault allegations against Rep. Bob Filner (D-Calif.) or submit a report to the House describing its reasons for not doing so by midnight Wednesday (Sept. 19-20).

Earlier this month, Filner was served with a summons for an Oct. 2 court hearing on the incident. The complaint was subsequently filed in Loudoun County, Va., General District Court and released to The Associated Press.

Filner, who was on his way to Iraq, has said he was tired at the time of the incident and has called the charges “ridiculous.” His spokeswoman, Amy Pond, did not return an inquiry by press time about whether he had been notified of any ethics committee action on the matter.

A call to the House ethics panel was not returned.

After Rep. William Jefferson’s (D-La.) indictment on 16 counts of bribery and corruption in early June, House Republicans and Democrats engaged in an ethics arms race of sorts, an attempt to outperform the other side by upping the ethics ante. The House passed two measures: a GOP-sponsored bill ordering the ethics committee to investigate Jefferson, and another Democratic-backed measure that would spark an investigation of any member charged with a crime or force the ethics committee to explain why it decided not to launch a probe.

The Democratic resolution says the ethics committee must either empanel an investigative subcommittee or review the allegations and submit a report to the House describing its reasons for not doing so “not later than 30 days after the date of such indictment or charges.”

The 30-day time period ends in less than 24 hours.

The GOP resolution, sponsored by Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), called on the committee to look into whether Jefferson should be expelled. It passed 373-26, with 13 lawmakers, including members of the ethics committee, voting present.

Seeking to blunt the impact of Boehner’s resolution, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) rushed to the floor a measure that would order the ethics committee to investigate any member who was indicted or arrested on criminal charges. It passed 387-10, with 15 members voting present.

At the time, that measure came under sharp attack from Rep. David Dreier of California, the top Republican on the Rules Committee, who complained that the resolution was poorly drafted and could spark an ethics investigation of a traffic ticket or an arrest at a protest. Hoyer responded that the ethics committee would not investigate trivial matters.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) office did not respond to a request for comment by press time.

Republicans seized on the silence from the ethics panel and Democrats on the issue as proof that they are not taking their own resolution seriously.

“It’s clear that Democrats were more interested in this rule for its value as a sound bite than as a tool for good government, but that pretty much encapsulates the positions they’ve taken on every issue this year — all sound bite, no substance,” one GOP leadership aide remarked. “Frankly, it’s just plain sloppy.”

Democrats countered that there’s no way to know whether the ethics committee has empanelled an investigative subcommittee because its members usually prefer to conduct their business in private. Because the rule is so new, if the ethics committee decides not to launch a probe against Filner, it is unclear whether the ethics panel would be forced to publicly disclose such a decision and the rationale behind it. Hoyer’s resolution only mandated that the panel “submit a report to the House.”

“Democrats have already shown that we are holding the House to a higher ethical standard than Republicans ever did. We would expect that the ethics committee is doing its work in a non-political manner as is their responsibility.”