Congressional ethics committees inquire about Deal's business

By Aaron Gould Sheinin

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Congressional ethics investigators have interviewed Georgia Department of Revenue officials and received dozens of records regarding U.S. Rep. Nathan Deal's business dealings with the state and indicated at least one subpoena would be issued.

According to records obtained by the AJC through the state's Open Records Act, both the Office of Congressional Ethics and the U.S. House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct have inquired about Deal's role in a 20-year business arrangement with the state that earned his company $1.5 million from 2004 through 2008.

Spokesmen for both groups, however, declined to comment Monday about the inquiries or acknowledge that they are investigating Deal (R-Ga.), a 2010 Republican candidate for governor. Deal's campaign also declined to comment.

"It looks like they're both looking into Deal," said Melanie Sloan, executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a non-partisan watchdog group that frequently files ethics complaints against members of Congress.  "Subpoenas mean they think something is wrong. It's so infrequent that they get to that stage they have to be concerned there is serious wrongdoing."

The AJC first reported Aug. 23 that Deal and a business partner have held a no-bid agreement with the state to provide a facility for the state's inspection of vehicles that were junked and then rebuilt. Deal personally earned up to $150,000 a year from the business, Recovery Services. Inc. of Gainesville, which was one of only five firms licensed to provide the service.

Sloan's organization, known as CREW, filed a complaint with the Office of Congressional Ethics, three days later.

The AJC reported that Deal personally intervened with state leaders to preserve the obscure state program that had granted him a regional monopoly. On three occasions in the past year and a half Deal met with Revenue Commissioner Bart Graham to question changes Graham wanted to make to the program. The state has, since 1982, required any vehicle that is totaled and rebuilt to pass a safety inspection before it can be given a new title.

Deal's then-chief of staff, Chris Riley, used his congressional e-mail account to contact Georgia Senate and Revenue Department staff to discuss the plans and to set appointments for Deal to meet with officials, including Lt. Gov. Casey Cagle.

Deal said in August he did nothing wrong and was not using his public office for personal gain. Instead, he said, he was helping constituents and making sure an important state program continued to protect the safety of Georgians.

Two days after the article appeared in the AJC, Frank Davies, a senior investigator with the Committee on Standards wrote to the Department of Revenue to request copies of records regarding Deal's business and efforts he and his staff made to prevent the Department of Revenue from changing the inspection process. In one e-mail, Davies said "we do plan to move ahead with a subpoena, but that will take some more time."

Nearly two months later, on Oct. 28, Paul Solis, investigative counsel for the ethics office, wrote Graham to thank him for speaking with him and to schedule a follow-up meeting. Graham could not be reached for comment Monday.

The Office of Congressional Ethics and the Committee on Standards are separate organizations with sometimes competing missions. The Committee on Standards, made up of five Democrats and five Republicans, investigates complaints filed by members of Congress or, if it chooses, cases forwarded to it by the Office of Congressional Ethics, Sloan said. The Office of Congressional Ethics accepts complaints from the general public. It's governing board is made up of private citizens who are barred from federal employment.

Only the Committee on Standards has power to issue subpoenas or impose punishment against a federal lawmaker. Sloan said that the Committee on Standards only issues subpoenas after it forms an investigative subcommittee.

Despite Deal's efforts to scuttle his plans, Graham succeeded in altering the program. While Graham failed to make changes through legislation and the state budget, he used the department's regulatory power to accomplish much the same thing. New rules that took effect in September ended the state's exclusive relationship with the five firms that hosted the inspections and opened up the process to any business that met basic qualifications.

Deal and his business partner, Ken Cronan, initially applied under the new guidelines, state records show, but on Sept. 10 Cronan asked that their application be withdrawn.

Today there are 15 locations were private companies conduct inspections, another aspect of the changes Graham made, and four other locations were state inspectors conduct the safety checks.