Senate ethics records

The indexed copy is marked complete. The original PDF bytes are unavailable.

Open the official document

Indexed text provided by web; observed Nov 5, 2026 at 7:43 PM Pacific.

BARBARA DOXCR, CALIFORNIA, CHAIRMAN
JOHNNY ISAKSON, GEORGIA, VICE CHAIRMAN
MARK L PRYOR. ARKANSAS
SHERROD BROWN, OHIO
PAT ROBERTS, KANSAS
JAMES E. RISCH, IDAHO
JOHN C. SASSAMAN, CHIEf COUNSEL AND STAFF DIRECTOR
ANNETIE GILLIS. DEPUTY STAFF DIRECTOR
The Honorable David Yitter
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510
Dear Senator Yitter:
mtntteb ~tateg ~enate
SELECT COMMITTEE ON ETHICS
HART SENATE OFFICE BUILDING, ROOM 220
SECOND AND CONSTITUTION AVEN UE, NE
WASHINGTON, DC 20510- 6425
March 29, 201 2
TELEPHONE: (202) 224--2981
FACSIMILE: (202) 224--7416
TOO: (202) 228-3752
The Select Committee on Ethics is dismissing the complaint filed by Citizens for
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington ("CREW") regarding your attempt to block Senate
legislation raising Secretary Salazar's salary $ 19,600 - thereby making it on par with other Cabinet
Secretaries- until he issued six new deepwater exploratory permits per month in the Gulf of Mexico.
While the Committee found that there was no substantial credible evidence that you violated the law
or Senate rules, it did conclude that it is inappropriate to condition support for a Secretary's personal
salary increase directly on his or her performance of a specific official act. The Committee
recognizes that currently there is no clear Senate guidance addressing such conduct, and therefore,
issues this letter and the accompanying guidance to the Senate community about how we will view
such behavior in the future.
Pursuant to Article I, section 6, clause 2 of the Constitution (the Ineligibility Clause), thenSenator Salazar was prohibited from becoming Secretary of the Interior until a law was passed that
" rolled back" any compensation increase enacted during his Senate term. Therefore, in 2008,
President George W. Bush signed legislation rolling back the Secretary of the Interior's salary so that
then-Senator Salazar could be appointed to that position. His salary was eligible to be increased by
$ 19,600 and thereby restored to the level of other Cabinet Secretaries on January 3, 20 I I, the date his
Senate term would have ended. This matter involves your hold on such " restoration" legislation.
On May 23, 20 II , you sent a letter to Secretary Salazar informing him that "when the rate of
permits issued for new deepwater exploratory wells reaches pre-moratorium levels (so 6 per month),
I will end my efforts to block your sa lary increase." In an accompanying press release, you
commented that this was your "way of keeping the ' boot on the neck' of Interior until they get the
job done." Your actions to block restoration legislation appear to be unprecedented. On May 24,
20 II , Secretary Salazar wrote to Senate Maj ority Leader Harry Reid and Republican Leader Mitch
McConnell requesting that the legislation be withdrawn, and the Senate has not taken any subsequent
action. Therefore, regardless of who the Secretary of the Interior is, that individual will be paid
$ 19,600 less than other Cabinet Secretaries unless legislation is passed that restores the salary.
While Senators have long used holds on nominations to help persuade administrations to
carry out or change policies, tying an incumbent Secretary's personal salary directly to his or her
perfo rmance of a specific offici al act is diffe rent, places a Secretary in a precarious and potentially
untenable position, and undermines a basic principle of government service. As stated in the Code of
Ethics for Government Service, "public offi ce is a public trust." A government employee must not be influenced by external factors when making decisions and "never accept for himself or his family,
favors or benefits under circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as
influencing the performance of his governmental duties." Had Secretary Salazar complied with this
request, it would have appeared that his decision was made because of his personal interests, and not
the public interest.
This unprecedented circumstance raised a new issue about how the Committee should treat
actions that tie an existing Secretary's personal salary to his or her performance of a specific official
act. As a result, later today the Committee is issuing to the Senate community the enclosed new
guidance, which makes it clear that going forward such actions will be viewed by the Committee as
improper conduct reflecting discreditably on the Senate.
Sincerely,
Enclosure
2

Extract SHA-256 (not a PDF checksum): 434e171d95ce52507ff54afeafd67092a3db54166cf333c73875c7766ab18d71

The indexed copy is marked complete. The original PDF bytes are unavailable.

Open the official document

Indexed text provided by web; observed Nov 5, 2026 at 7:41 PM Pacific.

United States Senate
Select Committee on Ethics
Hart Senate Office Building, Room 220
Second and Constitution Avenue, NE
Washington, DC 20510–6425

Barbara Boxer, California, Chairman
John Cornyn, Texas, Vice Chairman
Mark Pryor, Arkansas
Ken Salazar, Colorado
Pat Roberts, Kansas
Johnny Isakson, Georgia
Robert L. Walker, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
Annette Gillis, Deputy Staff Director

Telephone: (202) 224–2981
Facsimile: (202) 224–7416
TDD: (202) 228–3752

May 8, 2008
The Honorable David Vitter
United States Senate
Washington, DC 20510

Dear Senator Vitter:

Through this letter the Select Committee on Ethics informs you that it is dismissing without prejudice a July 19, 2007, letter of complaint from Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (“CREW”), through which CREW requested that the Committee “begin an investigation to determine whether Senator David Vitter (R-LA) violated the Senate Rules of Conduct by soliciting for prostitution.”*
The Committee has determined that, under the totality of the specific circumstances present in this matter, it is appropriate for the Committee to dismiss this matter without prejudice. These circumstances are that: as alleged in the letter of complaint, the conduct at issue occurred before your Senate candidacy and service; as alleged, the conduct at issue did not result in your being charged criminally; as alleged, the conduct at issue did not involve use of public office or status for improper purposes.
Based upon these specific grounds, the Committee has determined that it should not further exercise its jurisdiction over this matter at this time.
In addition, while the Committee has made no factual findings regarding the conduct alleged in the complaint, we note for the record that Deborah Jeane Palfrey of Pamela Martin & Associates, whose services you have been publicly linked to, was found guilty of operating an interstate prostitution ring in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on April 15, 2008. Specifically, Ms.
Palfrey was found guilty on all counts in the indictment against her, including operating a racketeering influenced corrupt organization (RICO), money laundering conspiracy, and interstate travel in aid of racketeering. The Committee makes note of these facts in light of your statement on July 9, 2007, in which you acknowledged, “This was a very serious
* On October 1, 2007, your counsel, on your behalf, submitted to the Committee a “Motion/Request for Recusal of Sen. Boxer”; your counsel resubmitted this motion to the Committee on November 27, 2007. You did not allege any facts requiring recusal under the Committee’s Rules. Therefore, your “Motion/Request for Recusal of Senator Boxer” has been denied.

sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible.”
The Committee also wishes to make clear that this decision to dismiss this matter without prejudice should not be taken as personal approbation or acceptance by any of the Members of the Committee of the kind of conduct alleged in this matter. In fact, if proven to be true, the Members of the Committee would find the alleged conduct of solicitation for prostitution to be reprehensible.
In dismissing this matter without prejudice, the Committee reserves the right to reopen an investigation should new allegations or evidence be brought to our attention.

The Committee has determined that this letter informing you of its decision will be released publicly.

Sincerely,

Barbara Boxer
Chairman

John Cornyn
Vice Chairman

Mark Pryor, Member

Pat Roberts, Member

Ken Salazar, Member

Johnny Isakson, Member

Extract SHA-256 (not a PDF checksum): b6b38014d8efb0ba5c1b65c63d96cea118b93496980bc912b1d1955021335779