Gingrich Admits He Broke Rules and Misled Panel

After two years of vehemently denying wrongdoing, House Speaker Newt Gingrich made an about-face Saturday and admitted that he had violated House rules in connection with several tax-exempt charitable organizations and had also provided “inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable” information to the Ethics Committee.

Gingrich’s admission of wrongdoing in a case he had once dismissed as a “fishing expedition” came after the ethics panel’s investigative subcommittee criticized the powerful speaker for improperly using the charitable organizations for partisan ends and not leveling with the committee in responses to its inquiries.

By agreeing that he did not act “at all times in a manner which shall reflect creditably on the House of Representatives,” the Georgia Republican avoided an embarrassing fact-finding hearing before the full House Standards of Official Conduct Committee. But that does not put an end to the matter. With the Ethics Committee now taking up the question of what sanctions to impose, the controversy will continue to cast a shadow over Gingrich’s effort to win reelection as speaker when the House begins its new session next month.

The 10-member bipartisan panel will deliberate on the sanctions issue behind closed doors, then present a recommendation to the full House for final action. Gingrich could be reprimanded, censured, fined or even expelled from the House, though expulsion is not considered likely. The panel could also recommend no action at all.

“I was overconfident, and in some ways, naive,” a chastened Gingrich said in a statement that admitted wrongdoing but still attempted to reduce personal blame. “I did not seek legal counsel when I should have in order to ensure clear compliance with all applicable laws, and that was wrong. Because I did not, I brought down on the people’s House a controversy which could weaken the faith people have in their government.”

In addition, Gingrich said in his statement: “In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable statements were given to [the] committee, but I did not intend to mislead the committee.”

Gingrich has worked feverishly behind the scenes in recent days to strike a deal with the committee before the Jan. 7 House vote on the speakership.

Even with his admission of wrongdoing, however, it remained unclear Saturday whether the committee would move to impose sanctions before the vote.

Although the Capitol itself was largely empty Saturday, with most lawmakers--Gingrich included--home for the holidays, reaction to the speaker’s plea was swift. Democrats called on him to step down from his leadership post, just as Gingrich had demanded of former House Speaker Jim Wright before he resigned in 1989.

“The speaker should step down as speaker of the House of Representatives and allow his colleagues in the majority party to elect a new speaker on the 7th of January,” said House Minority Whip David E. Bonior (D-Mich.).

Republicans, meanwhile, rallied around Gingrich in an attempt to minimize the political damage.

“It should be noted, and is clear, he did not seek nor intend to mislead the committee. We look forward to working with him as speaker following his reelection on Jan. 7,” said a joint statement issued by House Majority Leader Dick Armey of Texas, Majority Whip Tom DeLay of Texas, Republican Conference Chairman John Boehner of Ohio and four other GOP leaders.

Despite that show of unity, there remained some signs of strain within the party.

Rep. Peter T. King of New York, a Republican who has expressed concern about the charges, said it is essential to determine whether Gingrich intentionally, or unwittingly, submitted false information to the ethics panel.

“If it was an honest mistake, I think most members of Congress can understand that,” King said. “. . . If members conclude this was done intentionally, then that would be very serious.”

At the center of the investigation has been “Renewing American Civilization,” a college course Gingrich taught from 1993 to 1995 with financial support from the Progress & Freedom Foundation, a tax-exempt organization, and GOPAC, a political action committee Gingrich once headed.

The investigation focused on whether the course’s content was so partisan that it could not properly be financed with tax-exempt contributions.

The ethics panel authorized Gingrich to teach the course after he filed a May 12, 1993, letter disclosing that he would be teaching a Saturday morning class at Kennesaw State College in Georgia.

He failed to disclose in the letter, however, that the course would be televised nationally, filled with partisan themes and financed by the nonprofit organization and political action committee.

The subcommittee found that the college course and three television programs were political in nature and should not have qualified for tax-deductible donations.

The committee said a variety of tax experts, including one representing Gingrich himself, suggested that they would not have advised him to raise funds for his ventures through tax-exempt organizations.

Recently, James M. Cole, the former federal prosecutor who was hired last December by the Ethics Committee, also began looking into whether Gingrich misled the panel in his explanations of the matter.

The investigative subcommittee found that Gingrich made false statements in two letters to the committee on Dec. 8, 1994, and March 27, 1995, in which he called the college course “completely nonpartisan” and “wholly independent of GOPAC.”

Gingrich allies have blamed the speaker’s attorney, election law expert Jan Baran, for submitting the misstatements to the Ethics Committee. However, Baran has contended that Gingrich reviewed all such documents himself before their submission.

Because of the flap, Baran announced earlier this month that he would no longer represent Gingrich before the Ethics Committee. J. Randolph Evans, a longtime political supporter from Atlanta, represented Gingrich in the talks that led to Saturday’s deal.

In its 22-page report, the four-member subcommittee stopped short of saying the speaker had violated federal tax law.

Instead, it laid out Gingrich’s contradictory statements on the tax-exempt foundations and criticized him for not seeking legal advice to steer clear of violations.

The panel also said Gingrich should have known that the information he sent to the committee, no matter who prepared it, “was inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable.”

Three of the four members of the investigative subcommittee--Republicans Porter J. Goss of Florida and Steven H. Schiff of New Mexico, and Democrat Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland--endorsed the report. The fourth member, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), did not attend the subcommittee’s final session, but her colleagues said she supported the conclusions too.

“It is never a pleasant process dealing with judgment of your peers,” said Goss, chairman of the panel.

“I can stand here with the judgment that we have discharged our responsibilities fairly.”

Times staff writer David Willman contributed to this story.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

What Did Gingrich Do?

* Background: A House ethics panel has been investigating the tax-exempt financing of House Speaker Newt Gingrich’s “Renewing American Civilization” course taught at two Georgia colleges.

* The Report: “Mr. Gingrich engaged in conduct that did not reflect creditably on the House of Representatives . . .

* The Admission: The speaker acknowledged his failure to seek legal advice that would have prevented his use of tax-exempt organizations for political purposes and said, “In my name and over my signature, inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable statements were given to the committee, but I did not intend to mislead.”

* The Paper Trail: The excerpts above, from a letter signed by Gingrich and submitted to the committee in December 1994, wrongly says GOPAC had no role in the course. But that was contradicted by other evidence that GOPAC did help set up the course.

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX / INFOGRAPHIC)

BACKGROUND

The ethics investigation centers on a televised course called “Renewing American Civilization” that House Speaker Newt Gingrich taught at two Georgia colleges from 1993 to 1995 with financial support from the nonprofit Progress and Freedom Foundation. The subcommittee probe began Dec. 6, 1995, to determine if Gingrich’s activities in relation to the college course violated tax law. On Sept. 26, the panel expanded the probe, in part to determine if Gingrich “provided accurate, reliable and complete information” about the college course and the relationship of his political action committee, GOPAC, to the course and to the Progress and Freedom Foundation.