Source: https://ethics.house.gov/outside-employment-income/post-employment-restrictions
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 10:08:52+00:00

Document:
The Ethics Reform Act of 1989 enacted, for the first time, post-employment restrictions on Members, the elected officers, and certain employees of the House and Senate, and certain officers and employees of other legislative branch offices. These restrictions are set out in a criminal statute, 18 U.S.C. § 207, and they took effect in 1991. The restrictions were amended slightly by Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007,109 which was enacted during the 110th Congress.
The post-employment restrictions of 18 U.S.C. § 207 are the only such restrictions applicable to former House employees. House employees whose pay was below the threshold are not subject to the post-employment restrictions set out in the statute, and no other provision of federal statutory law or the House Rules establishes any comparable restrictions on post-employment activities.
Section 103(a) of the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act requires the Clerk of the House to provide all departing Members and covered employees (i.e., those employees who are subject to the post-employment restrictions) with a letter notifying the individual “of the beginning and ending date of the prohibitions that apply.” Section 103(b) of the Act mandates that the same information be available on a public internet site.
A former Member may not seek official action from any current Member, officer, or employee of either the Senate or the House, or from any current employee of any other legislative office (§ 207(e)(1)(B)).
A former elected officer of the House may not seek official action from any current Member, officer, or employee of the House (§ 207(e)(1)(B)).
A covered former employee on the personal staff of a Member may not seek official action from that Member or from any of the Member’s current employees (§ 207(e)(3)).
A covered former employee of a committee may not seek official action from any current Member or employee of the employing committee or from any Member who was on the committee during the last year that the former employee worked there (§ 207(e)(4)).
A covered former employee on the leadership staff (i.e., an employee of any leadership office) may not seek official action from any current Member of the leadership of the House113 or any current leadership staff employees (§ 207(e)(5)).
For the purposes of the statute, a detailee is deemed to be an employee of both the entity from which he or she comes and the entity to which the individual is detailed (§ 207(g)).
These restrictions bar certain types of contacts with certain categories of officials, basically former colleagues and those most likely to be influenced on the basis of the former position. The law focuses on communications and appearances. By contrast, if a former official plays a background role, does not appear in person or convey his or her name on any communications, the law does not appear to prohibit that person from advising those who seek official action from the Congress. Such a background role does not pose the risk of improper influence since the current officials are not even aware of the former official’s participation.115 The law does, however, absolutely preclude one set of activities regardless of whether the former official acts openly or behind the scenes. None of the officials subject to the limitations described above may represent, aid, or advise a foreign government or foreign political party before any federal official (including any Member of Congress) with the intent to influence a decision of such official in carrying out his or her official duties (§ 207(f)).
Under 18 U.S.C. § 207(j), these restrictions do not apply to official actions taken by employees or officials of the following: the United States government; the District of Columbia; state and local governments; accredited, degree-granting institutions of higher education; and hospitals or medical research organizations. They further do not preclude activities on behalf of international organizations in which the United States participates where the Secretary of State certifies in advance that such activities serve the interests of the United States. In addition, section 207 does not prevent individuals from making uncompensated statements based on their own special knowledge, from furnishing scientific or technological information in areas where they possess technical expertise, or from testifying under oath. Under 18 U.S.C. § 207(e)(8), individuals are also permitted to contact the Office of the Clerk regarding compliance with lobbying disclosure requirements under the Lobbying Disclosure Act.
Violation of § 207 is a felony, carrying penalties of imprisonment, fines, or both. Section 216 of Title 18 authorizes imprisonment for up to one year (or up to five years for willfully engaging in the proscribed conduct). Additionally, an individual may be fined up to $50,000 for each violation or the amount received or offered for the prohibited conduct, whichever is greater. The statute further authorizes the Attorney General to seek an injunction prohibiting a person from engaging in conduct that violates the act.
109 Honest Leadership and Open Government Act of 2007, supra note 45.
110 “[O]ther legislative offices” include employees of the Architect of the Capitol, United States Botanic Garden, Government Accountability Office, Government Printing Office, Library of Congress, Office of Technology Assessment, Congressional Budget Office, and Capitol Police. It also includes any other House legislative branch office not covered by the other provisions, such as the Clerk, Parliamentarian, Office of Legal Counsel, and Chief Administrative Officer. See 18 U.S.C. § 207(e)(9)(G).
111 18 U.S.C. § 207(e)(6), (e)(7)(B).
112 Regarding the post-employment implications of paying such an increase in the form of “lump sum” payments, rather than through a temporary adjustment in the employee’s regular salary, see Chapter 7 on Staff Rights and Duties. Briefly stated, the Committee determined that lump sum payments, when properly used by an employing office, do not constitute part of the recipient’s “rate of basic pay.” Key factors in making this determination are that lump sum payments are not treated as salary for purposes of employment benefits, do not count in determining the maximum amount an employee can contribute to the Thrift Savings Plan, or the amount of life insurance that the employee may purchase, and likewise they do not count in determining an employee’s “high three” years for purposes of calculating retirement benefits.
113 The “leadership” of the House consists of the Speaker; majority leader; minority leader; majority whip; minority whip; chief deputy majority whip; chief deputy minority whip; chairman of the Democratic Steering Committee; chairman and vice chairman of the Democratic Caucus; chairman, vice chairman, and secretary of the Republican Conference; chairman of the Republican Research Committee; chairman of the Republican Policy Committee; and any similar position created after the statute took effect. 18 U.S.C. § 207(e)(9)(L).
114 For these employees, post-employment restrictions do not apply unless their rate of basic pay equaled or exceeded that in effect for level IV of the Executive Schedule ($149,000 in 2008). 18 U.S.C. § 207(e)(7)(B).
115 Former officials who are lawyers should consult their local bar association concerning the application of rules governing their involvement in matters in which they participated personally and substantially in their official capacity.
116 House Comm. on Standards of Official Conduct, Summary of Activities, One Hundred Sixth Congress, H. Rep. 106-144, 106th Cong., 2d Sess., at 10 (2001).
117 It should be noted that one court held that it is a complete defense to a prosecution for conduct assertedly in violation of a related federal criminal strict-liability statute (18 U.S.C. § 208) that the conduct was undertaken in good faith reliance upon erroneous legal advice received from the official’s supervising ethics office. United States v. Hedges, 912 F.2d 1397 (11th Cir. 1990).

References: § 207
 § 207
 § 207
 § 207
 § 207
 § 207
 § 207
 § 207
 § 207
 § 208
 v.