Quantcast
Get breaking news alerts via email

Click here to manage your alerts
Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, answers questions during an interview with a reporter at his home in Eagle, Idaho, in May 2007. (AP Photo/Idaho Statesman, Kerry Maloney) ** MANDATORY CREDIT **
FEC: Idaho’s Craig spent money illegally on ‘bathroom’ defense
Law » The former U.S. senator tapped accounts to pay for personal legal fees.
First Published Jan 17 2014 07:51 pm • Last Updated Jan 18 2014 02:35 pm

Boise, Idaho » Federal Election Commission lawyers urged a federal judge not to heed U.S. Sen. Larry Craig’s contention that regulators are being too hard on him — and to force him to pay nearly $360,000 in fines and restitution for tapping campaign accounts for his legal defense following his 2007 arrest in an airport bathroom sex sting.

The FEC, which announced its latest legal filing Friday, says the Idaho Republican ignored the U.S. Senate’s own warnings not to spend the money. Craig also has acknowledged the campaign didn’t seek out FEC guidance on whether he should spend the money or not because he was worried it would tell him not to do it, its lawyers wrote.

Photos
Join the Discussion
Post a Comment

Craig and his campaign "ignored admonitory language in FEC guidance indicating their spending would be illegal, and they now admit that they did not ask for their own advisory opinion because they were concerned the commission might say no," said FEC attorney Kevin Hancock in the 43-page filing. "Instead, defendants spent the campaign funds, and they continued even after the Senate Ethics Committee warned them they were likely violating the Federal Employee’s Compensation Act."

U.S. District Court Judge Amy Berman Jackson has several options, including ruling on the FEC’s demand Craig pay restitution of $216,000 to his campaign fund and fines of $140,000, or scheduling a courtroom hearing for further arguments.

This battle has endured more than a year, as the commission seeks to force Craig to repay his campaign. Negotiations failed, and the two sides are entrenched.

Andrew Herman, Craig’s Washington, D.C.-based lawyer, declined comment on Friday, saying he would wait for the court to make the next move.

But in court filings last month, Herman told Berman Jackson the FEC’s proposed penalties amounted to "harsh, unjustified remedies."

Additionally, Herman wrote Craig is financially unable to cover the total — contrary to the FEC’s claims — and that the former three-term GOP lawmaker acted in good faith, having genuinely thought using campaign cash was appropriate.

Herman contends Craig hired lawyers in his unsuccessful bid to have his guilty plea to disorderly conduct reversed "with the sole purpose of defending Senator Craig’s reputation and vindicating him personally and professionally." This backs up Craig’s key contention: The legal fees he incurred — along with his July 11, 2007, trip to the airport bathroom in Minneapolis while returning to Washington, D.C. — were part of official business as a U.S. senator, not a personal expense.

The FEC, meanwhile, argues nothing about Craig’s July restroom trip or its legal aftermath entitled him to tap campaign funds.


story continues below
story continues below

"What matters is whether Craig’s officeholder duties resulted in his arrest and expenses. They did not," Hancock wrote, citing Berman Jackson’s decision last March declining to dismiss the FEC’s complaint against him.

Then, the federal judge wrote "The charge did not relate to his conduct as a legislator, but only actions undertaken in the privacy and anonymity of a restroom stall."



Copyright 2014 The Salt Lake Tribune. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Top Reader Comments Read All Comments Post a Comment
Click here to read all comments   Click here to post a comment


About Reader Comments


Reader comments on sltrib.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Salt Lake Tribune. We will delete comments containing obscenities, personal attacks and inappropriate or offensive remarks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. If you see an objectionable comment, please alert us by clicking the arrow on the upper right side of the comment and selecting "Flag comment as inappropriate". If you've recently registered with Disqus or aren't seeing your comments immediately, you may need to verify your email address. To do so, visit disqus.com/account.
See more about comments here.
Staying Connected
Videos
Jobs
Contests and Promotions
  • Search Obituaries
  • Place an Obituary

  • Search Cars
  • Search Homes
  • Search Jobs
  • Search Marketplace
  • Search Legal Notices

  • Other Services
  • Advertise With Us
  • Subscribe to the Newspaper
  • Login to the Electronic Edition
  • Frequently Asked Questions
  • Contact a newsroom staff member
  • Access the Trib Archives
  • Privacy Policy
  • Missing your paper? Need to place your paper on vacation hold? For this and any other subscription related needs, click here or call 801.204.6100.