By Mark Tapscott
A nonprofit government ethics watchdog claims that Rep. Katie Porter (D-Calif.), who is running to succeed Sen. Diane Feinstein in the 2024 election, illegally used official congressional resources in her reelection campaign.
“In 2022, Rep. Porter’s congressional office used taxpayer funds to run ads that are overtly political. These ads contained identical messaging or images to ads that her campaign ran and were often times completely indistinguishable from her campaign ads,” Kendra Arnold, executive director of the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust (FACT), told the Office of Congressional Ethics in a complaint filed on Feb. 22.
The FACT complaint alleges that Porter used official funds to pay for virtually identical ads that were used for both official and campaign purposes and that were produced and distributed by the same company.
“During the time period the ads were being disseminated, Porter’s campaign and congressional office simultaneously paid the same vendor, Wavelength Strategy, for advertising and printing services. Wavelength Strategy is a digital ad vendor for ‘Democratic campaigns.’
“From June to August 2022, Porter’s congressional office paid over $130,500 to Wavelength Strategy. From February 2022 to November 2022, Porter’s campaign paid over $1.6 million to Wavelength Strategy,” the complaint reads.
“On their face, the messages themselves contained short political phrases such as ‘Holding Oil Companies’ or ‘Delivering Results.’ There can be no doubt that these were political messages because her campaign ran substantially similar ads with the same exact messaging. In addition to the same message, the same image appears in both her congressional ad and campaign ad,” Arnold stated in the FACT complaint.
“The facts of this case demonstrate Rep. Porter used taxpayer funds to pay for political ads. The laws at issue in this case are extremely important because not only do they protect taxpayer funds from abuse, but they address the public perception that incumbents are simply using their office to run for reelection. The reason for that perception is quite evident in Rep. Porter’s actions. Moreover, her use of official resources does not reflect credibly on the House.”
Jordan Wong, Porter’s spokesman, disputed the FACT complaint, saying: “Our office has always been in full compliance with House franking rules. Wavelength Strategy is a House-approved vendor. Franked content was not sent during the 60-day blackout period preceding an election. All franked material was approved by the Communications Standards Commission (CSC), reviewed by both Democratic and Republican staff.”
The CSC is responsible for ensuring that no material sent by a representative to constituents includes campaign-related materials.
“As for the baseless allegation that the ads are ‘indistinguishable,’ that claim is nonsensical, given that our franked ads used official House footage and other visuals of the congresswoman performing official duties and wearing her Congressional pin, which campaigns expressly cannot use,” Wong added.
Multiple laws and congressional rules bar senators and representatives from paying for campaign expenses with taxpayer funds provided to their office for expenses and staffs; resources such as photographs and aides on a taxpayer-funded payroll also aren’t allowed to be used for campaigns. It isn’t unusual for congressional aides to transfer from an official payroll to a campaign payroll while working to help their boss gain reelection.
Porter is one of three already-announced Democratic candidates for the 2024 Senate nomination to succeed Feinstein. The other two California House Democrats who have announced their candidacies are Reps. Adam Schiff and Barbara Lee. At 49, Porter is the youngest of the announced candidates. Schiff is 62 and Lee is 76.
San Francisco Mayor London Breed is also reportedly considering making a run for the Democratic Senate nomination.
Porter is no stranger to ethics controversies. Last year, The Heritage Foundation President Kevin Roberts filed an ethics complaint against Porter after the California Democrat accused Amy Swearer, one of the think tank’s experts on gun control issues, of giving false testimony before Congress in 2019.
The OCE hasn’t publicly disclosed anything about its deliberations regarding the Heritage complaint.
Porter has also faced questions about her being able to purchase a four-bedroom, three-bathroom house near the University of California–Irvine for half of the $1 million average sales price of homes in Orange County. She was able to afford the house as a result of assistance she received as a teacher at the university, according to The Associated Press.
“For Porter, this version of subsidized housing has outlasted her time in the classroom, now extending nearly four years after she first took unpaid leave from her $258,000-a-year teaching job to serve in the U.S. House,” AP reported.
“But the ties go deeper, with at least one law school administrator, who was also a donor to her campaign, helping secure extensions of her tenure while she remained in Congress, according to university emails obtained by The Associated Press. That has allowed Porter, a rising Democratic star and fundraising powerhouse whose own net worth is valued at as much as $2 million, to retain her home even as her return to the school remains in doubt.”
No congressional ethics complaint regarding Porter’s home purchase or employment status at the school has been made public.
