Biden-Harris Transition Releases Code of Ethical Conduct and Ethics Plan

" Today, the Biden-Harris Transition published its Transition Code of Ethical Conduct and Transition Ethics Plan that will guide transition activities. The Presidential Transition Act directs the transition team to develop a Transition Code of Ethical Conduct and Ethics Plan to ensure the transition team members are held to clear and enforceable ethics standards. Consistent with Vice President Biden’s long-standing commitment to honest government, the Biden-Harris Code and Plan go beyond the requirements of the Presidential Transition Act.

Vice President Biden has said that the charge facing the president who follows Donald Trump is as big as it is essential: restoring faith in American government. The next administration must demonstrate with their actions that public servants serve all Americans, not themselves or narrow special interests.

“The Biden-Harris Transition prioritizes integrity and the highest ethical standards to serve the American people,” said Senator Ted Kaufman, Co-Chair, Biden-Harris Transition. “Our ethics code and plan demonstrate the values that would be part of a Biden-Harris Administration and promote accountability to garner trust from the American people at every stage.”.."
Biden-Harris Transition 

Executive Branch Ethics and Financial Conflicts of Interest: Disqualification

"Newly proposed legislation in the 116th Congress concerns government ethics reform, including conflicts of interest among executive branch officials. Federal officials have a basic duty not to allow private gain to influence their government service, which includes “not hold[ing] financial interests that conflict with the conscientious performance of duty.” Federal statutes, as well as a code of conduct for executive branch employees, make this principle part of a federal regulatory scheme intended to prevent officials from benefiting personally from their offices. The current federal statutory scheme regulating conflicts between an official’s personal financial interests and his or her official duties has three prongs: disclosure, disqualification, and divestiture (i.e., a 3-D system). This discussion of the disqualification requirement, also known as recusal, is the second in a three-part series examining conflicts of interest in the executive branch.

Disqualification Requirements in the Executive Branch 

The principal disqualification statute for executive branch officials—18 U.S.C. § 208 (section 208)— imposes criminal penalties for executive branch officials who fail to recuse themselves when their official role would conflict with their financial interests. Section 208 broadly applies to “officers and employees” within executive branch agencies regardless of the officials’ seniority or rate of pay. It also expressly applies to special government employees (SGE) who serve in temporary or intermittent government roles. Although the statute was originally silent regarding its applicability to the President and Vice President, Congress later amended it to exclude those officials by definition..."
Executive banch ethics

Calling Balls and Strikes: Ethics and Supreme Court Justices

"At his confirmation hearing in 2005, Chief Justice Roberts famously described his view of judges as umpires, pledging that, if confirmed, he would “call balls and strikes” when applying the law. Chief Justice Roberts emphasized the constitutional structure that underpins the Supreme Court and the rest of the federal judiciary, which is based on independence from political influence. The Court’s independence and its insulation from political influence is a perennial issue, which has received heightened attention with Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s pending nomination. What mechanisms ensure the integrity of Justices as federal officials? Are Justices subject to any rules of ethical conduct? How might such ethics rules be enforced? This Sidebar examines these questions and Congress’s potential role in regulating the ethics of the Supreme Court Justices.

Ethics Rules that Govern Judicial Conduct Generally

State codes of conduct and the Judicial Conference of the United States’ (Judicial Conference) federal Code of Conduct for United States Judges (Code of Conduct) set forth judicial ethics and standards of professional conduct. The Code of Conduct is largely aspirational and does not delineate specific prohibited behaviors. Rather, it identifies five canons of conduct, instructing that judges:  Should uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary;  Should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities;  Should perform the duties of the office fairly, impartially and diligently;  May engage in extrajudicial activities that are consistent with the obligations of a judicial office; and  Should refrain from political activity..".
Ethics and Supreme court judges

Ethics Pledges and Other Executive Branch Appointee Restrictions Since 1993: Historical Perspective, Current Practices, and Options for Change

"On January 28, 2017, President Donald Trump issued Executive Order (E.O.) 13770 on ethics and lobbying. E.O. 13770 created an ethics pledge for executive branch appointees, provided for the administration and enforcement of the pledge, and revoked President Barack Obama’s executive order ethics pledge that covered his Administration (E.O. 13490). President Trump’s executive order shares some features with President Obama’s executive order and a previous executive order issued by President Bill Clinton.

Executive order ethics pledges are one of several tools, along with laws and administrative guidance, available to influence the interactions and relationships between the public and the executive branch. The ability of private citizens to contact government officials is protected by the Constitution. As such, the restrictions placed by executive order ethics pledges, laws, and administrative guidance are designed to provide transparency and address enforcement of existing “revolving door” (when federal employees leave government for employment in the private sector) and lobbying laws..."
Ethics pledges

Remarks of Walter M. Shaub, Jr., Director, U.S. Office of Government Ethics

"I wish circumstances were different and I didn’t feel the need to make public remarks today. You don’t hear about ethics when things are going well. You’ve been hearing a lot about ethics lately.

I need to talk about ethics today because the plan the President-elect has announced doesn’t meet the standards that the best of his nominees are meeting and that every President in the past four decades has met. My hope is that, if the Office of Government Ethics can provide some constructive feedback on his plan, he may choose to make adjustments that will resolve his conflicts of interest.

I’ll limit the scope of my remarks today, and I won’t be talking about nominees whose ethics packages have not gone to the Senate. With that limitation, there’s still much that can be said. For starters, I’m happy to report that it’s not all bad news. OGE has been able to do good work during this Presidential transition. I’m especially proud of the ethics agreement we developed for the intended nominee for Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson..."
Government ethics

Restrictions on Lobbying the Government: Current Policy and Proposed Changes

"During the 2016 presidential campaign, President-elect Donald Trump proposed a series of ethics measures, including several lobbying-related provisions. They are:

 extending "cooling off" periods on lobbying the government for five years after government   service;
 "instituting a five-year ban on lobbying by former Members of Congress and their staffs";

 expanding the definition of a lobbyist to cover former government officials who engage in strategic consulting;

and issuing a "lifetime ban against senior executive branch officials lobbying on behalf of a foreign government."

President-elect Trump's ethics plan shares some features with past efforts to restrict Administration officials' future lobbying activities (the "revolving door") by adjusting "cooling off" periods—a period of time a former government official is restricted from contacting their former employer on particular matters they might have worked on in government. These previous efforts include a 1993 executive order issued by President Bill Clinton (E.O. 12834) and a 2009 executive order issued by President Barack Obama (E.O. 13490), and the Honest Leadership and Open Government Act (HLOGA) of 2007. The executive orders supplemented existing statutory revolving door and "cooling off" period requirements..."
Lobbying