Speaker 1: Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson spoke at President
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's rally Tuesday night, talking about his experience growing
Speaker 1: up and telling the crowd that life is too short
Speaker 1: for people to let differences divide them. Carson speech isn't
Speaker 1: raising questions. It's this introduction of him at the rally.
Speaker 1: Ladies and gentlemen, please welcome the Secretary of the U
Speaker 1: S Department of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Ben Carson.
Speaker 1: After that introduction, the tweeting started. Did Carson violate the
Speaker 1: Hatch Act, which prevents executive branch employees from using their
Speaker 1: government positions to influence elections. Our guest is Richard Painter,
Speaker 1: former White House ethics lawyer and a professor at the
Speaker 1: University of Minnesota Law School. Richard tell us a little
Speaker 1: bit more about this law from The Hatch Act was
Speaker 1: enacted to prevent federal government officials from using their official
Speaker 1: position to influenced part as an election. Uh the Republicans
Speaker 1: and the House and Senate. Some of the Democrats are
Speaker 1: asserted about the Roosevelt administration chickler. When they're spending a
Speaker 1: lot of types throw the money, analysts as the programs,
Speaker 1: and I'm gonna using their official position to influence part
Speaker 1: as an election. So the Secretary of Health and Human Services,
Speaker 1: like other federal officials, is prohibited from using his official
Speaker 1: title at a campaign rally. Whether or not he violated
Speaker 1: the Hatch Act will turn on whether he ought, drove,
Speaker 1: or encouraged someone she introduced him using his official pun.
Speaker 1: It was clearly anappropriate friends be introduced using his official
Speaker 1: cast title. The question really is who violated the Hatch Act,
Speaker 1: whether the person introducing him UH improperly used it or
Speaker 1: whether he UH do that that was going to happen
Speaker 1: or encouraged it, in which case he would face violation.
Speaker 1: So us A Hot spokesman told The Washington Post that
Speaker 1: Carson did not hear his name before he was que
Speaker 1: to go on, and all other references during the event
Speaker 1: referred to him as Dr Carson. So if that's if
Speaker 1: that's true, that he didn't really know about the way
Speaker 1: he was going to be introduced, is that then not
Speaker 1: a violation? Well, I think that he would not have
Speaker 1: violated the Hatacks unless he himself used his official title
Speaker 1: or allows the one or tell from what they could
Speaker 1: UH to avoid this type of thing. However, the Executive
Speaker 1: branch agency is as supposed to communicate with the campaign
Speaker 1: personnel people write a political rally, how important it is
Speaker 1: that the executive ranch official only appear at the rally
Speaker 1: in his or her personal capacity, that the official title
Speaker 1: never be use. So apparently that was not done. Um
Speaker 1: so clear it was improper. The question whether this is
Speaker 1: uh ignorance of the law the part of the Trump
Speaker 1: campaign staff, which is entirely pop or whether it's something
Speaker 1: that Secretary Carlton Uh, whether he sucked your Carson encouraged it, uh,
Speaker 1: you know. And then the middle ground, you have a
Speaker 1: situation where his own staff and h g W you
Speaker 1: know was h h HS was with Carol zed and
Speaker 1: should have been more um forward leading and trying to
Speaker 1: prevent these types of violations. How does enforcement of a
Speaker 1: violation of the Hatch Act work? Who reports it to whom?
Speaker 1: The Office Special Council is an agency set up to
Speaker 1: administer the Hatch Act, and they do investigate allegations of
Speaker 1: violations of the Hatch Act. Has been one violation by
Speaker 1: a member of the White House, for sure, who was
Speaker 1: tweeting using a White House Uh, we're using it a
Speaker 1: personal Twitter page that also is a White House photos
Speaker 1: and official titles on a purpose of advancing political campaigns. Um.
Speaker 1: So that's this type of thing some time at the
Speaker 1: time the Special Council of that's the gate. Uh, and
Speaker 1: then make the recommendation as to what should be done
Speaker 1: and what can be done, what kinds of punishment. If
Speaker 1: someone is consciously, knowingly or recklessly violated the hattack, the
Speaker 1: usual sanction is for them to be fired, to be
Speaker 1: fired in um. In June, the incident that you were
Speaker 1: talking about was White House social media director Dan Scovino
Speaker 1: tweeted a call for the electoral defeative Republican Representative Justin
Speaker 1: Amash of Michigan, who was often critical of Trump. He
Speaker 1: was just reprimanded by the Office of Special Counsel. Well, yes,
Speaker 1: the ulti Special Council cannot make the decision about where
Speaker 1: to fire somebody if they make a respectation. Uh, that's
Speaker 1: up to the president of this White House has had
Speaker 1: a somewhat laxed approach to the office issues. They did
Speaker 1: sanction Kelly and Conway at all with respected for violence
Speaker 1: of the ethics rules. That wasn't a violas match Act.
Speaker 1: But she was using her official position to promote a
Speaker 1: vanka's clothing and the office governor. It's really very clear
Speaker 1: that was a violation, and they just got a lot
Speaker 1: of pushback to the White House of that. So at
Speaker 1: the end of the day, Uh, the President decides how
Speaker 1: strictly he's going to enforce these rules for his there
Speaker 1: and Richard, really everyone who when Ben Carson comes on stage,
Speaker 1: just about everybody knows he's the HUD secretary. What harm
Speaker 1: or influence is there really in someone introducing him for
Speaker 1: about ten seconds as the HUD secretary. Well, that's a
Speaker 1: very good question because I've taken the position that's what
Speaker 1: the law should be is the Cabinet secretary, high ranking
Speaker 1: executive branch officials should be prohibited for participating in campaign
Speaker 1: events while they are holding off the only hold office
Speaker 1: usually for a few years, and I think that's a
Speaker 1: time of focus of their official duties and not participating
Speaker 1: the part of the politics at all. Um at least
Speaker 1: they shouldn't be going to fund break But that's my
Speaker 1: view of what the law should say. What the law
Speaker 1: is is that they are allowed to participate. Where we
Speaker 1: draw the lot and say, well, they cannot use their
Speaker 1: official title, Uh, they cannot use any government money for
Speaker 1: persons attending an event costs. Uh. And then they are, however,
Speaker 1: allowed to participate in their pression of the path. But
Speaker 1: either though, it's you're correctly quite out. Everybody knows who
Speaker 1: they are. People go to these events in order to
Speaker 1: smooth these executive branch of social and uh. You know,
Speaker 1: I think it encourages the pay to play game in
Speaker 1: politics when we let executive branch official crisis cabinet sectaries
Speaker 1: go to political events. Let me ask you a question
Speaker 1: that is separate. Um, when President Trump endorses candidates or
Speaker 1: makes references to candidates in tweets one way or the other,
Speaker 1: is that a problem an ethical problem? Uh? No, the
Speaker 1: hatchack does not apply to the press and uh and
Speaker 1: the vice president does not apply to the member Congress.
Speaker 1: We don't distinguish between their official capacity and their political
Speaker 1: capacity as we would for other executive branch employees other
Speaker 1: than the president of the vice president. So presidents have
Speaker 1: appeared uh uh quite recently, the introduced as president and
Speaker 1: then they endorse a candidate. Uh. And uh. That that's
Speaker 1: why comments So I wouldn't I would expect to see
Speaker 1: more than was unusual. President Trump is of course, he's
Speaker 1: attacking so many members of his own party. Uh that
Speaker 1: I'm not there being a Republican to lest other times through.
Speaker 1: But that's a practical problem. Yes it is, all right.
Speaker 1: Thanks so much for being on Bloomberg Law. That's Richard Painter,
Speaker 1: and he is an ex ethics expert, if I can
Speaker 1: say that correctly. Thanks so much Richard for being on
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law. As always. He's a former ethics lawyer at
Speaker 1: the White's House and a professor at the Universe in
Speaker 1: Minnesota Law School.