TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………1

Methodology……………………………………………………………………………………...2

The Governors

I. Haley Barbour (R-MS)………..…………………………………………………..3

II. Donald L. Carcieri (R-RI)…………………………………………………………6

III. Jim Gibbons (R-NV).…………………………..………………………………….9

IV. Bobby Jindal (R-LA).…………..………………………………………………..13

V. David A. Paterson (D-NY).……………………………..……………………….16

VI. Sonny Perdue (R-GA)..……………………..…………………………………...18

VII. Rick Perry (R-TX)……….………………..……………………………………..21

VIII. Bill Richardson (D-NM)…………………………………………………………25

IX. Mike Rounds (R-SD).…………………….……………………….......................28

X. Mark Sanford (R-SC)…………………………………………………………….30

XI. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA)..………………………………………………..33

 INTRODUCTION

Since 2003, CREW has closely monitored government ethics, bringing egregious conduct to
light and holding public officials accountable for their misconduct.

With a few exceptions, CREW has focused primarily on the ethics of federal government
officials. In 2006, however, CREW launched the state-based Colorado Ethics Watch (CEW),
which concentrates on public integrity at the state level. In 2009, CREW turned greater attention
to state government ethics by publishing its Directory of State-based Government Watchdogs,
which covers all 50 states and the District of Columbia.

CREW’s Worst Governors delves further into state ethics. CREW reviewed the job performance
of all 50 of our nation’s governors to determine which are the worst. CREW considered whether
governors had violated ethics, campaign finance and personal financial disclosure rules as well
as whether they had complied with state transparency laws. It is nearly impossible to compare
governors’ adherence to the laws because state rules and laws vary so widely. Each state has its
own ethical rules and standards. Requirements regarding disclosure of campaign contributions
and expenditures and personal finances differ significantly as do state open records laws. Some
states make much more information publicly available than others. Despite these difficulties,
CREW has been able to reach some general conclusions about which governors have violated
generally agreed upon notions of competence, transparency and integrity.

CREW’s assessments of the governors is based on the following criteria:

¾ Corruption: Has there been outright corruption? We also considered whether a

governor violated state ethics rules or campaign finance laws and whether he used his
position to influence the award of state contracts.
¾ Transparency: Did a governor block access to records that state law deems
discoverable? Similarly, did the governor oppose legislation to make public records
more accessible?
¾ Partisan politics: Several governors appeared to put partisan politics above the interests
of the citizens of his or her state. Did a governor attempt to score political points by
turning down federal funds that would benefit a state’s residents?
¾ Pressuring public officials: Has a governor attempted to pressure or intimidate other
state officials to act contrary to the public good?
¾ Cronyism: Did a governor abuse his position to reward family or friends with state
employment or other benefits?
¾ Self-enrichment: Did a governor use his position for his personal financial enrichment?
¾ Scandal: Was a governor involved in a personal scandal that clearly distracted from his
ability to govern effectively?

CREW discovered that most states lack vigorous ethics enforcement. Some states do not have
independent and professional ethics enforcement authorities while in others such bodies only
have jurisdiction over state legislators, but not the governor. Additionally, not all states require
governors to disclose personal financial information. Finally, open records laws and
transparency rules vary from state to state, making it difficult to fully analyze and compare
governors’ ethics issues. Unfortunately, in states where the sun does not shine very brightly on
state government, the likelihood of corruption is heightened yet harder to discern.

METHODOLOGY

1. CREW used Nexis to search governors’ names paired with any form of the word “corrupt”
and reviewed any articles produced to find credible allegations of misconduct in each governor’s
administration.

2. CREW reviewed any online records of state ethics bodies. In many states this data is easily
discovered and searchable electronically, while in others, this information is either not publicly
available or does not exist.

3. CREW reviewed the analyses by the Center for Study of Responsive Law, the University of
Florida’s Citizen Access Project, the Pew Center on the States, the Sunshine Review, and other
independent watchdog groups that focus on open records laws or government accountability,
competence, and transparency. Where relevant, we used their information to conduct additional
Nexis searches to try to find instances where a governor made known his or her position with
respect to ethics-in-government issues.

4. CREW searched state government websites as well as the Center for Public Integrity’s website
to obtain and review the personal financial information disclosed by many governors.

5. CREW reviewed the websites of state-based government watchdog groups identified in

CREW’s Directory of State-based Watchdogs to see whether these groups had identified
instances where their state’s governor had been involved in an ethics scandal, misconduct or
mismanagement of any kind. We also reviewed state political blogs listed in our directory for
additional information.

2
 Haley Barbour

Haley Barbour (R-MS) was elected governor of Mississippi in 2003, and reelected in 2007.
Under the state’s term limits law, he cannot run for reelection in 2011.

Gov. Barbour:

• Allegedly laundered campaign contributions

• Refused to accept federal stimulus funds to expand unemployment insurance
• Used his position to enrich himself and his family members

CHARGE ONE: CAMPAIGN FINANCE IRREGULARITIES

The Louisiana Democratic Party filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission against
Gov. Barbour’s political action committee (PAC), Haley’s PAC, for funneling a campaign
contribution from former Rep. Chip Pickering (R-MS) to Sen. David Vitter (R-LA).1 In August
2009, Gov. Barbour’s dormant PAC received only one $5,000 contribution from Rep.
Pickering’s inactive CHIP PAC.2 Four days earlier, Haley’s PAC made its only donation of the
month, a $5,000 contribution to Sen. Vitter, who had admitted to using an escort service.3
Because Rep. Pickering had also been accused by his wife of engaging in an extramarital affair,
the Louisiana Democratic Party contended the campaigns wanted to avoid the appearance of one
Republican embroiled in a sex scandal donating to another Republican involved in a sex
scandal.4

CHARGE TWO: TURNING DOWN FEDERAL FUNDS

Gov. Barbour refused federal stimulus funds to expand unemployment insurance.5 The state’s
unemployment rate subsequently rose to 11.4 percent.6

CHARGE THREE: ENRICHING SELF AND FAMILY

Gov. Barbour has abused his position to enrich himself and his family. For example, Gov.
Barbour’s nephews, Henry and Austin Barbour, registered to lobby in Mississippi with Capitol
Resources LLC soon after their uncle became governor.7 Neither man was registered to lobby
the state of Mississippi prior to their uncle becoming governor.8 One of the firm’s clients was

                                                        
1
Jonathan Allen, Louisiana Dems file FEC complaint against David Vitter, Politico, October 5, 2009.
2
Id.
3
Id.
4
Id.
5
U.S. States Don’t Want Federal Jobless Cash, Winnipeg Free Press, July 7, 2009.
6
Regional and State Employment and Unemployment Summary, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Economic News
Release, March 26, 2010.
7
Timothy J. Burger, Mississippi Governor’s Associates Profit From Katrina Recovery, Bloomberg, August 16,
2007.
8
A review of records available from the Mississippi Secretary of State’s Lobbyist Compensation Report database do
not indicate that either Henry or Austin Barbour were registered to lobby prior to Gov. Barbour taking office.

3
Government Consultants Inc., which advises the state government on bond issues.9 Following
Hurricane Katrina, which struck in August 2005, Gov. Barbour appointed Henry Barbour to
serve as the unpaid executive director of a special recovery commission, which met from
September to December of that year.10 Between July 2005 and July 2006, a period which covers
Henry Barbour’s time on the commission, Government Consultants paid his lobbying firm
$65,000; firm principals also contributed at least $27,500 to Gov. Barbour’s reelection
campaign.11 Government Consultants subsequently received approximately $2.4 million in bond
fees, including at least $400,000 directly from Katrina-related issues. 12 This represented a 3.3%
increase over what it received in 2005, and a full 125% jump compared with its earnings for
2004, the year before it hired Henry Barbour.13 Henry Barbour’s lobbying fees continued to
grow, rising from $150,000 in 2004 to $379,000 in 2006.14

Rosemary Ramirez Barbour, the wife of another of Gov. Barbour’s nephews, has also profited
from government contracts. Her company, Alcatec LLC., had a contract to maintain FEMA
trailers for hurricane victims.15 In June 2007, the FBI executed a search warrant of the firm’s
offices as part of its investigation into federal mail fraud.16 Ms. Barbour’s company had been
awarded at least ten Katrina-related contracts from FEMA and the U.S. General Services
Administration, including a number that were awarded without competitive bidding.17 The
Project on Government Oversight, a government watchdog group, called for the awards to be
scrutinized to ensure they were awarded based on merit rather than favoritism.18 In response to
the allegations, spokesmen for Gov. Barbour, FEMA and Ms. Barbour all said that her close ties
with the governor, the Republican Party and President George W. Bush played no role in her
receiving the contracts.19

Prior his swearing in, Gov.-elect Barbour claimed he had set up a blind trust and cut ties with
Barbour, Griffith, and Rogers, now known as BGR Group.20 On assuming office, the governor
told The Associated Press he no longer had any contact with the lobbying firm and had severed
financial ties to the company.21 According to a notarized trust document obtained by Bloomberg,
however, when Gov. Barbour took office he still had a $786,666 stake in the parent company of
his former lobbying firm, in addition to a pension and profit-sharing agreement with the

                                                                                                                                                                                   
Database available at: http://www.sos.state.ms.us/elections/Lobbying/Lobbyist_CompRpt01.asp, searched April 14,
2010.
9
Burger, Bloomberg, August 16, 2007.
10
Id.
11
Id.
12
Id,
13
Burger, Bloomberg, August 16, 2007.
14
Id.
15
Id.
16
Id.
17
Eric Lipton and Ron Nixon, Governor’s Relative is Big Contract Winner, The New York Times, December 7,
2005.
18
Id.
19
Id.
20
Timothy J. Burger, Mississippi Governor Barbour Held Stock in Parent of Lobby Firm, Bloomberg, August 29,
2007.
21
Id.

4
business.22 It is unclear what relationship Gov. Barbour had with his old lobbying firm when it
lobbied for and received at least four Hurricane Katrina related recovery contracts in 2006.23

                                                        
22
Id.
23
Id.

5
 Donald L. Carcieri

Donald L. Carcieri (R-RI) was elected governor of Rhode Island in 2002 and reelected in 2006.
Under the state’s term limits law, he cannot run for reelection in 2010.

Gov. Carcieri:

• Hired his niece in violation of Rhode Island’s anti-nepotism laws

• Failed to adequately manage his state’s logistics and staffing needs
• Violated campaign finance laws by soliciting subordinates, accepting luxury gifts and
missing a filing deadline
• Impeded the public’s access to information and blocked pro-transparency legislation

CHARGE ONE: NEPOTISM

In late 2002, as he was preparing to assume the governorship, Gov.-elect Carcieri hired his niece,
Stephanie Accaputo, to the Governor’s Office of Correspondence and Constituent Affairs,
despite anti-nepotism laws prohibiting the hiring of family members.1 When the incident
became the subject of an ethics complaint, Gov. Carcieri maintained his innocence, insisting that
at the time he hired Ms. Accaputo, Rhode Island’s anti-nepotism laws applied only to blood
nieces, not nieces-in-law.2 Gov. Carcieri eventually relented, admitted wrongdoing, and paid the
state Ethics Commission a $2,500 fine to settle the complaint.3

CHARGE TWO: MISMANAGEMENT

On December 13, 2007, a winter storm dumped 8.2 inches of snow across Rhode Island,
clogging roadways with snow and causing mass gridlock.4 In just one of many examples of the
slow, poorly coordinated and badly led emergency response to the storm, approximately one
hundred Providence school children were trapped in their buses until late into the evening.5
Meanwhile, Gov. Carcieri had left the country without turning authority over to Lt. Gov.
Elizabeth Roberts, his Democratic rival.6 During the actual snowstorm, the governor was on a
plane and “probably sleeping.” 7 On his return, Gov. Carcieri fired the executive director of the
Emergency Management Agency, even though it was not clear who was responsible for
coordinating storm response.8

In September 2006, a temporary staffing firm with a small contract to supply the state of Rhode
Island became insolvent.9 To meet staffing needs, the Carcieri administration subsequently

1
Carcieri Makes Appointments to Top Administrative Posts, Providence Journal-Bulletin, January 3, 2003;
Katherine Gregg, Governor’s 2002 Hiring of Niece Back in Spotlight, Providence Journal-Bulletin, May 24, 2008.
2
Carcieri Disputes Ch. 10 Ethics Violation Claim, Office of Governor Don Carcieri, Press Release, May 23, 2008.
3
Carcieri Admits Breaking Ethics Rules in Hiring Niece, NBC 10 News (Providence), November 18, 2008.
4
Amanda Milkovits, Storm Casualty: EMA Director Dismissed, The Providence Journal, December 19, 2007.
5
Id.
6
Katherine Gregg, Who’s in Charge Here?, The Providence Journal, December 18, 2007.
7
Id.
8
Milkovits, The Providence Journal, December 19, 2007. 
9
Week in Review, Office of Governor Don Carcieri, Press Release, August 25, 2007.

6
entered into an expansive and expensive emergency contract with Smart Staffing Services.10
Under the terms of the new contract, the percentage of overhead costs increased dramatically,
from 17 percent to 22.5 percent.11 Furthermore, the absolute size of the contract expanded—
from five years, capped at a total of $10 million, to $11 million a year.12 At a state Senate
investigation in May 2007, witnesses revealed irregularities in the contract’s sourcing.13 They
described the state’s payment arrangement—whereby Smart Staffing Services received payroll
funds —as “unique” and “very unusual.”14 The Senate’s final investigative report criticized
Gov. Carcieri for undermining the state’s procurement process and for “violat[ing] the spirit of
the Access to Public Records Act.”15 The committee also found that a number of jobs staffed
through the state’s temporary staffing contract appeared to differ little from regular, full-time
government jobs, suggesting that the governor was using temporary workers to skirt state
sourcing laws.16 Gov. Carcieri decried the investigation, calling it a “witch hunt” and even
threatened to send in the state police.17 As a result of the outcry, Gov. Carcieri’s administration
put the Smart Staffing Services contract out to bid and switched to a less expensive staffing
firm.18

CHARGE THREE: ETHICS VIOLATIONS

The Rhode Island Ethics Commission has cited Gov. Carcieri numerous times for violations. For
example, although the Rhode Island ethics code prohibits the governor from soliciting campaign
contributions from his subordinates, during his reelection campaign, Gov. Carcieri sent them
direct-mail advertising. 19

Rhode Island’s ethics code prohibits state officials from accepting expensive gifts from
“interested parties” with business pending before the state.20 Nevertheless, Gov. Carcieri
accepted luxury box tickets to the New England Patriots’ football stadium in “knowing and
willful violation” of the code.21

In 2003, Gov. Carcieri inexplicably missed the deadline for filing his personal financial
disclosure by two-and-a-half months.22 The commission did not levy a fine or punishment for
the missed deadline.23

10
Katherine Gregg, Democrat Chair Assails Use of Temp Workers, The Providence Journal, April 4, 2007.
11
Office of Governor Don Carcieri, Press Release, August 25, 2007.
12
Gregg, The Providence Journal, April 4, 2007.
13
Katherine Gregg, R.I. Deal with Staffing Firm Called ‘Unique’, The Providence Journal, May 15, 2007.
14
Id.
15
Katherine Gregg, Senate Panel Blasts Staffing Deal, The Providence Journal, February 5, 2008.
16
Id.
17
Id.
18
Office of Governor Don Carcieri, Press Release, August 25, 2007.
19
Rhode Island Ethics Commission, In Re: Donald L. Carcieri Complaint No. 2006–9, March 6, 2007.
20
Rhode Island Ethics Commission, In Re: Donald L. Carcieri Complaint No. 2004–3, Complaint No. 2004-9, May
3, 2005.
21
Id.
22
Id. 
23
Id.

7
CHARGE FOUR: BLOCKING TRANSPARENCY

In 2008, Gov. Carcieri vetoed a bill that would have strengthened the state’s disclosure laws.24
In his veto message, he said the bill would allow the disclosure of sensitive police information,
even though, as The Providence Journal reported, the measure had been “crafted with input from
the Rhode Island Police Chiefs Association.”25

After Gov. Carcieri’s absence from the state during the 2007 snowstorm mentioned above, the
ACLU requested copies of the state’s organizational chart to determine the state’s chain of
command.26 Gov. Carcieri’s office stonewalled, releasing only an already published news
release.27 Gov. Carcieri’s office claimed that the only other documents responsive to the request
were internal emails and that those were exempted from public disclosure because they were
“internal documents that were created for internal purposes.”28 In response, the ACLU sued for
the release of the emails.29 In March 2009, a Superior Court judge ruled for the ACLU and
ordered Gov. Carcieri to comply with Rhode Island’s public records laws, forcing him to release
internal e-mails and other documents.30

24
Steve Peoples and Katherine Gregg, Expungement, Public Records Bill Vetoed, The Providence Journal, July 4,
2008.
25
Id.
26
Ruling in Open Records Suit; Judge Orders Governor to Turn Over ‘Chain of Command’ Documents to the
ACLU, Rhode Island ACLU (RI ACLU), Press Release, March 3, 2009.
27
Id.
28
Id.
29
Id.
30
RI ACLU, Press Release, March 3, 2009. 

8
 

Jim Gibbons

Jim Gibbons (R-NV) was elected governor of Nevada in 2006 and is running for reelection this
year.

Gov. Gibbons:

• Violated campaign finance law by accepting illegal corporate donations

• Allegedly assaulted a waitress
• Overlooked ethical lapses of his appointee
• Misused state resources in pursuit of an extra-marital affair
• Endangered his state’s economy by threatening to reject federal stimulus funds
• Has been involved with various investigations stemming from his time in congress

CHARGE ONE: ACCEPTING ILLEGAL CORPORATE DONATIONS

In 2006, while campaigning for governor, then-Rep. Gibbons’ Democratic opponent, state Sen.
Dina Titus, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and the Nevada
Secretary of State alleging that Rep. Gibbons’ federal political action committee (PAC) had
improperly accepted corporate donations dating from his time as a member of the U.S House of
Representatives.1 The complaint alleged that Rep. Gibbons had accepted illegal campaign
contributions from corporate donors at least four times, and questioned whether a fifth donation
might have also violated the law.2 The Titus campaign said Gov. Gibbons had a long history of
campaign contribution violations, citing as evidence his return of multiple donations that
exceeded state limits.3 In 2007, the FEC “admonished” Gov. Gibbons for accepting one
corporate contribution, and ordered him to pay a $2,000 fine.4 The FEC “exercised its
prosecutorial discretion” by addressing only one of the five counts lodged by the Titus campaign
and dismissing the other four.5

CHARGE TWO: ALLEGATIONS OF ASSAULT

In October 2006, casino cocktail waitress, Chrissy Mazzeo, claimed a drunken Rep. Gibbons had
assaulted her outside a Las Vegas restaurant.6 Ms. Mazzeo claimed that Rep. Gibbons made
unwanted advances while they were in the restaurant, and then, as he walked her to her car,
grabbed her arms and pushed her against the wall.7 Rep. Gibbons later admitted to grabbing Ms.
Mazzeo, but said he was keeping her from falling.8 Both said they had been drinking, but Rep.
Gibbons asserted that he was not intoxicated.9

                                                            
1
Ray Hagar, FEC Complaint Filed over Gibbons Donations, Reno Gazette-Journal, September 22, 2006.
2
Tony Batt, Gibbons’ PAC Must Pay $2,000 Fine, Las Vegas Review-Journal, August 23, 2007.
3
Hager, Reno Gazette-Journal, September 22, 2006.
4
Batt, Las Vegas Review-Journal, August 23, 2007.
5
Id.
6
Molly Ball, Accuser Alleges Cover-Up Attempt, Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 26, 2006.
7
Id.
8
Molly Ball and David Kihara, Gibbons Cleared by Police, Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 15, 2006.
9
Id.

 
9
 

The day after she lodged the formal complaint, Ms. Mazzeo signed a statement saying she did
not want to pursue the matter and explained it was “because of who he is”10 and the police
promptly ended their investigation.11 The brief inquiry was handled by detectives in the Clark
County Sheriff’s Office, which was headed by Bill Young, a Republican who had endorsed Rep.
Gibbons’s gubernatorial campaign.12

Two weeks after the incident, the company that owned the parking lot where the alleged assault
took place released security camera footage to the police,13 but the tapes were inconclusive.14
After Gov. Gibbons’s election, local prosecutors, citing insufficient evidence, closed the case.15
Ms. Mazzeo said that Gov. Gibbons’s allies had threatened her and offered to buy her silence,
but those claims were never substantiated.16 In 2008, Ms. Mazzeo filed a civil suit against the
governor, which is still pending.17 In March 2010, lawyers for the governor filed a motion to
dismiss the case.18

CHARGE THREE: QUESTIONABLE APPOINTMENT

In 2007, Gov. Gibbons appointed Joe Waltuch—the former top lobbyist for the nation’s second
largest subprime mortgage lender, New Century Financial Corp.—to serve as commissioner of
the Nevada Division of Mortgage Lending.19 New Century had recently declared bankruptcy
and was under federal criminal investigation for securities and accounting violations.20 While
Mr. Waltuch was not accused of any wrongdoing, the appointment of the chief lobbyist for a
disgraced mortgage company to oversee the state’s mortgage lending division sparked harsh
criticism from the Nevada Legislature.21

CHARGE FOUR: MISUSE OF STATE RESOURCES TO PURSUE AN AFFAIR

In the course of divorce proceedings, Nevada First Lady Dawn Gibbons revealed her suspicions
that Gov. Gibbons was carrying on an affair with the wife of a Reno doctor.22 In June 2008, The
Reno Gazette-Journal found documents that showed Gov. Gibbons had text-messaged his
alleged mistress, Kathy Karrasch, 867 times over six weeks in 2007, racking up nearly $130 in
charges on his state-owned cell phone.23 The marathon texting sessions included 91 texts sent
between midnight and 2 a.m. one morning.24 The governor was forced to reimburse the state for
                                                            
10
Ball, Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 26, 2006.
11
Ball and Kihara, Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 15, 2006.
12
Id.
13
Editorial, What Will The Tapes Show?, Las Vegas Sun, November 2, 2006.
14
Justin Rood, In Nevada, Tapes Reveal No People – Only More Chaos, TPM Muckraker (Talking Points Memo
blog), November 3, 2006.
15
Kathleen Hennessey, DA Won’t Prosecute Nevada Governor-Elect, The Associated Press, December 28, 2006.
16
Ball, Las Vegas Review-Journal, October 26, 2006.
17
David Kihara, Governor Fights to Keep Records Away from Accuser, Las Vegas Review-Journal, June 25, 2009.
18
Carrie Geer Thevenot, Gibbons Seeks Dismissal of Mazzeo Lawsuit, Las Vegas Review-Journal, March 5, 2010.
19
John G. Edwards, Former Lobbyist Granted State Job, Las Vegas Review-Journal, September 5, 2007.
20
Id.
21
Id.
22
Steve Friess, Divorce Turns Ugly for Nevada’s Governor, The New York Times (blog), May 30, 2008.
23
Anjeanette Damon, Gibbons Texted Woman 867 Times in 6 Weeks, Reno Gazette-Journal, June 11, 2008.
24
Id.

 
10
 

the charges.25 He also made 42 calls on the state-issued phone to his alleged mistress, including
“two lengthy phone calls” during business hours.26 Gov. Gibbons denied having an
inappropriate relationship with Ms. Karrasch.27

In February 2010, Gov. Gibbons claimed Ms. Karrasch had not accompanied him to
Washington, D.C. for a conference, even though video evidence and a local news team showed
the pair returning to the Reno airport together and leaving in the same car.28 When asked by a
reporter, Gov. Gibbons claimed that he was giving Ms. Karrasch a ride home because they lived
near each other, and not because she was returning from Washington, D.C. with him.29 The next
day, the governor admitted that Ms. Karrasch had accompanied him but said she had paid her
own way.30

CHARGE FIVE: REJECTING FEDERAL STIMULUS FUNDS

In March 2009, Gov. Gibbons, along with a handful of other Republican governors, threatened
not to accept federal stimulus funds.31 The governor threatened to refuse the funds designed to
help the state provide unemployment benefits; at the time Nevada had one of the highest jobless
and foreclosure rates in the nation.32 After angering members of his own party with his stance,
Gov. Gibbons relented and accepted the money.33

ESTABLISHING LEGAL DEFENSE FUND

In May 2007, Gov. Gibbons established a legal defense fund to defray the costs of various
investigations into his conduct, some of which stemmed from his years in congress.34 The
ongoing investigations or claims related to:

• His relationship with Warren Trepp and eTreppid Technologies;

• Litigation involving eTreppid Technologies;
• The employment of Gov. Gibbons’s wife as a consultant with Sierra Nevada Corp.
around the time the company received a no-bid federal contract;
• The investigation of the alleged assault of Chrissy Mazzeo; and
• Allegations that Gov. Gibbons employed an illegal immigrant as a nanny.35

                                                            
25
Id.
26
Id.
27
Damon, Reno Gazette-Journal, June 11, 2008.
28
Jonathon Humbert, Gov. Gibbons Responds to I-Team Investigation and Apologizes, LasVegasNow.com,
February 23, 2010.
29
Id.
30
Id.
31
Jennifer Steinhauer, A Governor Says No to Money and Reaps Boos, The New York Times, March 21, 2009.
32
Id.
33
Id.; Lawmakers, the Governor and a Stimulus Czar, Las Vegas Review-Journal, August 16, 2009.
34
Governor James A. Gibbons, Legal Defense Fund Statement of Formation, May 14, 2007.
35
Id.

 
11
 

In November 2008, Gov. Gibbons was cleared of criminal conduct following allegations he had
accepted gifts from eTreppid Technologies’ president, including a Caribbean cruise, in return for
help procuring defense contracts.36

In 2004, while serving on the U.S. House Armed Services and Intelligence committees, then-
Rep. Gibbons allegedly helped secure a no-bid federal defense contract for a company that hired
his wife through her consulting firm.37 Rep. Gibbons pushed through a $2 million research and
development contract to Sierra Nevada Corp., which then hired Dawn Gibbons to conduct
surveys and carry out demonstrations of a hand-held emergency communications device.38 Ms.
Gibbons’s firm was paid $35,000 for the work.39

The investigation concerning Gov. Gibbons’s alleged employment of an illegal immigrant arose
after Martha Patricia Sandoval said the governor and his wife hired her as a nanny and
housekeeper despite her illegal status.40 The status of the investigation is unknown.

                                                            
36
Matt Apuzzo, Attorney: Gibbons Cleared in FBI Probe, Las Vegas Sun, November 2, 2008.
37
Report: Nevada Governor Helped Company that Hired Wife, The Associated Press, March 30, 2007.
38
Id.
39
Id.
40
Brendan Riley, Nevada Governor Told Defense Fund Not Illegal, The Associated Press, March 20, 2007.

 
12
 Bobby Jindal

Bobby Jindal (R-LA) was elected governor of Louisiana in 2007 and is running for reelection in
2011.

Gov. Jindal:

• Prevented the public release of government records and has fought legislation to make
government more transparent
• Weakened the authority of the state ethics board
• Refused to accept federal stimulus funds to expand unemployment insurance and to fund
other important programs
• Rewarded campaign donors with government jobs and contracts
• Has been fined for ethics violations

CHARGE ONE: TRANSPARENCY

During the 2009 legislative session, Gov. Jindal killed a bill that would have greatly expanded
transparency in the governor’s office.1 House Bill 169 would have extended the Public Records
Act to the governor’s office and made most books, records, writings, accounts, letters and other
executive branch communications available to the public on request.2 Gov. Jindal said the bill
would violate executive privilege and helped to kill it in committee.3

Instead, Gov. Jindal backed Senate Bill 278, a rival measure riddled with loopholes,4 but which
became law on July 10, 2009.5 Gov. Jindal asserted the new law would increase government
transparency, but opponents charged that it would forever seal some records regarding who and
what influenced a governor’s decisions.6

Gov. Jindal has voiced his opposition to legislation aimed at expanding access to records of the
governor’s office.7 During the 2010 legislative session, two state legislators introduced bills to
strengthen the open records policy by making clear that gubernatorial records are public and
creating narrow exceptions to shield specific documents from the public domain. 8 One bill
directs the governor’s office to preserve records exempt from public disclosure and transfer them
to the state archives at the end of the governor’s tenure; the documents would become public 10

                                                       
1
Ed Anderson, Bill Would Open Governor’s Office Documents to Public, The Times-Picayune, April 4, 2009;
Marsha Shuler, Lawmakers Target Saints, Jindal *** Governor’s Office Scrutiny Bill Quashed, The Advocate, April
30, 2009.
2
Id.
3
Id.
4
Marsha Shuler, Senate Sends Governor Records Bill to Jindal, 2TheAdvocate.com, June 24, 2009.
5
Governor Jindal Signs Bills Into Law and Announces Bills That Became Law Without Signature, Office of
Governor Bobby Jindal, Press Release, July 10, 2009.
6
Marsha Shuler and Michelle Millhollon, Jindal Law Veils His Office’s Records, The Advocate, July 11, 2009.
7
 Marsha Shuler, Public Records Fights, 2TheAdvocate.com, April 4, 2010. 
8
Id.

13
years after their creation.9 Gov. Jindal called the open records legislation a distraction and
defended the law passed in 2009 as adequate.10

CHARGE TWO: UNDERCUTTING ETHICS ENFORCEMENT

After a special legislative session passed Gov. Jindal-backed legislation gutting the Louisiana
Board of Ethics, ten of its 11 members resigned.11 Seven of the ten members resigned because
the legislation transferred ethics enforcement power from the state ethics board to administrative
law judges, rendering the board useless.12 Under the new law, administrative law judges,
selected by an appointee of the governor, determine the guilt or innocence of public officials.13
Opponents of the legislation contend this will hinder ethics reform and promote political
gamesmanship because lawmakers may be able to choose the judges they will face.14 The new
law also requires a tougher standard for evidence to prove ethics violations.15 Gov. Jindal
proposed the legislation while he was under investigation by the Louisiana Board of Ethics.16
Other proponents of the new law were accused of holding grudges against the ethics board.17

CHARGE THREE: HYPOCRISY IN REJECTING STIMULUS MONEY

Gov. Jindal declined $98 million in federal stimulus funds intended to help the state expand
unemployment insurance.18 He also rejected $9.5 million in stimulus funds to temporarily
expand Medicaid to families who left welfare for a job and turned back $55.3 million to provide
health care for people without insurance.19 Gov. Jindal also refused to apply for $300 million in
stimulus money to potentially fund a high-speed rail line between New Orleans and Baton
Rouge, upsetting even some fellow Louisiana Republicans, including Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao.20

In marked contrast, Gov. Jindal accepted and dispersed one billion in stimulus money to shore up
Louisiana’s budget. 21 The governor also publicly presented a $521,000 check he signed
personally to the First Baptist Church in Anacoco, but failed to disclose its source: the much-
maligned federal stimulus law.22

                                                       
9
Id.
10
Id. 
11
Melinda Deslatte, Jindal Suggests Ethics Board Quit Over Disclosure, The Associated Press, July 7, 2008.
12
 Id. 
13
 Id. 
14
 Melinda Deslatte, Jindal Proposes Revamped Ethics Enforcement in Special Session, The Associated Press,
February 8, 2008. 
15
Deslatte, The Associated Press, July 7, 2008.
16
 Deslatte, The Associated Press, February 8, 2008. 
17
Id.
18
Jan Moller, Jindal Rejects $98 Million in Stimulus Spending, The Times-Picayune, February 20, 2009.
19
Jindal Says ‘No’ to Health Care Stimulus Funds, The Associated Press and WDSU.com, March 31, 2009.
20
Doug Simpson, Cao, Jindal at Odds Over Rail ‘Stimulus’ Money, The Associated Press, October 2, 2009.
21
Jeremy Alford, Bobby and Barack, Gambit Weekly, July 27, 2009.
22
Id.

14
CHARGE FOUR: PATRONAGE FOR DONORS

Gov. Jindal appointed more than 200 campaign contributors—who donated in excess of
$784,000 to the governor’s election campaign in 2007 and 2008—to positions in Louisiana state
government.23 In addition, 12 of the 16 doctors appointed by Gov. Jindal to the Louisiana
Medical Advisory Board were found to be campaign donors as well.24

Gov. Jindal has sought to keep such connections from becoming public.25 During the 2009
legislative session, the governor helped kill House Bill 243, a measure which would have
required him to disclose the names of campaign contributors appointed to government
positions.26 It was not the first time Gov. Jindal tried to keep the legislature from forcing him to
divulge his ties to donors; he vetoed similar legislation in 2008.27

Gov. Jindal also has awarded millions of dollars in work and incentives to campaign donors. 28
In one egregious case, the state announced plans to invest $10 million in the Port of Terrebonne,
to the benefit of Gary Chouest. 29 Mr. Chouest, his business and his closest family members
were responsible for at least 18 separate donations to Gov. Jindal’s campaign war-chest, totaling
$85,000.30

CHARGE FIVE: ETHICS VIOLATIONS

Gov. Jindal was fined $2,500 by the Louisiana Board of Ethics for violating campaign finance
laws by failing to disclose in a timely manner more than $118,000 in direct mail expenses the
Louisiana Republican Party made on his behalf.31

                                                       
23
Jeremy Alford, Jindal’s List, Gambit Weekly, March 23, 2009.
24
Id. 
25
Shuler, The Advocate, April 30, 2009.
26
Id.
27
Id.
28
Jeremy Alford, Deep Pockets, Gambit Weekly, April 6, 2009.
29
Id.
30
Id.
31
Jan Moller and Ed Anderson, Jindal to Pay Ethics Fine, The Times-Picayune, January 25, 2008. 

15
 David Paterson

David Paterson (D-NY) assumed the office of governor of New York on March 17, 2008,
following the resignation of former Gov. Eliot Spitzer. He is not running for reelection.

Gov. Paterson:

• Accepted improper gifts

• Testified falsely under oath
• Acted with willful opacity in consequential state matters
• Shielded a top aide from assault allegations

CHARGE ONE: SELF-ENRICHMENT

The New York State Commission on Public Integrity concluded in March 2010 that Gov.
Paterson violated state ethics laws by accepting free World Series tickets in October 2009.1 Gov.
Paterson had directed an aide to contact the New York Yankees to request tickets to game one of
the World Series so the governor could attend in his “official capacity.”2 The governor then
received five field-level tickets with a face value of $425 each, but an estimated total market
value of $6,000.3

In the face of an expanding state budget crisis, Gov. Paterson came under heavy criticism after it
was revealed that he had spent $21,000 of taxpayers’ money on a custom-stitched antique rug for
his residence.4 Gov. Paterson acquired the rug after warning that the state deficit could swell to
$15 billion and calling on state workers to forgo a 3 percent yearly pay raise.5 The rug was
purchased at Stark Carpets, which had contributed $3,000 to the Spitzer–Paterson campaign in
2005 and 2006, and $5,000 in 2003, further raising suspicion.6

CHARGE TWO: FALSE TESTIMONY

In connection with Gov. Paterson’s acceptance of free World Series tickets, the state ethics
commission ruled that Gov. Paterson had falsely testified under oath when he claimed he
intended to pay for the tickets all along.7 In reality, the tickets were paid for with a backdated
check for $850 from the governor’s personal account, apparently written to support the

                                                            
1
Nicholas Confessore and Jeremy W. Peters, Inquiry on Gifts Finds Governor Testified Falsely, The New York
Times, March 4, 2010.
2
Id.
3
Kenneth Lovett, State Watchdog Probes Gov Over Free Game 1 Tix, Daily News (New York), November 3, 2009;
Fredric U. Dicker, Prober: E-mails Don’t Clear Gov in Tixgate, New York Post, March 17, 2010.
4
Rick Karlin, Purchase of Turkish Carpet Takes Taxpayers for a Ride?, Times Union (Albany, N.Y.), November 20,
2008.
5
Id.
6
Id.
7
 Confessore and Peters, The New York Times, March 4, 2010. 

16
governor’s claim.8 The state attorney general’s office is investigating the matter and considering
criminal charges.9

CHARGE THREE: TRANSPARENCY

The New York Times called Gov. Paterson’s attempts to fill the Senate seat vacated by Hillary
Clinton—who was appointed U.S. Secretary of State—an “embarrassing sequence of events”
that “ding[ed] Mr. Paterson’s credibility.”10 Gov. Paterson was heavily criticized for dragging
out the process, shrouding it in secrecy by refusing to release the results of a questionnaire he
required potential candidates to fill out, and neglecting to publically announce any potential
candidates.11

Gov. Paterson’s record of obfuscation has extended to state fiscal matters.12 The governor’s one-
party negotiations on the state budget—conducted during a hastily assembled weekend session—
gave legislators and the news media just a few days to read thousands of pages of materials
before a vote was held.13 NYPIRG, a state ethics-in-government organization, said that Gov.
Paterson “gambled that an ‘on-time’ budget means more to voters than ‘transparency.’”14

CHARGE FOUR: INTERFERENCE IN A SEXUAL ASSAULT CASE

Gov. Paterson is under investigation for allegedly becoming entangled in a domestic abuse case
involving top aide David Johnson and Mr. Johnson’s girlfriend, Sherr-una Booker.15 Ms. Booker
accused Mr. Johnson of assaulting her in 2009.16 Gov. Paterson apparently tried to silence Ms.
Booker by sending her a message via a state worker that “the governor wants her to make this go
away,” in apparent reference to the allegations against Mr. Johnson.17 Gov. Paterson contacted
Ms. Booker the day before her hearing to obtain a protection order against Mr. Johnson was
scheduled.18 Ms. Booker failed to appear in court and the case was dismissed.19 In addition, the
state police department, which has no jurisdiction in the matter, was accused of harassing the
victim.20 This revelation resulted in two superintendents resigning from the force.21 Two senior
aides to Gov. Paterson and his press secretary also resigned in connection with the ongoing
scandal.22

                                                            
8
Id.
9
Dicker, New York Post, March 17, 2010.
10
Jeremy W. Peters, Double-Takes by the Governor in Casting a Senator, The New York Times, January 21, 2009.
11
Id.
12
David King, In Albany, Budget Battles Behind Closed Doors, Gotham Gazette, March 2009.
13
Id.
14
Id.
15
David Kocieniewski and Jeremy Peters, Inquiry is Told of Paterson Bid to Quiet Accuser, The New York Times,
March 3, 2010.
16
 Id. 
17
Id.
18
Kocieniewski and Peters, The New York Times, March 3, 2010
19
Id.
20
Danny Hakim, Another Aide to Paterson Steps Down, The New York Times, March 20, 2010.
21
Id.
22
Id.

17
 Sonny Perdue

Sonny Perdue (R-GA) was elected governor of Georgia in 2002 and reelected in 2006. Under
the state’s term limits law, he cannot run for reelection in 2010.

Gov. Perdue:

• Accepted gifts and travel from lobbyists

• Violated campaign finance laws
• Failed to file complete personal financial disclosure information and supported a tax
loophole that benefitted him personally
• Allegedly thwarted an investigation by the Governor’s Office of Consumer Affairs
• Appointed a business associate to a state position

CHARGE ONE: ACCEPTING GIFTS AND TRAVEL FROM LOBBYISTS

In 2003, Gov. Perdue signed an executive order banning most state employees and the governor
himself from accepting any gift valued at more than $25 from a lobbyist.1 Nevertheless, Gov.
Perdue has exploited loopholes to accept many gifts, including football tickets from his former
chief of staff turned lobbyist and refreshments from an AT&T lobbyist at the Republican
National Convention.2 A CREW review of Georgia state lobbyist report forms found that, since
2007, Gov. Perdue has accepted at least $2,286 in football tickets alone.3

In addition, Gov. Purdue has accepted travel paid for by lobbyists on numerous occasions. In
2004, the governor reportedly accepted a $2,400 plane ride from Atlanta to a NASCAR race just
30 miles south of the city, paid for by a Home Depot lobbyist.4 Also in 2004, insurer AFLAC
bought Gov. Perdue a first-class plane ticket worth $2,776 to Washington, D.C., to attend former
President Ronald Reagan’s funeral.5 A Portuguese company that built a factory in Georgia flew
the governor to Milan in 2008.6 That same year, Gov. Purdue accepted a flight from a CSX
Corp. lobbyist to attend a football game.7 The governor’s staff has argued that such trips were
                                                        
1
James Salzer and Cameron McWhirter, Georgia’s Gift Ban has Wide Loophole, Atlanta Journal Constitution,
February 8, 2009.
2
Id.
3
Craig Camuso, Lobbyist Report Form August 1–December 31, 2008, The Georgia State Ethics Commission; Craig
Camuso, Lobbyist Report Form August 1–December 31 2009, The Georgia State Ethics Commission; Christopher
Cummiskey, Lobbyist Report Form August 1–December 31, 2008, The Georgia State Ethics Commission;
Christopher Cummiskey, Lobbyist Report Form August 1–December 31, 2009, The Georgia State Ethics
Commission; Dean Sheheane, Lobbyist Report Form August 1–December 31, 2007, The Georgia State Ethics
Commission; Dean Sheheane, Lobbyist Report Form August 1–December 31, 2008, The Georgia State Ethics
Commission; Dean Sheheane, Lobbyist Report Form August 1–December 31, 2009, The Georgia State Ethics
Commission; Eric Tanenblatt, Lobbyist Report Form August 1–December 31, 2008, The Georgia State Ethics
Commission. The Georgia state lobbyist database is not searchable by gift recipient; CREW’s research is based on
the lobbyist names listed in: James Salzer, Perdue Took Gifts From Lobbyists, Atlanta Journal Constitution, May 1,
2005.
4
Salzer, Atlanta Journal Constitution, May 1, 2005.
5
Id.
6
Salzer, Atlanta Journal Constitution, February 8, 2009.
7
 Id.  

18
appropriate because they were for state business and that having lobbyists foot the bills saved
taxpayers money.8

CHARGE TWO: CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW VIOLATION

In 2005, Gov. Perdue became the first Georgia governor to be fined by the State Ethics
Commission for multiple campaign finance violations.9 Most notably, despite a state law
prohibiting contributions over $10,000 from corporations, Gov. Perdue accepted more than
$22,000 from his wife’s company, including over $12,000 in unreported flights around the state
on his wife’s company’s private jet.10 A deal reached with the State Ethics Commission valued
the flight time at just $65 an hour.11

To settle the charges against him, Gov. Perdue reimbursed donors $18,000 and paid an Ethics
Commission fine of $1,900.12 According to the governor’s own lawyer, Gov. Perdue’s wife
promptly donated her share of the money back to the governor’s campaign, taking advantage of a
campaign finance loophole allowing immediate family members to make unlimited campaign
contributions.13

CHARGE THREE: PERSONAL FINANCIAL IRREGULARITES

Gov. Perdue failed to report the 2007 purchase of a $550,000 vacation property on his 2007
personal financial disclosure form, as required by law.14 Gov. Perdue’s spokesman called the
omission an oversight.15 An amended disclosure form was filed roughly one year after the date
of purchase.16

In the summer of 2004, Gov. Perdue secured a $300,000 federal tax break for himself involving
a Florida land deal.17 Earlier that year, the governor sold a tract of land in Georgia that he
inherited from his father, realizing a gain of more than $2 million.18 Then, over the summer, the
governor paid more than $2 million to purchase a 20-acre tract of land near Disney World from
Stan Thomas, one of his political supporters.19 At the time, the real estate was appraised at up to
$102,000.20 Mr. Thomas, in fact, is described as one of the most powerful backers of the
Georgia state GOP, having contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to the party and its
causes while Gov. Perdue has been in office.21 The purchase of the Florida land enabled the
governor to take advantage of a federal capital gains tax loophole that allows investors to put the
                                                        
8
Id.
9
James Salzer, Perdue to Pay $1,900 Fine for Ethical Lapse, Atlanta Journal Constitution, June 18, 2005.
10
Id.
11
Georgia State Ethics Commission, Consent Order: Case No. 2004-0002, June 17, 2005, p. 3.
12
Salzer, Atlanta Journal Constitution, June 18, 2005.
13
Id.
14
James Salzer, Perdue Fails to Disclose Property, Atlanta Journal Constitution, September 10, 2008.
15
Id.
16
Id.
17
Investigation Shines Light on Fla. Land Deal, Macon Telegraph, December 21, 2006.
18
Ken Foskett, Did Land Buy Justify Tax Break?, Atlanta Journal Constitution, December 20, 2006.
19
Id.
20
Id.
21
Id.

19
proceeds of one sale toward the purchase of land of equal or higher value.22 The transaction
saved the governor an estimated $300,000 in federal taxes.23 Gov. Perdue bought the land
unseen from Mr. Thomas after the governor asked for help finding an investment that would
shelter him from federal taxes deriving from the Georgia sale.24

Gov. Perdue saved an additional $100,000 in Georgia state taxes thanks to a tax bill, which
repealed the state tax on federal land swaps, the governor signed into law in 2005, the year after
his own land swap had taken place.25 The chairman of the state House Ways and Means
Committee—who has done legal work for the governor—altered the bill at the 11th hour to
retroactively cover any land sales occurring after January 1, 2004.26 This change allowed the
governor to take advantage of the new tax rule.27 Despite this, Gov. Perdue repeatedly claimed
that when he signed the tax bill into law he was unaware that it would affect him.28 A document
obtained by The Atlanta Journal Constitution suggests otherwise—the governor received a
memorandum explaining the tax change in April 2005, prior to signing the legislation.29

CHARGE FOUR: HELPING OUT SPECIAL INTERESTS

Bill Heard Enterprises, based in Columbus, Ga., was once the country’s largest Chevrolet retailer
network.30 In September 2008, the company abruptly closed its doors and began liquidating its
assets, citing high gas prices and the economic downturn.31 Over the previous 16 years, Bill
Heard had been accused of numerous deceptive and fraudulent business practices, and had paid
the Georgia Governor’s Office of Consumer Affairs (OCA) more than $279,000 in
administrative fines.32 In 2003, Bill Heard Enterprises was investigated by the OCA for
misleading advertising practices, reportedly prompting executives of the company to ask for
Gov. Perdue’s intervention.33 Within a few months, Gov. Perdue fired the head of the OCA, an
action that the governor and company executives claimed was unrelated to the investigation.34

CHARGE FIVE: CRONYISM

In 2003, Gov. Perdue appointed Stan Thomas to a state board overseeing economic development
in Georgia—the same Stan Thomas with whom Gov. Perdue would later work on the
questionable land transaction described above. 35

                                                        
22
Foskett, Atlanta Journal Constitution, December 20, 2006.
23
Id.
24
Id.
25
James Salzer, Perdue Had Explanation of Tax Break, Atlanta Journal Constitution, December 18, 2006.
26
Id.
27
Id.
28
Id.
29
Salzer, Atlanta Journal Constitution, December 18, 2006.
30
Alan Judd, Heard Took Risky Road, Atlanta Journal Constitution, September 28, 2008.
31
Id.
32
Lyle Harris, A Consumer Agency That Isn’t, Atlanta Journal Constitution, July 13, 2007.
33
Id.
34
Id.
35
Foskett, Atlanta Journal Constitution, December 20, 2006.

20
 Rick Perry

Rick Perry (R-TX) assumed the office of governor of Texas in 2000 when George W. Bush
became president. He was elected to a full four-year term in 2002, reelected in 2006 and is
running again in 2010.

Gov. Perry:

• Allegedly disregarded campaign finance laws and aided a business that was especially
generous to his campaign
• Refused to operate transparently, and has blocked access to information related to a death
penalty case
• Rejected federal stimulus funds in a manner that appeared to put partisan politics ahead
of the interests of the citizens of Texas
• Has perpetuated the revolving door between government and special interests
• Accepted travel and campaign donations from a business that received benefits from his
official actions
• Used campaign funds for a personal trip with questionable relevance to his campaign for
office

CHARGE ONE: CAMPAIGN FINANCE PROBLEMS

A lawsuit filed by Christopher Bell, Gov. Perry’s opponent in the 2006 campaign for governor,
alleged that errors in campaign finance reports obscured the source of $1 million in
contributions.1 Attorneys for Mr. Bell further alleged that the $1 million in question, purportedly
from the Republican Governors Association (RGA), was actually a conduit contribution from
Texas homebuilder Bob Perry (no relation to the governor), who had cut a check to the RGA for
the same amount just days earlier.2 According to Mr. Bell’s lawyers, the RGA deliberately
misclassified the donation on campaign finance reports and “effectively kept anybody from
knowing what was going on about these contributions.”3

Bob and Doylene Perry, owners of Perry Homes of Houston, have donated $840,000 directly to
Gov. Perry’s campaign committee—not including the alleged $1 million contribution made
through the RGA—and the Perrys’ industry seems to have benefitted from the governor’s
official actions.4 In 2003, Gov. Perry helped push through legislation creating the Texas
Residential Construction Commission, a state body that is supposed to handle complaints against
homebuilders.5 Within a month of receiving a $100,000 donation from Bob Perry, Gov. Perry
appointed Perry Homes executive John R. Krugh—who reportedly helped write the law creating

                                                        
1
Judge Rejects Request to Toss Lawsuit, The Associated Press, May 6, 2009.
2
Jason Embry, Defeated Democrat Alleges Source of Money Was Hidden, Seeks Damages Over Error, Austin
American-Statesman, April 6, 2009.
3
Id.
4
Rick Casey, Investor’s Guide to Guv Contest, Houston Chronicle, November 5, 2006.
5
Id.

21
the body—to serve as one of its nine commissioners.6 In 2006, state Comptroller Carole Keeton
Strayhorn nicknamed the commission the “builder protection agency” for its ineffectiveness and
advocated that it be abolished.7

CHARGE TWO: TRANSPARENCY AND THE DEATH PENALTY

In 2009, Gov. Perry refused to release a clemency report prepared to help him to decide the fate
of then-death row inmate Cameron Todd Willingham.8 Gov. Perry also took actions that shielded
the public from important knowledge about how certain cases are investigated.9

Mr. Willingham was executed in 2004 after being convicted in the arson deaths of his three
daughters.10 In October 2009, the Houston Chronicle and Hearst Newspapers filed a lawsuit
against Gov. Perry for his refusal to release the clemency report, which was received by his
office on the eve the governor denied Mr. Willingham a stay of execution.11 The governor
argued the document was privileged.12 Soon after the execution forensic scientists raised serious
doubts about the evidence used to convict Mr. Willingham—and questioned whether the fire
was, in fact, arson.13 Controversy over the case reignited when Gov. Perry replaced members of
the Texas Forensic Science Commission, which was investigating whether to improve the
standards of arson investigators in light of the Willingham case. 14 The governor’s move
prompted accusations that he was covering up facts that could prove that Texas executed an
innocent man.15

CHARGE THREE: REJECTING STIMULUS MONEY

In March 2009, Gov. Perry announced that he would reject nearly $555 million in federal
stimulus funds to expand state unemployment benefits, arguing that the money would increase
the tax burden on Texas businesses.16 He did, however, accept most of the nearly $17 billion in
federal aid set aside for his state.17 Texas currently covers the smallest percentage of
unemployed workers of any state, according to the Center for Public Policy Priorities, with
nearly four out of every five unemployed workers not qualifying for benefits.18 At least one
business-backed tax group predicted that by rejecting the funds, the state would be forced to

                                                        
6
Id.; Clay Robinson and Purva Patel, Builder Oversight Agency Blasted; Strayhorn Says the State Group Gives
Little Help to Home Buyers, Houston Chronicle, January 24, 2006, in this source, Mr. Krugh is referred to as Robert
Krugh. His official Commission biography, found at
http://www.trcc.state.tx.us/who_we_are/resources/krugh_printer_friendly.pdf, gives Mr. Krugh’s full name as John
R. Krugh.
7
Robinson and Patel, Houston Chronicle, January, 24, 2006.
8
R.G. Ratcliffe, Chronicle, Hearst Sue Perry to Release Clemency Report, Houston Chronicle, October 27, 2009.
9
Id.
10
Id.
11
Id.
12
Ratcliffe, Houston Chronicle, October 27, 2009.
13
Steve Mills and Maurice Possley, Man Executed on Disproved Forensics, Chicago Tribune, December 9, 2004.
14
Ratcliffe, Houston Chronicle, October 27, 2009.
15
Id.
16
Texas Rejects Stimulus Unemployment Money, The Associated Press, March 12, 2009.
17
Id.
18
Perry Rejects Funds for Jobless, The Dallas Morning News, March 13, 2009.

22
increase taxes on businesses to avoid a projected unemployment fund shortfall.19 The group said
accepting the stimulus funds would have reduced the potential tax increase.20 Members of both
political parties opposed the governor’s actions.21

CHARGE FOUR: REVOLVING DOOR

Gov. Perry’s staff has made use of the revolving door; at least 17 of Gov. Perry’s former aides
have entered the lobbying industry.22 For instance, in June 2009, Gov. Perry named former
lobbyist Ray Sullivan as his chief of staff.23 Mr. Sullivan, employed by Gov. Perry earlier in his
career, had left government to pursue a lobbying career, representing companies such as Exelon
Power Texas, Banc Pass Inc., Global Options Inc. and HNTB Corp.24

On February 2, 2007, Gov. Perry issued an executive order mandating that all sixth-grade girls
receive the human papillomavirus vaccine Gardasil, a move opposed by a number of
conservatives and some parents’ rights groups.25 The executive order also directed the state to
provide the vaccine at no cost to girls between the ages of 9 and 18 who were uninsured or
whose insurance did not cover the vaccine.26 Leading up to the order, Merck & Co., the
distributor of Gardasil, doubled its lobbying budget in Texas and gave money to Women in
Government, a group established to advocate for the vaccine.27 Gov. Perry’s former chief of
staff, Mike Toomey, was one of three Merck lobbyists in Texas at the time.28 Merck’s political
action committee also donated at least $6,000 to Gov. Perry’s 2006 reelection campaign.29

CHARGE FIVE: IMPROPER TIES TO THE POULTRY INDUSTRY

In April 2008, Gov. Perry, apparently acting in the interests of poultry producer Lonnie Pilgrim,
requested a waiver from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for certain ethanol
mandates.30 Gov. Perry had met with Mr. Pilgrim one month earlier.31 Six days after the
meeting, Mr. Pilgrim made a $100,000 contribution to the RGA, then chaired by Gov. Perry.32
About a month after Gov. Perry requested the waiver, Mr. Pilgrim donated $25,000 to the
governor’s political action committee.33 Mr. Pilgrim even footed the bill for Gov. Perry and

                                                        
19
Perry’s Misguided $555 Million Stand, Austin American-Statesman, March 14 2009.
20
Id.
21
Id.; Perry Should Admit His Stimulus Mistake, States News Service, March 25, 2009.
22
Randy Lee Loftis, State of Neglect: Revolving Door Lets Lawmakers Profit From Capitol Floor Time, The Dallas
Morning News, January 7, 2009.
23
Jason Embry, Perry Appoints Lobbyist Sullivan as Chief of Staff, Austin American-Statesman, June 20, 2009.
24
Id.
25
Texas Orders STD Vaccine For All Girls, The Associated Press, February 3, 2007.
26
Id.
27
Id.
28
Id.
29
The Associated Press, February 3, 2007.
30
R.G. Ratcliffe, Poultry King Paid for Perry’s Airfare, Gave to Campaign; the Governor Asked the EPA for
Ethanol Waiver Sought by Pilgrim, Houston Chronicle, July 16, 2008.
31
Id.
32
Id.
33
Id.

23
three aides to attend a June 24, 2008, news conference in Washington, D.C., to promote the
waiver request.34

CHARGE SIX: ETHICS INVESTIGATION

In spring 2004, the Texas Ethics Commission opened an investigation of Gov. Perry to determine
if he illegally spent political contributions on personal expenses.35 Judicial Watch, a government
watchdog group that filed the complaint, accused Gov. Perry of using campaign funds to take a
trip to the Bahamas with his wife and several staffers, a voyage unrelated to any campaign or
official event.36 The Ethics Commission found, however, that Gov. Perry’s conversations on the
trip--covering taxes, education and politics--were “clearly related” to his official duties and did
not constitute a violation.37

                                                        
34
Ratcliffe, Houston Chronicle, July 16, 2008.
35
Ken Herman, Ethics Agency Investigates Perry’s Trip to Bahamas, Austin American-Statesman, April 22, 2004.
36
Id.
37
W. Gardener Selby, Perry’s Trip is a Fond Memory – For His Foes, Austin American-Statesman, February 17,
2006.

24
 Bill Richardson

Bill Richardson (D-NM) was elected governor of New Mexico in 2002 and reelected in 2006.
Under the state’s term limits law, he cannot run for reelection in 2010.

Gov. Richardson:

• Allowed political allies to benefit from firms connected to state investments

• Allowed pay-to-play scandals to plague his administration
• Rewarded close associates with state positions or benefits, including providing a longtime
friend and political supporter with a costly state contract
• Fell short on efforts to make state government more transparent

CHARGE ONE: THIRD-PARTY INVESTMENTS

Political insiders and donors to Gov. Richardson have collected third-party fees from firms
chosen by the state to manage alternative assets, such as real estate and hedge funds.1 The son of
an administrative insider to Gov. Richardson, Marc Correra, shared in $22 million in fees from
firms doing business with two state bodies, the State Investment Council and the New Mexico
Educational Retirement Board (NMERB).2 Other insiders have benefited as well, including a
former appointee of the governor, renowned Democratic fundraisers and a New York political
operative.3 The State Investment Council, chaired and controlled by the governor, failed to
adopt the governor’s transparency policy, which called for the public disclosure of fees paid to
third-party marketers connected with government investment deals.4

CHARGE TWO: PAY-TO-PLAY

In a lawsuit, the former chief investment officer for the NMERB said the state lost $90 million in
bad investments stemming from a pay-to-play scandal.5 The lawsuit alleges that government
officials with close ties to Gov. Richardson, including Gov. Richardson’s former chief of staff,
pressured the NMERB and the State Investment Council to place millions of dollars into
unsound investments with Vanderbilt Capital of Chicago for political reasons.6 The lawsuit
contends that the investment decisions were driven by campaign contributions to Gov.
Richardson’s presidential campaign.7 Executives at Vanderbilt donated about $15,000 to Gov.
Richardson’s 2007 failed bid for the presidency.8 The investments – complex collateralized debt
obligations that were at the root of the current financial crisis – have since lost all of their value.9

1
Thomas J. Cole, Investment Sunshine Policy was Shelved, Albuquerque Journal, June 17, 2009.
2
Mike Gallagher, Correra Shared in $22M of Fees, Albuquerque Journal, July 1, 2009.
3
Cole, Albuquerque Journal, June 17, 2009.
4
Id.
5
Mike Gallagher, New ‘Pay-to-Play’ Claim, Albuquerque Journal, January 15, 2009.
6
Id.; Mike Gallagher, Objection! Lawyers Mix It Up, Albuquerque Journal, February 4, 2009.
7
Gallagher, Albuquerque Journal, January 15, 2009.
8
Id.
9
Mike Gallagher, Tab for Investing Poorly Goes Up, Albequerque Journal, January 13, 2010.

25
A federal grand jury launched an investigation into a California financial company’s
contributions to Gov. Richardson’s political committees in another possible pay-to-play
scandal.10 In 2004, CDR Financial Products secured a contract with the New Mexico Finance
Authority to become part of a financial team that provided bond management services for Gov.
Richardson’s Investment Program (GRIP).11 The team was responsible for creating a bond
financing deal for the governor’s highway and transportation construction program that won
legislative approval in 2003.12 CDR and its chief executive officer (CEO) David Rubin gave at
least $110,000 to Gov. Richardson’s campaign and associated political committees.13 The state
paid CDR $1.48 million in 2004 and 2005.14

CDR’s and Rubin’s contributions to two of Gov. Richardson’s political action committees
(PACs)—Moving America Forward, to increase voter registration among Latinos; and Si Se
Puede, to defray the costs of the governor’s and his staff’s trip to the 2004 Democratic
Convention15—were heavily scrutinized by a federal grand jury.16 In October 2003, the
president of CDR Financial Products gave $25,000 to Moving America Forward and, in June
2004, gave $75,000 to Si Se Puede. At the same time, the company won two state contracts.17
Mr. Rubin donated $10,000 to Gov. Richardson’s reelection committee in 2005.18 Gov.
Richardson’s top aide, David Contarino, traveled to Los Angeles with CDR executives, received
tickets to a Lakers’ game and dined at The Palm—all on CDR’s dime.19

In August 2009, federal investigators temporarily closed the pay-to-play investigation without
filing any criminal charges, eight months after Gov. Richardson relinquished a nomination to
become Secretary of the Department of Commerce in the Obama administration. 20 In a letter to
Gov. Richardson, U.S. Attorney Greg Fouratt wrote that even though the investigation was
dropped, that was not “an exoneration of any party’s conduct” and does “not preclude the United
States or the grand jury from reinstituting such an investigation without notification” if it is
warranted. 21

On March 15, 2010, the former vice president of CDR Financial Products, who was involved in
getting CDR hired by the state of New Mexico in 2004, admitted in federal court to bid-rigging
investment agreements and contracts involving municipal bonds from 1998 to 2006.22 CDR
CEO Rubin was indicted on bid-rigging and fraud charges in October 2009.23

10
Mark Evans, AP Source: Donor to Commerce Nominee Being Probed, The Associated Press, December 16, 2008.
11
Id.
12
Id.
13
Id.
14
Evans, The Associated Press, December 16, 2008.
15
Colleen Heild, Gov.’s ‘Charity’ Got $1.7M, Albuquerque Journal, January 18, 2009.
16
Evans, The Associated Press, December 16, 2008.
17
Heild, Albuquerque Journal, January 18, 2009.
18
Evans, The Associated Press, December 16, 2008.
19
Mike Gallagher, CDR Exec Admits to Bid Rigging; California Firm Was at Center of Pay-to-Play Investigation in
N.M., Albuquerque Journal, March 16, 2010.
20
No byline, Gov. Richardson Pay-to-Play Investigation Dropped, USA Today, August 27, 2009.
21
Gallagher, Albuquerque Journal, March 16, 2010.
22
Id.
23
Id. 

26
CHARGE THREE: PATRONAGE

A political patronage controversy tied to Gov. Richardson plagued the University of New
Mexico (UNM) and led faculty members to cast a vote of no confidence against three top
university officials, including the UNM President David Schmidly.24 In 2008, a whistleblower
alleged that several employees were hired, promoted, or given pay raises on the basis of ties to
the governor, but UNM attorneys did not find evidence to support the claims.25 Nevertheless,
Gov. Richardson’s administration was caught on tape approaching UNM about hiring Health
Secretary Michelle Lujan Grisham, right before she left the governor’s cabinet.26 At least one
company with ties to Gov. Richardson—Santa Fe Protective Services—profited handsomely in
connection with a UNM contract that has doubled in price since it was signed.27 The company’s
bid was the second highest among eight bidders.28 The owner, Butch Maki, served on then-
Congressman Richardson’s staff and on his New Hampshire presidential campaign team after
Mr. Maki’s company received the contract.29

Gov. Richardson’s practice of expanding the number of governor-appointed jobs on the state
payroll—the so-called “gov-ex” employees—drew fire, as did the removal of a commission
head, who said he was fired to make room for a political ally of Gov. Richardson.30

CHARGE FOUR: TRANSPARENCY

In the fall of 2003, the governor founded Moving America Forward PAC, mentioned above, and
set up a secretive non-profit, called Moving America Forward Foundation, with a largely
ceremonial board.31 The Albuquerque Journal reported that the foundation raised at least $1.7
million without disclosing its donors or much information about its activities.32

In a separate incident, Gov. Richardson refused to disclose the details of a trip aboard a law firm
executive’s private jet for a 2007 Mexican vacation.33 While the state attorney general found no
violation of state ethics laws, critics called on the governor to document that he paid fair market
value for the trip.34

24
Martin Salazar, Faculty Decisively Votes No Confidence, Albuquerque Journal, February 27, 2009.
25
Id.
26
Martin Salazar, Those Pesky Tapes, Albuquerque Journal, June 29, 2008.
27
Martin Salazar, UNM Security Fees Double, Albuquerque Journal, July 5, 2009.
28
Id.
29
Id.
30
No byline, All Aboard the Guv’s Gravy Train of Jobs, Albuquerque Journal, March 8, 2006; Debra Dominguez,
Lawsuit Accuses Gov. of Bias, Albuquerque Journal, February 27, 2004.
31
Heild, Albuquerque Journal, Jan. 18, 2009.
32
Id.
33
Jeff Jones, Richardson’s Flight Was Legal, AG Says, Albuquerque Journal, February 16, 2008. 
34
Id.

27
 Mike Rounds

Mike Rounds (R-SD) was elected governor of South Dakota in 2002 and was reelected in 2006.
Under the state’s term limits law, he cannot run for reelection in 2010.

Gov. Rounds:

• Resisted efforts to promote government transparency and frustrated public access to

information
• Used his office for personal benefit
• Abused state authority for the benefit of friends and family

CHARGE ONE: RESISTANCE TO TRANSPARENCY

Gov. Rounds has systematically impeded the public’s access to relevant information about the
activities of South Dakota’s government. For example, Gov. Rounds used private funds to
reimburse the state for his personal travel aboard state aircraft but has repeatedly refused to
reveal the names of his funders, prompting a state senator to introduce a bill to force disclosure. 1

Gov. Rounds has shielded political allies from public scrutiny as well.2 The governor declined,
for instance, to release information about his Republican predecessor’s unprosecuted traffic
infractions.3 Former Gov. Bill Janklow, a notorious violator of traffic laws, mysteriously
stopped receiving tickets after his third gubernatorial election in 1995.4 Mr. Janklow, who was
elected to the U.S. House of Representatives in 2002, resigned from congress in 2003 to serve
jail time for killing a motorcyclist by running a stop sign while speeding.5

The state’s annual, invitation-only pheasant hunt brings state leaders together with major
business interests to showcase South Dakota’s investment opportunities.6 Although the hunt is
state-organized, Gov. Rounds has refused to release the list of invitees and has even gone to
court to keep the information secret.7

Gov. Rounds vetoed a popular transparency bill during the 2008 legislative session.8 The
legislature failed to override his veto by two votes.9 In the next session, Gov. Rounds signed
South Dakota’s first disclosure measure into law.10 Open records advocates have noted that the
statute maintains exclusions and loopholes, including exemptions for official correspondence and
internal memoranda.11

1
Terry Woster, Lawmaker: Governor’s Club Donor List Should be Public, Argus Leader, January 1, 2006.
2
Randell Beck, South Dakota Keeps its Secrets, Argus Leader, January 11, 2004.
3
Id.
4
Id.
5
Monica Davey, Lawmaker Guilty of Manslaughter; Says He’ll Resign, The New York Times, December 9, 2003.
6
Terry Woster, In Court: Pleas for Public Access, Argus Leader, April 24, 2007.
7
Id.
8
Terry Woster, Lawmakers Save One Vetoed Bill, Argus Leader, March 18, 2008.
9
Id.
10
Josie Kerk, South Dakota Amends State Records Statute, The Volante, April 1, 2009.
11
Id.

28
CHARGE TWO: USING STATE RESOURCES FOR PERSONAL PURPOSES

In 2005, a review of the state’s air travel logs revealed that Gov. Rounds routinely used state
aircraft for non-official travel.12 During the 2004–2005 high school basketball season, Gov.
Rounds used state planes to ferry himself, family, and friends to five of seven of his son’s road
games.13 Gov. Rounds also acknowledged using state planes to attend Republican Party political
functions; a certified pilot, he has frequently flown the planes himself. 14 Under state law, the
governor is not barred from using state planes for personal use.15 He has, however, reimbursed
the state for his personal travel with political contributions from his Governor’s Club; this private
fund has raised serious legal questions, including possible breaches of federal policy pertaining
to third party financing.16 A Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) investigation, however,
found no violations of federal regulations.17 Following the revelation of Gov. Rounds’s personal
use of state aircraft, South Dakota residents voted by referendum to restrict state aircraft use to
official purposes.18

CHARGE THREE: USING A GOVERNMENT POSITION TO HELP FAMILY

In the spring of 2007, Gov. Rounds made the firing of a longtime federal game warden a priority,
going so far as to threaten terminating cooperation between state and federal wildlife officials
unless the warden was removed.19 Although the warden had been the subject of numerous
complaints, an internal investigation cleared him of wrongdoing.20 Only after the governor’s
calls reached a fever pitch did it become known that Gov. Rounds’s family members, including
his brother, were among those investigated by the warden for code violations.21

Additionally, Gov. Rounds rewarded a business partner when he appointed his partner’s
daughter, Kristen Conzet, to an open seat in the state legislature.22 In late 2009, state Rep. Brian
Dreyer of Rapid City, S.D., resigned his seat pending his deployment to Afghanistan; Gov.
Rounds then appointed Ms. Conzet to fill his seat. 23 Gov. Rounds and Ms. Conzet’s father, Karl
Fischer, run insurance and real estate agencies together.24

12
Stu Whitney and Terry Woster, Rounds’ Family, Friends, Fly Free on State Planes, Argus Leader, September 25,
2005.
13
Id.
14
Id.
15
Id.
16 Whitney and Woster, Argus Leader, September 25, 2005.
17
Id.; Terry Woster, Rounds’ Airplane Travel OK, Says FAA, Argus Leader, January 22, 2006.
18
Louis Jacobson, Watching, Waiting in the States, Roll Call, December 4, 2006.
19
Tony Dean, No Real Winners in S.D. Game Warden Flap, Argus Leader, May 30, 2007; Drop Dispute With
Warden, Argus Leader, June 7, 2007.
20
Argus Leader, June 7, 2007; Sporting and Conservation, Argus Leader, November 11, 2007.
21
Argus Leader, June 7, 2007.
22
Peter Harriman, Rounds’ Pick for Open State House Seat is Partner’s Daughter, Argus Leader, December 3, 2009.
23
Id.
24
Id. 

29
 Mark Sanford

Mark Sanford (R-SC) was elected governor of South Carolina in 2002 and was reelected in 2006.
Under the state’s term limits law, he cannot run for reelection in 2010.

Gov. Sanford:

• Abused his office for his personal benefit and the benefit of his friends
• Violated campaign finance laws by failing to report in-kind contributions and improperly
converting campaign funds for personal use
• Subordinated his responsibilities to his pursuit of an extramarital affair
• Endangered his state’s economy by threatening to refuse stimulus funds

CHARGE ONE: ABUSE OF OFFICE

Gov. Sanford has a pattern of abusing his office for his own personal benefit. An investigation
by the South Carolina State Ethics Commission established that Gov. Sanford used his position
to secure luxury travel for himself, his friends, and his family—all at taxpayer expense.1 South
Carolina law requires that all state employees fly economy class, “except where exigencies
require otherwise.”2 Nevertheless, since 2005, Gov. Sanford has flown business class no fewer
than 16 times and first class at least twice—often on costly international flights—without any
work-related justification.3 On a few occasions, such as when Gov. Sanford flew to Paris and
Brazil, there was no official business scheduled until the day after his arrival.4 Additionally,
luxury travel was not unusual; multiple state employees testified that flying business class or
better was the Sanford administration standard policy.5

Gov. Sanford’s abuse of flying privileges was not confined to commercial aircraft. He
inappropriately used South Carolina’s state airplane fleet for non-official purposes, in clear
violation of a state law explicitly forbidding this practice.6 On nine different occasions, Gov.
Sanford used South Carolina planes to fly himself and/or his family and friends to personal
functions, including a birthday dinner for a top supporter, a theme park opening and a haircut
appointment.7

When state ethics officials wanted to conduct a hearing to review these and other ethics
violations, Gov. Sanford signed a consent order with the South Carolina State Ethics

1
South Carolina State Ethics Commission, Investigative Report Re: Complaint C2010–020, November 18, 2009.
(Hereinafter referred to as the Sanford Ethics Investigation).
2
Id. p. 10.
3
South Carolina State Ethics Commission, Consent Order Re: Complaint C2010–020, March 18, 2010, pp. 2–9.
(Hereinafter referred to as the Sanford Ethics Consent Order).
4
Sanford Ethics Investigation, p. 17.
5
Sanford Ethics Investigation, pp. 12–13.
6
Sanford Ethics Consent Order, pp. 10–13.
7
Id.

30
Commission conceding that the “evidence presented [against him] is factual” and agreeing to pay
a fine of $74,000 as well as restitution and other reimbursements totaling more than $66,000.8

CHARGE TWO: CAMPAIGN FINANCE VIOLATIONS

The State Ethics Commission found that Gov. Sanford violated South Carolina’s campaign
finance disclosure laws.9 On 61 occasions, Gov. Sanford flew on privately owned aircraft
without recording the flights as in-kind gifts, as required by state law.10 Gov. Sanford’s
lawyers—even as they disputed the investigators’ findings—acknowledged that the governor
failed to report several flights, and requested that their correspondence about the issue be added
to his disclosure filings.11

Gov. Sanford also conceded as “factual” reports that he improperly converted nearly $3,000 in
campaign money for personal use.12 South Carolina state law prohibits using campaign funds for
purposes other than campaigning, with few exceptions.13 As a result, the State Ethics
Commission found that Gov. Sanford violated the law when he used his campaign funds to pay
for direct marketing services, a ticket to the presidential inauguration and a hunting trip to
Dublin, Ireland.14

CHARGE THREE: DERELICTION OF DUTY

On June 18, 2009, Gov. Sanford disappeared for five days without a security detail, lied to his
staff about where he was going and remained incommunicado for the duration of his trip.15 Gov.
Sanford later admitted that he had left South Carolina for nearly a week to pursue an extramarital
affair with a woman in Argentina.16

This was not the first time Gov. Sanford traveled to Argentina to pursue his extramarital affair
while neglecting his duties as governor.17 In June 2008, Gov. Sanford arranged to visit
Argentina as part of a trade trip to Latin America.18 Even though U.S. trade policy at the time
shunned contacts with the Argentine government in retaliation for reneged debt obligations, Gov.
Sanford traveled there to meet with Argentine officials and visit his mistress.19 Gov. Sanford

8
Sanford Ethics Consent Order, pp. 19–22.
9
Sanford Ethics Consent Order, p. 19.
10
Sanford Ethics Investigation, p. 28.
11
Sanford Ethics Investigation, p. 29; Mark Sanford’s Lawyer Says 4 Private Flights Unreported, The Associated
Press, November 27, 2009.
12
Sanford Consent Order, pp. 13–17, 19.
13
Sanford Consent Order, pp. 13–17.
14
Sanford Consent Order, pp. 15–17,19.
15
Versha Sharma, The Missing Governor: A Timeline, TPM Muckraker, June 24, 2009; Clif LeBlanc and John
O’Connor, Sanford Admits Affair: ‘I’ve Let Down a Lot of People’, The State, June 25, 2009.
16
Id.
17
Staff Report, Sanford Traveled to Argentina for Taxpayer-Funded Trip, The Post and Courier (Charleston, S.C.),
June 25, 2009.
18
Kevin Hall, Sanford’s Trade Mission to Argentina Contradicted U.S. Policy, The McClatchy Company, June 25,
2009.
19
Id.; Staff Report, The Post and Courier, June 25, 2009.

31
later admitted to meeting his mistress during the trip and agreed to refund taxpayers for the cost
of the trip.20

In response to the scandal, the Republican-dominated South Carolina legislature censured Gov.
Sanford for “dereliction of duty” and “official misconduct,” but did not vote to impeach him.21

CHARGE FOUR: REFUSING STIMULUS FUNDS

Gov. Sanford campaigned vigorously against President Barack Obama’s stimulus bill.22 As
governor, he endangered the state’s stimulus funds by refusing to file the preliminary paperwork
to accept the money, reversing himself only as the deadline approached.23 He became the last
governor to apply for the money.24 Additionally, despite the fact that South Carolina had the
nation’s second highest unemployment rate, Gov. Sanford sought to prevent the state legislature
from accessing $700 million in stimulus money.25 The matter ended up in litigation26 and the
South Carolina Supreme Court eventually forced Gov. Sanford to accept the contested $700
million.27

20
Id.
21
Roddie Burris, John O’Connor and Gina Smith, How Sanford Avoided Impeachment, The State, December 20,
2009.
22
Mark Sanford, Why South Carolina Doesn’t Want ‘Stimulus’, The Wall Street Journal, March 21, 2009.
23
James Rosen, Sanford Gives In on Stimulus, Will Seek Funds for S.C., The McClatchy Company, April 3, 2009.
24
Id.
25 Id.
26
Yvonne Wenger, Sanford Hands Off Decision, The Post and Courier (Charleston, S.C.), June 2, 2009.
27
Tom Cohen and Peter Hamby, South Carolina Governor Trumped, Must Take Stimulus Money, CNN Politics,
June 4, 2009.

32
 Arnold Schwarzenegger

Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA) was elected governor of California in 2003 and was reelected in
2006. Under the state’s term limits law, he cannot run for reelection in 2010.

Gov. Schwarzenegger:

• Used non-profit and campaign funds for personal benefit

• Built cozy relationships with special interests
• Created conflicts of interest by accepting a consulting position and doing state business
with a company staffed by his former campaign aides
• Provided state jobs to friends with dubious qualifications
• Allegedly pressured government employees to change outcomes
• Did not provide adequate leadership to the state
• Vetoed bills to improve transparency in hospitals at the behest of powerful special
interests

CHARGE ONE: SELF-ENRICHMENT

A network of tax-exempt groups pays for many of Gov. Schwarzenegger’s personal and staff
expenses, including a $6,000 per month Sacramento hotel suite he maintains, luxury
international travel and glitzy bill-signing stunts and photo opportunities.1 Non-profits are not
subject to the scrutiny that campaign finance committees receive, they are not required to
disclose their contributors and donations to the non-profit are not subject to contribution limits.2
One such non-profit, the California Commission on Jobs and Economic Growth, raised $1
million from corporate interests, some with business before the state, to promote the Governor in
public relations events.3 Two utility companies gave $200,000 to the non-profit after Gov.
Schwarzenegger announced he would not accept contributions from the utility industry as he
drafted a state energy policy.4 A hospital group, Catholic Healthcare West, donated $100,000 to
the non-profit; Gov. Schwarzenegger issued an executive order weakening the nurse-patient
ratios at hospitals, a stance the hospital supported.5 The nurses union sued over the order and the
court ruled the governor overstepped his authority.6

The California State Protocol Foundation—another corporate-backed non-profit with the explicit
mission of bankrolling the travel and personal expenses of lawmakers and their staffs—has spent
$1.7 million on Gov. Schwarzenegger’s posh lifestyle.7 The organization spent more than
$25,000 to send the governor’s staff to a four-day trip to China to attend the Special Olympics
and meet with a Chinese motor vehicle company.8 The Foundation is run out of the California
                                                        
1
Robert Salladay and Peter Nicholas, Nonprofits Cloak Donors to Governor, Los Angeles Times, August 24, 2005;
Peter Nicholas and Dan Morain, Gov. Funds Public Events Privately, Los Angeles Times, September 29, 2006.
2
Nicholas and Morain, Los Angeles Times, September 29, 2006.
3
Salladay and Nicholas, Los Angeles Times, August 24, 2005.
4
Id.
5
Id.
6
Id.
7
Michael Rothfeld, State Staffers’ Trip to China Draws Ire, Los Angeles Times, December 30, 2007.
8
Id.

33
Chamber of Commerce and foundation staff overlaps with the Chamber’s staff.9 In 2007, the
Chamber spent at least $2 million lobbying Gov. Schwarzenegger and state lawmakers.10

Gov. Schwarzenegger’s ballot-initiative fundraising—a practice not as tightly regulated as

candidate fundraising—has paid for a wide range of expenses, including executive jet travel and
pet causes.11 The governor’s committee, the California Dream Team, spent $2.4 million to
support a redistricting measure, $2 million on expenses that reportedly promoted the governor
and his causes and $523,000 on private jet service.12 New rules were developed last year in
response to complaints about the governor’s practices.13 The ballot-measure committees must
now disclose the politician who controls the committee, but the rules still do not appear to be
very stringent, for example, there are no contribution limits to the committees.14

Some corporations have also given gifts and payments to members of the governor’s
administration, including thousands of dollars in tickets to concerts, sporting events and theme
parks as well as meals and receptions.15 In October 2006, Gov. Schwarzenegger banned his
administration officials from receiving gifts from corporations with business pending before the
state, but major loopholes remain and compliance is spotty.16 In March 2009, Rosario Marin, a
member of Gov. Schwarzenegger’s cabinet, resigned after news sources revealed she violated a
state ban on accepting speaking fees, by accepting tens of thousands of dollars for speaking
engagements.17 Ms. Marin agreed to pay $5,400 in ethics fines.18

CHARGE TWO: COZYING UP TO SPECIAL INTERESTS

Gov. Schwarzenegger has not lived up to his campaign promises of purging “special interests”
by not accepting campaign contributions from groups that have business before the governor’s
office.19 He has instead benefitted from these corporate ties.20 For example, six months after
Gov. Schwarzenegger signed a law deregulating television service AT&T donated $500,000 to
Gov. Schwarzenegger’s charity, After-School All-Stars, a non-profit that serves low-income
children.21 Gov. Schwarzenegger flew to San Antonio, Texas to be present when AT&T
announced its contribution.22 AT&T only began donating to the charity after Gov.
Schwarzenegger took office.23

                                                        
9
Id.
10
Id.
11
Patrick McGreevy, Uses of Ballot-Item War Chests Curbed, Los Angeles Times, January 16, 2009.
12
Id.
13
Id.
14
Id.
15
Peter Nicholas, Governor’s Ban on Staff Perks Isn’t Perfect, Los Angeles Times, October 31, 2006.
16
Id.
17
Michael Rothfeld, Ex- Cabinet Member Pays $5,400 Ethics Fine, Los Angeles Times, June 9, 2009.
18
Id.
19
Peter Nicholas, Insurers Liking the Coverage of Schwarzenegger’s Policies, Los Angeles Times, September 24,
2006.
20
Peter Nicholas, Governor’s Cause Gets Gift After He Signed Law, Los Angeles Times, March 22, 2007.
21
Id.
22
Id.
23
Id.

34
Gov. Schwarzenegger’s administration also has had a close relationship with the insurance
industry.24 At least two high-level aides to the governor were former officials or lobbyists for
the insurance industry.25 Both appointees maintained relationships with the insurance industry
while serving the state, one even met with insurance lobbyists and officials 30 times over a six-
month period.26 By 2006, the governor sided with the industry nearly nine out of ten times on
insurance-related bills.27

Gov. Schwarzenegger has encouraged state lawmakers to take overseas trips paid for by special
interests. 28 At a forum on global economics he told lawmakers and reporters: “I am always
against [it] when the media beats up [on lawmakers] for traveling around because someone else
is paying for their trips,” adding, “I mean, so what[?]”29 The governor encouraged lawmakers to
take industry-paid trips in hopes they become more willing to implement his plans to privatize
roads, schools, rail and other public works.30

CHARGE THREE: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

Days before Gov. Schwarzenegger took office, he accepted an $8 million consulting job with
American Media Inc., publisher of the muscle magazines Flex and Muscle & Fitness as well as
the tabloid National Enquirer.31 Critics contended that the contract raised obvious ethical issues
because the muscle magazines’ ad revenue, to which Gov. Schwarzenegger’s salary was directly
tied, relied heavily on dietary supplement advertising.32 The year after Gov. Schwarzenegger
accepted the consulting job, he vetoed legislation that would have regulated supplements.33 In
September 2009, the Fair Political Practices Commission ruled that the contract did not run afoul
of the state’s conflict-of-interest laws.34 Nevertheless, Gov. Schwarzenegger ended the contract
after the terms were disclosed.35

The $8 million consulting arrangement was not Gov. Schwarzenegger’s only tie with American
Media, Inc.36 In 2003, following Gov. Schwarzenegger’s decision to enter the gubernatorial
contest, American Media tried to conceal a risqué 1983 Playboy video featuring Gov.
Schwarzenegger by purchasing the original copy.37 In another move to prevent the gubernatorial

                                                        
24
Nicholas, Los Angeles Times, Sept. 24, 2006.
25
Id.
26
Id.
27
Nicholas, Los Angeles Times, Sept. 24, 2006.
28
Evan Halper and Nancy Vogel, See the World, Let Special Interests Pay, Governor Urges, Los Angeles Times,
May 1, 2008.
29
Id.
30
Id.
31
Robert Salladay and Dan Morain, Before and After, Supplements in the Picture, Los Angeles Times, July 23,
2005; Michael Rothfeld, Ethics Complaint Against the Governor is Dismissed, Los Angeles Times, September 26,
2009; Peter Nicholas and Carla Hall, Tabloid’s Deal With Woman Shielded Schwarzenegger, Los Angeles Times,
August 12, 2005.
32
Salladay and Morain, Los Angeles Times, July 23, 2005.
33
Id.
34
Rothfeld, Los Angeles Times, September 26, 2009.
35
Id.
36
Nicholas and Hall, Los Angeles Times, August 12, 2005.
37
Peter Nicholas, Tabloid Tried to Suppress Videotape, Los Angeles Times, September 12, 2005.

35
candidate from embarrassment, America Media offered $20,000 to Gigi Goyette, a woman who
claimed to have had a seven-year affair with Schwarzenegger, and $1,000 to her friend Judy
Mora, to keep silent.38

Gov. Schwarzenegger was also criticized when a high-speed rail commission stacked with his
appointees awarded a $9 million public relations contract to Mercury Public Affairs, a firm with
ties to the governor.39 Two former top aides to Gov. Schwarzenegger were employed by
Mercury at the time the contract was awarded.40 The contract was rescinded after the Los
Angeles Times exposed the deal.41

CHARGE FOUR: CRONYISM

Gov. Schwarzenegger campaigned against patronage, but since taking office has appointed
friends and political allies to state boards.42 For example, Brent Wilkes, a former defense
contractor, was appointed by the governor to two state panels, the state Race Track Leasing
Commission and Del Mar Fairgrounds Board, after donating over $70,000 to Gov.
Schwarzenegger.43 Mr. Wilkes was later convicted for bribing disgraced former-congressman
Randy “Duke” Cunningham and sentenced to 12 years in prison.44

In addition, he placed two of his oldest friends on the Board of Chiropractic Examiners, neither
of whom had substantial experience in patient protection (although one was the governor’s
former chiropractor).45 After newspaper reports questioned the suitability of these appointees,
lawmakers ordered an audit of the chiropractic board and its activities.46 The investigation
uncovered serious violations of state law, including violations of the state’s open meetings law,
illegal delegation of authority and improper enforcement of conflict-of-interest provisions.47
Auditors noted that the board’s appointees did not fully understand their roles and
responsibilities.48 Gov. Schwarzenegger has also been criticized for appointing his dentist to the
state dental board and for naming his appointment secretary to the powerful California Public
Utilities Commission.49

CHARGE FIVE: PRESSURING STATE OFFICIALS

Gov. Schwarzenegger has tried to thwart existing public policies by pressuring state officials to
act in ways contrary to their duties. For example, he was accused of firing the head of
California’s Air Resources Board (ARB) as part of a campaign to weaken proposed greenhouse

                                                        
38
Nicholas and Hall, Los Angeles Times, August 12, 2005.
39
Shane Goldmacher, High-Speed Rail PR Deal Raising Ethical Question, Los Angeles Times, September 3, 2009.
40
Id.
41
Cathleen Decker, A State Fed Up With Its Government, Los Angeles Times, September 13, 2009.
42
Jordan Rau, Campaign Aides Cash in on State Jobs, Los Angeles Times, March 5, 2007.
43
Dan Morain, Cunningham Figure Gave to Gov, Los Angeles Times, December 8, 2005.
44
Greg Moran, Probation for Minor Figure in Bribe Case, The San Diego Union-Tribune, October 3, 2008.
45
Patrick McGreevy, Board Violated State Laws, Audit Says, Los Angeles Times, March 26, 2008.
46
Id.
47
Id.
48
Id.
49
Peter Nicholas, Gov.’s State Board Choices Raise Charges of Cronyism, Los Angeles Times, April 2, 2007.

36
gas regulations.50 The governor said he fired the ARB director because the official had been too
soft on air pollution in the San Joaquin Valley,51 but the director and ARB’s top executive had
claimed two of Gov. Schwarzenegger’s aides pressured them to weaken environmental pollution
rules.52 The supposed interference was serious enough to spark a legislative investigation and to
cause the board’s top executive to resign in protest.53 Gov. Schwarzenegger refused to allow his
aides to appear before the state assembly investigative panel.54

CHARGE SIX: MISMANAGEMENT

Gov. Schwarzenegger’s administration also has been accused of not providing adequate
leadership to the state’s Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board while California faces a
critically high unemployment rate.55 Critics accused the governor of not allowing the board to
meet its staffing needs, resulting in gross inefficiencies and a massive backlog of cases.56 After
board members fired the director for nepotism, a member of the Senate labor committee, who
monitors the committee, stated the governor did not provide any guidance on how to fix the
board.57 The need for a well functioning labor board is especially urgent given that the U.S.
Department of Labor ranks California second to last in hearing worker appeals.58 In July 2009,
facing a backlog of more than 82,500 cases, Gov. Schwarzenegger criticized administrative
judges for not taking more than the capped limit of 30 cases per month and for working on cases
at home; the governor asserted working from home limits the type of work they can perform. 59
In response to the rebuke, the union representing administrative judges reminded the governor
the judges are unable to take on a bigger case load and maintain a high quality of work while
being forced to take three furloughed days a month.60

In addition, Gov. Schwarzenegger appointed two political allies to spots on the board within days
of furloughing 238,000 state workers.61 The two appointees, recently retired GOP lawmakers,
receive salaries of $128,109 each for 12 meetings per year.62 In addition, it is not clear either of
them had relevant experience pertaining to unemployment issues.63

                                                        
50
Evan Halper, Governor Is Accused of Bullying Air Panel, Los Angeles Times, July 7, 2007.
51
Dan Walters, ARB Probe: Conflict or Kabuki, The Sacramento Bee, July 6, 2007.
52
Id.
53
Id.; Halper, Los Angeles Times, July 7, 2007.
54
Walters, The Sacramento Bee, July 6, 2007.
55
Patrick McGreevy, Turmoil Rocks Jobless Benefits Agency, Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2008; Marc Lifsher,
Jobless Benefit Appeals Pile Up, Los Angeles Times, February 2, 2009.
56
Id.
57
McGreevy, Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2008.
58
Lifsher, Los Angeles Times, February 2, 2009.
59
Richard Procter, Governor Tells Judges on Jobless Panel to Step it Up, San Francisco Chronicle, July 31, 2009.
60
Id.
61
Patrick McGreevy, Gov. Gives Insiders Lucrative Jobs While Workers Face Pay Cuts, Los Angeles Times,
January 18, 2009.
62
Id.
63
Id.

37
CHARGE SEVEN: VETOING HOSPITAL TRANSPARENCY BILLS

Gov. Schwarzenegger vetoed bills that would have improved transparency in California. For
example, the governor vetoed a measure that would have forced hospitals to disclose infection
and death rates.64 He vetoed the bill—deemed to be one of the most effective and least
expensive ways to improve patient care—despite having previously endorsed the bill’s
approach.65 The California hospital lobby, one of the most powerful interests in the state,
opposed these disclosures on the grounds that they might lead to “frivolous” lawsuits.66 The veto
of the disclosure bill was at least the second time Gov. Schwarzenegger bowed to the hospital
lobby, which wields political and financial clout in the state. 67 In 2004, he vetoed another
hospital disclosure measure and, in the following gubernatorial election, the governor received
the maximum yearly contribution of $44,600 from the hospital association.68

                                                        
64
Jordan Rau, Gov. Vetoes Hospital Disclosure, Los Angeles Times, October 14, 2007.
65
Id.
66
Id.
67
Id.
68
Rau, Los Angeles Times, October 14, 2007.

38