Carl DeMaio Apologizes for Lifted Pension Report

After plagiarizing a National Journal investigative project to make a case against his opponent, the California Republican says he’s “mortified.”

UNITED STATES - JULY 18: Candidate Carl DeMaio, R-Calif., is interviewed in CQ Roll Call offices. (Photo By Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call)
National Journal
Shane Goldmacher
Add to Briefcase
Shane Goldmacher
May 12, 2014, 8:24 a.m.

[UP­DATE: Carl De­Maio called late Monday to say he was “mor­ti­fied” by the situ­ation and that Na­tion­al Journ­al should have been cred­ited as the ori­gin­al source of his re­port on con­gres­sion­al pen­sions. “I’m ter­ribly sorry,” he said.

De­Maio said his staff had pro­duced the pen­sions re­port at his dir­ec­tion but he did not know the full ex­tent to which its con­tents had been lif­ted from Na­tion­al Journ­al un­til Monday morn­ing. Still, he took full re­spons­ib­il­ity. “I don’t throw my staff un­der the bus,” he said.

He said he still hoped to change the sys­tem of mem­bers of Con­gress re­ceiv­ing pub­lic pen­sions, cit­ing past suc­cess at the loc­al level when “we’ve been able to shame” un­will­ing politi­cians in­to such re­forms.

The ori­gin­al story ap­pears be­low.]

Re­pub­lic­an con­gres­sion­al can­did­ate Carl De­Maio is at­tack­ing his op­pon­ent for pen­sion double-dip­ping but he ap­pears to be pla­gi­ar­iz­ing Na­tion­al Journ­al to do it.

De­Maio has claimed to have au­thored a “re­port” find­ing that 102 mem­bers of Con­gress are draw­ing a gov­ern­ment pen­sion atop their con­gres­sion­al salar­ies. He leaked an ad­vanced copy to The Wall Street Journ­al on Monday and is fol­low­ing up with an event in San Diego this morn­ing to in­duct some law­makers, most not­ably his op­pon­ent, Rep. Scott Peters, D-Cal­if., in­to a “Hall of Shame.”

But his “re­port” looks like little more than a copied-and-pas­ted ver­sion of a Na­tion­al Journ­al data­base that ac­com­pan­ied a cov­er story last June on con­gres­sion­al double-dip­ping. Na­tion­al Journ­al re­viewed the fin­an­cial dis­clos­ure forms of every mem­ber of the House and Sen­ate to cre­ate the data­base and re­veal that nearly one in five mem­bers of Con­gress are col­lect­ing tax­pay­er-fun­ded re­tire­ments atop their $174,000 salar­ies.

The data in De­Maio’s ver­sion, which is touted as a “Re­port by Carl De­Maio” on its first page, matches the Na­tion­al Journ­al data­base, down to the text, col­ors, and ab­bre­vi­ations.

Among the few dif­fer­ences, De­Maio put a “$” and com­mas in the field de­tail­ing the amount of law­makers’ pub­lic pen­sions.

Also, Peters did not ap­pear in the ori­gin­al Na­tion­al Journ­al data­base be­cause he filed an ex­ten­sion on his fin­an­cial dis­clos­ure form in 2013. He ap­pears to have been in­ser­ted in­to De­Maio’s copied list, which can be seen be­cause the col­ors of law­makers’ entries vary with each per­son, with the ex­cep­tion of Peters.

“De­Maio Re­veal­ing 102 Mem­bers of Con­gress Get Paid Twice,” his cam­paign ad­vert­ised in a press re­lease on Monday, pre­view­ing the event at his cam­paign of­fice and link­ing to The Wall Street Journ­al piece.

De­Maio spokes­man Dave Mc­Cul­loch de­fen­ded the re­port, ar­guing that De­Maio had been “tar­get­ing state and loc­al politi­cians” for pen­sions since 2004.

“As Carl takes his pen­sion-re­form ef­forts na­tion­al, the cam­paign ex­pan­ded his list to in­clude mem­bers of Con­gress, us­ing pub­licly avail­able data in­clud­ing Mem­ber Fin­an­cial In­terest Dis­clos­ures and the pre­vi­ous re­port­ing done by Na­tion­al Journ­al,” Mc­Cul­loch said.

He claimed the cam­paign doc­u­ment is “the first re­port on Double Dip­ping cov­er­ing the cur­rent Con­gress,” though no new fin­an­cial dis­clos­ures have been re­leased since the Na­tion­al Journ­al data­base was pub­lished last June, ex­cept for law­makers who filed ex­ten­sions.

Mean­while, Peters’ of­fice told The Wall Street Journ­al that the con­gress­man donates his pen­sion to loc­al lib­rar­ies.

What We're Following See More »
NEVER TRUMP
USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
5 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."

Source:
COMMISSIONERS NEED TO DELIBERATE MORE
FCC Pushes Vote on Set-Top Boxes
6 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Federal regulators on Thursday delayed a vote on a proposal to reshape the television market by freeing consumers from cable box rentals, putting into doubt a plan that has pitted technology companies against cable television providers. ... The proposal will still be considered for a future vote. But Tom Wheeler, chairman of the F.C.C., said commissioners needed more discussions."

Source:
UNTIL DEC. 9, ANYWAY
Obama Signs Bill to Fund Government
11 hours ago
THE LATEST
REDSKINS IMPLICATIONS
SCOTUS to Hear Case on Offensive Trademarks
11 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

"The Supreme Court is taking up a First Amendment clash over the government’s refusal to register offensive trademarks, a case that could affect the Washington Redskins in their legal fight over the team name. The justices agreed Thursday to hear a dispute involving an Asian-American rock band called the Slants, but they did not act on a separate request to hear the higher-profile Redskins case at the same time." Still, any precedent set by the case could have ramifications for the Washington football team.

Source:
IT’S ALL CLINTON
Reliable Poll Data Coming in RE: Debate #1
13 hours ago
WHY WE CARE
×