Ensign ethics

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, an ethics watchdog group, filed complaints Wednesday urging Senate and federal election officials to investigate unanswered questions about Nevada Sen. John Ensign's extramarital affair.

The group alleged the Republican senator may have violated federal law and Senate rules against sexual harassment.

The group also asked the Federal Elections Commission to investigate whether Sen. Ensign made unreported payments to his mistress, who had worked for his political organizations.

Sen. Ensign last week acknowledged having an affair from December 2007 to August 2008 with a close family friend from Las Vegas who worked for his two political organizations. A social conservative who preaches family values, the senator has drawn criticism for moral hypocrisy.

At the same time Sen. Ensign was conducting a relationship with Cindy Hampton, 46, her husband, Doug, was a senior administrative aide on the senator's personal staff. Both left Sen. Ensign's employ at the end of April 2008.

In a recent letter to the Fox News Channel, Doug Hampton, 47, said the pair were dismissed as an outcome of Sen. Ensign's "conduct and relentless pursuit of my wife."

George R. Clark, an ethics attorney in Washington who has had clients before the Senate panel, said the complaints raise issues that should draw the Senate's attention.

"The sex harassment angle is an interesting one and should give the committee some pause rather than dismissing it out of hand. I regard these as two serious complaints," Mr. Clark said.

If the discharge of the Hamptons was related to the affair, Ensign may have engaged in sex harassment in violation of the Title VII federal law, and Senate Rule 42, according to the ethics complaint. Both prohibit sex discrimination in the workplace.

CREW also urged the Senate and the FEC to investigate media reports that Sen. Ensign paid Cindy Hampton a severance when she stopped work as treasurer of his Ensign for Senate re-election committee, and his personal political action committee, Battle Born PAC.

Such payments are required by federal law to be reported, even if paid out of personal funds. Neither of Sen. Ensign's committees reported such a payment to Cindy Hampton.

At first glance, these new demands might appear to be mere "piling on." But given that the object of the senator's affections was on his payroll -- even if no tax dollars were involved -- and that her compensation may have substantially increased during the time in question, the assertions are serious enough to deserve review.