(CA-48): Swamp Creature

Significant Findings

 Rohrabacher has received $4,359,100 in taxpayer funded salary, voted to raise his own pay at least six times; Despite being in office for nearly 30 years, Rohrabacher has only passed 3 bills into law

 Rohrabacher has spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on car lease, foreign trips, and reimbursements to himself

 2008 – 2012: Watchdog said Rohrabacher “abused his position to benefit” himself; he received $60,000 in disbursements that included furniture and telephone charges

 Rohrabacher voted against establishing the Office Of Congressional Ethics

 Rohrabacher voted for FY18 Senate Republican budget that set the stage for tax reform

 Rohrabacher voted for the American Health Care Act

Biography

Dana Rohrabacher is a Member of Congress representing ’s 48th Congressional District and has served in that position since 2013, although he has been a member of Congress since 1989.

 Born June 1947 in Costa Mesa, California  Education: Harbor College, attended from 1965 to 1967; California State University, B.A. (1969); University of California, M.A. (1971)  Worked as a journalist for the City News Service, Radio News West, and the  Served as senior speechwriter to President after working on his presidential campaign

Rohrabacher Benefitted From The Perks Of Congress

Rohrabacher Has Received $4,359,100 In Taxpayer Funded Salary

When Rohrabacher first took office in Congress, he made $89,500 as a congressional salary. Today, Rohrabacher receives a Congressional salary of $174,000, an increase of $84,500. Over his 29 years served in Congress, Rohrabacher has received a total of $4,359,100 in taxpayer-funded salary.

Year Congressional Salary 1989 $89,500 1990 $96,600 1991 $125,100 1992 $129,500 1993 $133,600 1994 $133,600 1995 $133,600 1996 $133,600 1997 $133,600 1998 $136,700 1999 $136,700 2000 $141,300 2001 $145,100 2002 $150,000 2003 $154,700 2004 $158,100 2005 $162,100 2006 $165,200 2007 $165,200 2008 $169,300 2009 $174,000 2010 $174,000 2011 $174,000 2012 $174,000 2013 $174,000 2014 $174,000 2015 $174,000 2016 $174,000 2017 $174,000 TOTAL $4,359,100 [Congressional Research Service, 6/21/16]

Rohrabacher Voted To Raise His Own Pay At Least Six Times

2013: Rohrabacher Voted Against Continuing Appropriations That Blocked COLA For Members. In May 2014, Rohrabacher voted against: “Passage of the bill that would provide $3.3 billion for legislative branch operations, excluding Senate operations, in fiscal 2015. The total would include $1.2 billion for House operations, $595 million for the , $519.6 million for the Government Accountability Office, $488.6 million for the Architect of the Capitol and $348 million for the Capitol Police.” According to the Congressional Research Service, “The Continuing Appropriations Act, 2014 (P.L. 113-46, Section 146, enacted October 17, 2013), prohibited the scheduled 2014 pay adjustment for Members of Congress.” A vote yes was a vote to block pay increases. The bill passed 285-144. [CRS, 6/21/16; CQ, 10/16/13; HR2775, Vote #550, 10/16/13]

2011: Rohrabacher Voted Against A Motion That Included Language To Block COLA For Members. In 2011, Rohrabacher voted against a motion to recommit that included language blocking member pay increases. According to the CRS, “Section 5421(b)(1) of H.R. 3630, as introduced in the House, would have prohibited any adjustment for Members of Congress prior to December 31, 2013. Section 706 of the motion to recommit also contained language freezing Member pay.” A vote yes was a vote to block pay increases. The motion was rejected 183-244. [Congressional Research Service, 6/20/13; HR 3630, Vote #922, 12/13/11]

2010: Rohrabacher Voted Against Freezing GS Base Pay, Effectively Freezing Congressional Pay. In December 2010, Rohrabacher Voted Against: “Obey, D-Wis., motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to the Senate amendment to the bill. The Senate amendment would continue most appropriations at fiscal 2010-enacted levels through March 4, 2011. The measure would provide an overall annualized spending rate that is $1.16 billion more than fiscal 2010 levels. It would provide additional funding for the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) and Pell grants. It also would allow the awarding of a Navy contract for shipbuilding of Littoral Combat Ships to multiple suppliers.” According to the Congressional Research Service, “P.L. 111-322, which was enacted on December 22, 2010, prohibited any adjustment in GS base pay before December 31, 2012. Since the percent adjustment in Member pay may not exceed the percent adjustment in the base pay of GS employees, Member pay also was frozen during this period.” A vote yes was a vote to block pay increases. The bill passed 193-165 and became Public Law No: 111-322 on December 22, 2010. [CRS, 6/21/16; CQ, 12/21/10; HR 3082, Vote #662, 12/21/10]

2009: Rohrabacher Voted Against A Bill Including A Provision To Block Automatic Pay Increases For Members Of Congress. In February 2009, Rohrabacher Voted Against: “Passage of the bill that would provide $410 billion in discretionary spending in fiscal 2009 for federal departments and agencies covered by nine unfinished fiscal 2009 spending bills. The measure incorporates the following previously separate appropriations bills from the 110th Congress: Agriculture; Commerce-Justice-Science; Energy-Water; Financial Services; Interior- Environment; Labor-HHS-Education; Legislative Branch; State-Foreign Operations; and Transportation-HUD. It would also provide $100 million for the U.S. Secret Service and block the automatic cost-of-living adjustment for members of Congress in 2010.” According to the Congressional Research Service, “The provision prohibiting the 2010 Member pay adjustment was added to H.R. 1105 through the adoption of the rule providing for consideration of the bill (H.Res. 184). The rule provided that the provision, which was printed in the report accompanying the resolution,34 would be considered as adopted.” A vote yes was a vote to block pay increases. The bill passed 245- 178. [CRS, 6/21/16; CQ, 2/25/09; HR 1105, Vote #86, 2/25/09]

2009: Rohrabacher Voted Against A Bill That Included A Provision To Block Automatic Pay Increases For Members Of Congress. In February 2009, Rohrabacher Voted Against: “Adoption of the rule (H Res 184) that would provide for House floor consideration of the bill that would provide fiscal 2009 appropriations for federal departments and agencies covered by nine unfinished fiscal 2009 spending bills. The rule contains self-executing language, that upon adoption, would incorporate a provision to block the automatic cost-of-living adjustment for members of Congress in 2010.” A vote yes was a vote to block pay increases. The rule passed 398-24. [CRS, 6/21/16; CQ, 2/25/09; H Res 184, Vote #85, 2/25/09]

2007: Rohrabacher Voted For Blocking An Amendment To Stop A Member Pay Increase. In June 2007, Rohrabacher voted for a motion “to order the previous question on the rule (H.Res. 517) for consideration of H.R. 2829, the FY2008 Financial Services and General Government Appropriations bill. By ordering the previous question, the House voted to prevent an amendment to the rule from being offered and brought the rule to an immediate vote. The House bill did not contain Member pay language, and the House did not vote on an amendment to accept or reject a Member pay increase.” A no vote was a vote to consider an amendment to stop pay increases. The motion to kill the amendment passed 244-181. [CRS, 6/21/16; CQ, 6/27/07; HRes 517, Vote #580, 6/27/07]

2007: Rohrabacher Voted Against An Appropriations Bill That Included Language To Block COLA For Members. In January 2007, Rohrabacher voted for a motion that would prohibit a scheduled Congressional pay raise from going into effect as part of further Fiscal Year 2007 appropriations. A yes vote was a vote to block pay increasesThe motion passed 286-140. [CQ Bill Analysis, 2/23/07; H J Res 20, Vote #72, 1/31/07]

NOTE: When using this research, keep in mind that Rohrabacher has also voted on various occasions against raising his own pay.

Rohrabacher Would Receive $74,820 Per Year In Taxpayer Funded Pension

According to the Office of Personnel Management, a “Member of Congress or Congressional Employee (or any combination of the two) must have at least 5 years of service as a Member of Congress and/or Congressional Employee” to qualify for their retirement annuity.

The annual pension is calculated as “1.7% of your high-3 average salary multiplied by your years of service as a Member of Congress or Congressional Employee which do not exceed 20, PLUS 1% of your high-3 average salary multiplied by your years of other service.” [Office of Personnel Management, accessed 7/18/17]

For Members who joined after 1991, the annual pension is calculated as:

[, 10/2/15; Congressional Research Service, 11/10/16]

For any current Member eligible for their pension, their High-3 would be $174,000, making the formula:

[$174,000 x .017 x Years of Service (Max 20)] + [$174,0000 x .01 x (Years of Service Over 20)] = Annual Pension [$174,000 x .017 x Years of Service (20)] + [$174,0000 x .01 x (9)] = Annual Pension = $74,820

Given Rohrabacher’s 29 years served, he would receive $74,820 in annual taxpayer-funded pension.

1989-2017: Only Three Of Rohrabacher’s Bills Have Been Signed Into Law

1989-2017: Only Three Of Rohrabacher’s Bills Have Been Signed Into Law, Amounting To A 0.01% Effectiveness Rate. Throughout Rohrabacher’s 28-year congressional career, only three of his sponsored bills have been signed into law. He has sponsored a total of 260 bills during this time, amounting to a 0.01% effectiveness rate. [Congress.gov, accessed 6/07/17]

1989-2017: Only 0.07% Of Bills Rohrabacher’s Cosponsored Have Become Law. Throughout Rohrabacher’s 28-year congressional career, only 272 out of 3,696 of the bills he has cosponsored have become law, amounting to a 0.07% effectiveness rate. [Congress.gov, accessed 6/07/17]

Rohrabacher Has Spent Hundreds Of Thousands Of Taxpayer Dollars On Car Lease, Foreign Trips, And Reimbursements To Himself

Rohrabacher Has Charged Taxpayers $70,754 For Car Lease

2017: Rohrabacher Has Spent $9,000 ($1,000/Month) On Taxpayer-Funded Car Lease

Office Description Payee Service Dates Description Amount 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 7/1/17 7/31/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 8/1/17 8/31/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 9/1/17 9/30/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 4/1/17 4/30/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 5/1/17 5/31/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 6/1/17 6/30/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 3/1/17 3/31/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 2/1/17 2/28/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 2017 Hon. Dana Toyota Financial Rohrabacher Travel Services 1/1/17 1/31/17 Automobile Lease $1,000 Total: $9,000

2011-16: Rohrabacher Spent More Than $65,000 Of Taxpayer Funds On A Car

Rohrabacher Spent More Than $65,000 Of Taxpayer Funds On A Car. According to member disbursements, between 2011 and 2016 Rohrabacher spent $65,873.69 of taxpayer funds on a Toyota lease. [U.S. House of Representatives, Statement of Disbursements, 2011 – September 2016]

Toyota Car Charges by Year Year Amount 2016 $9,798.68 2015 $13,468.40 2014 $11,844.44 2013 $10,982.57 2012 $12,015.56 2011 $7,764.04 Total $65,873.69 [U.S. House of Representatives, Statement of Disbursements, 2011 – September 2016]

Toyota Car Charges by Type Type Amount Lease $61,754.69 Parking $2,935.00 Other $1,184.00 Total $65,873.69 [U.S. House of Representatives, Statement of Disbursements, 2011 – September 2016]

2014: Rohrabacher Voted To Allow Taxpayer-Funded Car Leases For Members Of Congress

Rohrabacher Voted To Allow Taxpayer-Funded Car Leases For Members Of Congress. In May 2014, Rohrabacher voted against a: “Nugent, R-Fla., amendment that would prohibit the chief administrative officer of the House of Representatives from making any payments from any members’ representational allowance for the leasing of a vehicle, excluding mobile district offices.” The amendment was rejected in Committee of the Whole by a vote of 196-221. [CQ Floor Votes, 5/1/14; HR 4887, Vote #188, 5/01/14]

2017: Rohrabacher Had Most Expensive Car Lease In California Delegation

2017: Rohrabacher Had Most Expensive Car Lease In California Delegation. In 2017, Rorhabacher had the most expensive monthly taxpayer-funded car lease in California. [Statement of Disbursements of the House, accessed 1/11/18]

ORGANIZATION PROGRAM VENDOR NAME DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2017 HON. DANA OFFICIAL EXPENSES TOYOTA FINANCIAL AUTOMOBILE ROHRABACHER OF MEMBERS SERVICES LEASE $1,000.00 2017 HON. DUNCAN OFFICIAL EXPENSES ALLY FINANCIAL AUTOMOBILE HUNTER OF MEMBERS INC LEASE $699.99 2016 HON. TONY OFFICIAL EXPENSES AUTOMOBILE CARDENAS OF MEMBERS GALPIN FORD LEASE $631.44 2017 HON. OFFICIAL EXPENSES CHASE MANHATTAN AUTOMOBILE OF MEMBERS BANK (FORD CR) LEASE $592.81 2017 HON. JUAN OFFICIAL EXPENSES FORD MOTOR AUTOMOBILE VARGAS OF MEMBERS CREDIT LEASE $509.77 2017 HON. ADAM B. OFFICIAL EXPENSES CAMINO REAL AUTOMOBILE SCHIFF OF MEMBERS LEASING LEASE $500.00 2017 HON. KAREN OFFICIAL EXPENSES FORD MOTOR AUTOMOBILE BASS OF MEMBERS CREDIT LEASE $478.86 2017 HON. OFFICIAL EXPENSES ALLY FINANCIAL AUTOMOBILE EDWARD R. ROYCE OF MEMBERS INC LEASE $476.94 2017 HON. KEVIN OFFICIAL EXPENSES FORD MOTOR AUTOMOBILE MCCARTHY OF MEMBERS CREDIT LEASE $386.75 2017 HON. MARK OFFICIAL EXPENSES GM FINANCIAL AUTOMOBILE DESAULNIER OF MEMBERS LEASING LEASE $328.32 2017 HON. ANNA G. OFFICIAL EXPENSES FORD MOTOR AUTOMOBILE ESHOO OF MEMBERS CREDIT LEASE $299.00

Rohrabacher Spent More Than $233,000 Of Taxpayer Money On Reimbursements To Himself

Rohrabacher Spent More Than $233k Of Taxpayer Money On Reimbursements To Himself. Between 1996 and 2016, Rohrabacher spent $233,032.48 of taxpayer money on reimbursements to himself. [U.S. House of Representatives, Statement of Disbursements, 1996 – September 2016]

Rohrabacher Spent More Than $667,000 Travelling To 66 Different Countries On 172 Taxpayer- Sponsored Trips

Rohrabacher Spent More Than $667,000 Travelling To 66 Different Countries On 172 Taxpayer-Sponsored Trips. Since 1989, Rohrabacher spent $667,842.17 on 172 taxpayer-sponsored trips to 66 different countries. [U.S. House of Representatives, House Clerk, Filings for 1989 – 2016]

Rohrabacher Trips By Country Country # Trips 2 Australia 1 Austria 16 Azerbaijan 2 Bahrain 1 Belarus 1 Belgium 1 Bosnia 2 1 Burma 1 1 Congo 1 Croatia 1 Czech Republic 2 Denmark 1 Egypt 6 England 1 Estonia 1 Finland 1 France 6 Georgia 1 Germany 8 Honduras 1 Hong Kong SAR 1 Hungary 5 India 2 Iraq 4 Ireland 2 Israel 4 Italy 1 Japan 5 Jordan 2 Kazakhstan 2 5 Kuwait 7 Latvia 1 Lithuania 1 Macedonia 1 Malaysia 2 Marshall Islands 1 Montenegro 1 Netherlands 3 Norway 1 Pakistan 2 Philippines 6 Poland 1 Portugal 1 Qatar 4 Romania 1 Russia 11 Saudi Arabia 1 Scotland 1 Serbia 3 Slovak Republic 1 Slovenia 1 South Korea 1 Spain 1 Switzerland 1 3 8 Turkey 4 Turkmenistan 1 UAE 4 Ukraine 2 United Kingdom 2 Uzbekistan 2 Total 172 [U.S. House of Representatives, House Clerk, Filings for 1989 – 2016]

Rohrabacher CODEL Travel Date Country Total Source 4/8/1995 4/9/1995 Italy 4/10/1995 4/11/1995 Pakistan $1,295.99 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1995q3aug04.txt 4/12/1995 4/15/1995 Thailand/Vietnam 4/15/1995 4/18/1995 Singapore/Malaysia $422.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1995q3aug04.txt 4/18/1995 4/21/1995 Cambodia/Thailand 4/22/1995 4/25/1995 Philippines $6,358.43 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1995q3aug04.txt Airfare 5/27/1995 6/2/1995 Thailand/Laos $1,583.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1995q3aug04.txt Airfare $4,291.08 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1995q3aug04.txt 8/21/1996 8/23/1996 Saudi Arabia $618.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1997q2apr23.txt 8/25/1996 8/27/1996 Pakistan $651.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1997q2apr23.txt Airfare $8,744.85 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1997q2apr23.txt 11/15/1997 11/17/1997 Turkey $516.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1998q1mar11.txt 11/17/1997 11/19/1997 Azerbaijan $645.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1998q1mar11.txt 11/19/1997 11/21/1997 Kazakhstan $606.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1998q1mar11.txt 11/21/1997 11/23/1997 Uzbekistan $688.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1998q1mar11.txt 11/23/1997 11/24/1997 Turkmenistan $241.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1998q1mar11.txt 11/24/1997 11/25/1997 Norway $304.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/1998q1mar11.txt 11/18/1999 11/22/1999 Kuwait $6,473.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb02.txt 4/5/1998 4/8/1998 Taiwan $3,773.02 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 4/8/1998 4/14/1998 Thailand $1,140.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 4/14/1998 4/15/1998 Malaysia $102.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 4/15/1998 4/17/1998 Philippines $198.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 11/30/1998 12/2/1998 Kuwait $676.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 12/2/1998 12/5/1998 Taiwan $1,180.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 12/5/1998 12/11/1998 Philippines $804.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt Airfare $6,378.89 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 2/20/1999 2/21/1999 Marshall Island $185.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 8/28/1999 8/31/1999 Slovak Republic $589.50 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 8/31/1999 9/2/1999 Romania $522.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 9/2/1999 9/4/1999 Bulgaria $250.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 9/4/1999 9/6/1999 Hungary $502.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 9/6/1999 9/7/1999 Netherlands $207.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1feb29.txt 11/18/1999 11/22/1999 Kuwait $7,280.17 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1mar14.txt 10/8/1999 10/11/1999 Hungary $3,644.24 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q1mar14.txt 1/7/2000 1/11/2000 Philippines $1,132.37 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q2may08.txt 1/11/2000 1/18/2000 Thailand $3,157.86 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q2jun20.txt 1/14/2000 1/14/2000 Cambodia Airfare $1,871.11 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q2may08.txt 4/25/2000 4/26/2000 Macedonia $172.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q4nov14.txt 4/26/2000 4/27/2000 Kosovo $217.69 4/27/2000 4/28/2000 Austria http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q4nov14.txt Airfare $1,784.34 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q3sep28.txt 8/25/2000 8/27/2000 France $594.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q4nov02.txt 8/27/2000 8/29/2000 Russia $712.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q4nov02.txt 8/29/2000 8/31/2000 Russia $686.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q4nov02.txt 8/31/2000 9/1/2000 Ireland $281.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2000q4nov02.txt 6/15/2001 6/19/2001 France $320.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2001q3sep17.txt 5/30/2002 6/13/2002 Philippines $320.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2002q3sep10.txt Airfare $3,553.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2002q3sep10.txt 8/13/2002 8/15/2002 Portugal $404.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q1jan31.txt 8/15/2002 8/16/2002 France $236.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q1jan31.txt 8/16/2002 8/18/2002 Austria $494.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q1jan31.txt 8/18/2002 8/20/2002 Slovenia $496.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q1jan31.txt 8/20/2002 8/22/2002 Russia $688.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q1jan31.txt 8/22/2002 8/23/2002 Scotland $356.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q1jan31.txt 12/5/2002 12/8/2002 Japan $1,017.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q1feb27.txt 12/8/2002 12/12/2002 China $1,180.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q1feb27.txt 7/26/2003 7/28/2003 United Kingdom $861.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q4oct01.txt 7/28/2003 7/30/2003 Denmark $582.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q4oct01.txt 7/30/2003 7/31/2003 Netherlands $165.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q4oct01.txt 7/31/2003 8/4/2003 Spain $1,148.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q4oct01.txt 5/24/2003 5/25/2003 Netherlands $339.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q4oct01.txt 5/26/2003 5/30/2003 Israel $1,660.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q4oct01.txt 5/30/2003 6/2/2003 Austria $267.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q4oct01.txt Airfare $9,290.76 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2003q4oct01.txt 12/1/2004 12/4/2004 Hong Kong SAR $1,137.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2005q1mar10.txt 12/16/2004 12/18/2004 Austria $642.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2005q1mar10.txt 12/18/2004 12/20/2004 Ukraine $599.50 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2005q1mar10.txt 12/20/2004 12/21/2004 Ireland $486.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2005q1mar10.txt 4/7/2006 4/10/2006 Austria $1,663.45 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2006q4dec05.txt 4/10/2006 4/13/2006 Qatar 4/13/2006 4/16/2006 Germany $454.52 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2006q4dec05.txt Airfare $12,451.67 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2006q4dec05.txt 4/10/2007 4/12/2007 Austria $1,292.28 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2007q3sep06.txt 4/12/2007 4/12/2007 Hungary $579.07 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2007q3sep06.txt 4/13/2007 4/14/2007 Serbia $996.37 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2007q3sep06.txt 4/14/2007 4/15/2007 Kosovo $103.12 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2007q3sep06.txt 4/15/2007 4/16/2007 Austria $349.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2007q3sep06.txt Airfare $10,408.64 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2007q3sep06.txt 3/21/2008 3/22/2008 Taiwan $173.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q2may19.txt 3/22/2008 3/25/2008 South Korea $1,200.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q2may19.txt 3/25/2008 3/28/2008 Japan $1,248.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q2may19.txt Airfare $5,813.12 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q2may19.txt 5/27/2008 5/30/2008 Germany $10,614.99 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q3sep22.txt 6/2/2008 6/3/2008 Germany $4,757.41 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q3sep22.txt 5/30/2008 6/2/2008 Russia $3,295.01 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q3sep22.txt 8/17/2008 8/20/2008 Finland $1,365.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q4dec10.txt 8/20/2008 8/22/2008 Kosovo $474.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q4dec10.txt 8/22/2008 8/26/2008 Germany $2,164.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q4dec10.txt Airfare $12,491.06 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2008q4dec10.txt 12/2/2008 12/5/2008 Germany $1,320.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q1feb11.txt 12/5/2008 12/11/2008 Russia $2,867.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q1feb11.txt Airfare $9,283.78 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q1feb11.txt 2/14/2009 2/15/2009 Kuwait $483.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q2may12.txt 2/15/2009 2/16/2009 Iraq 2/16/2009 2/17/2009 Bahrain $526.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q2may12.txt 2/17/2009 2/18/2009 Afghanistan $75.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q2may12.txt 2/18/2009 2/19/2009 Kuwait $483.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q2may12.txt 2/20/2009 2/21/2009 Japan $7,317.05 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q2may12.txt 4/13/2009 4/17/2009 Ukraine $1,148.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q3sep16.txt 4/17/2009 4/20/2009 Czech Republic $1,398.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q3sep16.txt 4/20/2009 4/21/2009 Austria $862.97 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q3sep16.txt Airfare $9,232.82 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q3sep16.txt 6/28/2009 7/1/2009 Russia $1,489.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q3sep16.txt Airfare $8,522.67 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q3sep16.txt 8/12/2009 8/17/2009 Austria $2,409.66 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q4nov19.txt 8/17/2009 8/18/2009 Iraq $852.20 8/18/2009 8/19/2009 Jordan http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q4nov19.txt 8/19/2009 8/22/2009 Israel $7,677.44 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q4nov19.txt Airfare $13,483.73 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2009q4nov19.txt 1/31/2010 2/2/2010 Honduras $3,103.70 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2010q2may24.pdf 7/30/2010 8/1/2010 Germany $559.84 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2010q4nov18.txt 8/1/2010 8/2/2010 India $293.75 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2010q4nov18.txt 8/2/2010 8/5/2010 Thailand $574.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2010q4nov18.txt 8/5/2010 8/6/2010 Austria $370.90 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2010q4nov18.txt 6/6/2011 6/9/2011 Philippines $11,991.58 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2011q3aug16.txt 6/9/2011 6/10/2011 Qatar $3,724.61 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2011q3aug16.txt 6/10/2011 6/11/2011 Kuwait/Iraq $5,187.47 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2011q3aug16.txt 6/11/2011 6/13/2011 Turkey $825.41 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2011q3aug16.txt 10/5/2011 10/6/2011 Croatia $350.67 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q1feb09.txt 10/6/2011 10/8/2011 Serbia $706.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q1feb09.txt 10/8/2011 10/9/2011 Kosovo $183.66 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q1feb09.txt 10/9/2011 10/10/2011 Bosnia $145.82 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q1feb09.txt 1/7/2011 1/13/2017 Germany $27,771.02 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q2may09.txt Airfare $10,611.70 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q2may09.txt 4/23/2012 4/24/2012 Qatar $4,795.10 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q3sep13.txt 4/20/2012 4/23/2012 UAE $2,769.70 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q3sep13.txt 9/4/2012 9/5/2012 Thailand $238.32 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q4nov27.txt 9/5/2012 9/5/2012 Burma $595.36 9/5/2012 9/7/2012 India http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q4nov27.txt 9/7/2012 9/8/2012 Azerbaijan $4,368.01 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q4nov27.txt 9/8/2012 9/10/2012 Austria $708.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2012q4nov27.txt 2/16/2013 2/18/2013 France $7,624.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q2may08.txt 2/18/2013 2/20/2013 Uzbekistan $11,249.16 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q2may08.txt 2/20/2013 2/23/2013 Georgia $3,140.33 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q2may08.txt 2/23/2013 2/25/2013 United Kingdom $4,104.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q2may08.txt 5/28/2013 6/3/2013 Russia $31,885.13 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q3sep11.txt 8/31/2013 9/3/2013 Japan $25,918.60 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q4nov12.txt 9/4/2013 9/5/2013 UAE $4,063.09 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q4nov12.txt 9/5/2013 9/6/2013 Egypt $1,073.78 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q4nov12.txt 9/6/2013 9/7/2013 Qatar $2,840.27 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q4nov12.txt 9/7/2013 9/9/2013 Belgium $5,616.92 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2013q4nov12.txt 1/17/2014 1/18/2014 Austria $15,842.23 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q2may07.txt 1/18/2014 1/20/2014 Egypt $535.38 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q2may07.txt 1/20/2014 1/23/2014 Israel $1,454.24 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q2may07.txt 1/23/2014 1/25/2014 Russia $976.65 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q2may07.txt 1/25/2014 1/26/2014 England $4,580.91 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q2may07.txt 6/26/2014 7/3/2014 Australia $26,589.40 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q4dec01.txt 8/26/2014 8/28/2014 Austria $15,239.34 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q4dec01.txt 8/29/2014 8/31/2014 Hungary $486.95 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q4dec01.txt 8/31/2014 9/2/2014 Israel $1,000.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q4dec01.txt 9/3/2014 9/5/2014 Kazakhstan $3,744.08 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q4dec01.txt 9/5/2014 9/8/2014 Russia $2,676.73 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2014q4dec01.txt 12/13/2014 12/16/2014 UAE 12/16/2014 12/17/2014 Afghanistan $20,089.80 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q1feb20.txt 12/18/2014 12/18/2014 Iraq 12/18/2014 12/20/2014 Austria $2,826.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q1feb20.txt 3/12/2015 3/13/2015 Kuwait $16,696.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q2may12.txt 3/13/2015 3/16/2015 Egypt $5,989.50 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q2may12.txt 5/6/2015 5/8/2015 Switzerland $13,999.40 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q3sep08.txt 5/8/2015 5/9/2015 Serbia $1,919.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q3sep08.txt 5/9/2015 5/11/2015 Bosnia $194.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q3sep08.txt 5/10/2015 5/11/2015 Montenegro $178.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q3sep08.txt 5/11/2015 5/12/2015 Kosovo $164.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q3sep08.txt 7/31/2015 8/2/2015 Austria $19,478.07 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q4nov18.txt 8/2/2015 8/4/2015 Belarus $582.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q4nov18.txt 8/4/2015 8/6/2015 Russia $506.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q4nov18.txt 8/6/2015 8/7/2015 Estonia $226.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q4nov18.txt 8/7/2015 8/8/2015 Latvia $236.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q4nov18.txt 8/8/2015 8/10/2015 Lithuania $529.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2015q4nov18.txt 11/20/2015 11/23/2015 France $21,237.16 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q1feb11.txt 11/21/2015 11/23/2015 Egypt $534.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q1feb11.txt 11/23/2015 11/24/2015 UAE $810.87 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q1feb11.txt 11/24/2015 11/25/2015 Japan $251.90 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q1feb11.txt 11/6/2015 11/8/2015 Turkey $12,621.85 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q1feb11.txt 11/8/2015 11/10/2015 Germany $1,465.10 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q1feb11.txt 11/7/2015 11/7/2015 Iraq 4/1/2016 4/3/2016 Russia $19,533.07 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q3sep12.txt 4/3/2016 4/5/2016 Poland $6,391.84 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q3sep12.txt 4/5/2016 4/7/2016 Czech Republic $1,794.93 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q3sep12.txt 4/7/2016 4/9/2016 Hungary $1,183.07 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q3sep12.txt 4/9/2016 4/12/2016 Austria $870.05 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q3sep12.txt 6/25/2016 6/27/2016 Egypt $14,840.96 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q4nov14.txt 6/27/2016 6/30/2016 Jordan $1,060.56 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q4nov14.txt 6/30/2016 7/2/2016 Turkey $621.28 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2016q4nov14.txt 2/9/2017 2/10/2017 Congo $4,435.45 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2017q2may15.txt 2/10/2017 2/12/2017 Egypt $4,090.67 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2017q2may15.txt 2/12/2017 2/13/2017 France $2,921.00 http://clerk.house.gov/foreign/reports/2017q2may15.txt Total $667,836.17 [U.S. House of Representatives, House Clerk, Filings for 1989 – 2016]

Rohrabacher Bought A Home In Washington, D.C., And Subsequently Sold It

163 D ST SE WASHINGTON, DC 20003-1809

Rohrabacher Real Property Address Parcel Number Assessed Value Sale Price 163 D ST SE WASHINGTON, DC 20003-1809 0734 0032 $718,930 $410,000 [Nexis, Comprehensive Person Search, accessed 4/13/17]

2001: Rohrabacher And His Wife Purchased A Home In Washington, D.C. For $410,000

March 2001: Rohrabacher And His Wife Purchased Property In Washington, D.C. For $410,000. On March 19, 2001, Dana Rohrabacher and Rhonda Rohrabacher were named grantees of land in Washington, DC. The consideration amount was $410,000. They purchased the property from Charles B. Harrison. [District of Columbia, Deed, Doc Number 2001028406, Recorded 3/23/01]

2013: The Rohrabacher’s Sold Their Washington, D.C. Home For More Than $800,000

March 2013: The Rohrabachers Sold Their D.C. Property For More Than $800,000. In March 2013, the Rohrabachers sold their property title to Kevin Michael O’Meara for $829,000. [District of Columbia, Document Number 2013033883, Filed 3/15/13]

3143 14TH STREET SOUTH, ARLINGTON, VA

Rohrabacher Real Property Address Parcel Number Assessed Value Sale Price 3143 14TH STREET SOUTH, ARLINGTON, VA 32-018-051 $223,000 $251,500 [Nexis, Comprehensive Person Search, accessed 4/13/17]

1990: Rohrabacher Purchased A Bargain And Sale Home In Arlington, VA For $223,000

1990: Rohrabacher Purchased A Home In Arlington, VA for $223,000. According to a property record card, Rohrabacher owned a home in Arlington, Virginia in 1990. He purchased the home for $223,000 on April 18, 1990. [Arlington Virginia, Property Records Cards, Parcel Number 32-018-051, accessed 4/20/17]

1990: Rohrabacher Purchased “Bargain And Sale” Home. According to Arlington County Clerk of Court, Davis IRA Lee, Davis Oscar Faye, and IRA Lee Davis sold Rohrabacher a “bargain and sale” home. [Arlington County, Instrument Number 19900100008576, Filed 5/1/90] *Upgrade in subscription required to access detailed documents

2000: Rohrabacher Sold His Home In Arlington, Virginia For $251,000

2000: Rohrabacher Sold His Home In Arlington, Virginia For $251,000. According to Arlington County, Rohrabacher sold his home for $251,500 on July 10, 2000. [Arlington County, Property Sales History, Parcel Number 32-018-051, Viewed 5/8/17]

2000: Rohrabacher Sold Property To Paulina Bendana For More Than $251,000. According to Arlington County Clerk of Court, Rohrabacher sold the property to Paulina Bendana for $251,500. [Arlington County, Instrument Number 20000100015581, Filed 7/11/00] *Upgrade in subscription required to access detailed documents

Rohrabacher Allegedly Threatened To Use Political Weight To Prompt A Criminal Probe To Intimidate His Landlord Who Claimed His Family Left A Rental Dirty And Damaged

*Note: This case in ongoing and may need to be updated.

OC Weekly: Rohrabacher Allegedly Threatened To Use Political Weight To Prompt A Criminal Probe Into The Property Owner

OC Weekly: Rohrabacher Allegedly Threatened To Use Political Weight To Prompt A Criminal Probe Into The Property Owner. “In September, Polyniak filed a cross-complaint in court. That lawsuit alleges in part that the Rohrabachers ‘failed to perform their obligations under the lease and have breached the terms and conditions of the lease in numerous, material ways.’ […] Behind the scenes, there has also allegedly been a not-so-subtle threat from Rohrabacher's camp that the 13-term congressman (who first ran for office in 1988 while championing the imperative of term limits) will use his political weight and personal relationship with Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas to prompt a criminal probe as another intimidation tactic against Polyniak and Whitsell.” [OC Weekly, 12/19/13]

Rohrabacher’s Landlord Claimed The Rohrabachers Left Their Rental Home Dirty And Damaged

Rohrabacher And His Landlord Were Disputing Whether The Rohrabachers Left Their Rental Home Dirty And Damaged After They Moved Out. “What happens in Washington doesn’t always stay in Washington. Or in Costa Mesa, for that matter. A flap between Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Costa Mesa, and a former landlord over a home the congressman’s family occupied has swept social media in recent days. Photos of a greasy stove, grimy carpets and dirty bathrooms are showcased in one online report, while the congressman countered last weekend on and with a seven- minute video taken of a vacant, mostly crisp-looking home, apparently taken about the time his family moved out in July 2012.” [Orange County Register, 12/30/13]

Rohrabacher’s Wife Filed A Lawsuit Against The Landlord Seeking Their $6,700 Deposit, And Claimed She Requested The Refund One Year Before Filing

Rohrabacher’s Wife Filed A Lawsuit Against The Landlord Seeking Their $6,700 Deposit And Attorney Fees Totaling $20,000. “The fracas began with a dispute over a $6,700 security deposit the Rohrabacher’s had made on their rented home on Costa Mesa’s Orange Avenue to their landlord, Robert Polyniak. Rhonda Rohrabacher, Dana’s wife, filed a lawsuit Aug. 12 seeking their security deposit and attorney fees, for a total of $20,100. By that time, the family had been out of the home for about a year. The landlord, they say, had asked them to move out because he wanted the property for someone else.” [Orange County Register, 12/30/13]

Rohrabacher’s Wife Said She Requested The Return Of The Deposit A Year Before Filing Legal Action. “Rhonda Rohrabacher said in a phone interview earlier this month that she had been requesting the return of the deposit for a year and gave up in frustration, resulting in her legal action.” [Orange County Register, 12/30/13]

Rohrabacher’s Landlord Countersued The Rohrabachers For Failing To Pay Their Month-To-Month Lease, And Return The Premises In Its Original Condition

Rohrabacher’s Landlord Filed A $19,557 Cross Complaint Against Rohrabacher Alleging Breach Of Contract For Failing To Pay Month-To-Month Lease, And Return The Premises In Its Original Condition. “Forty-six days later, Polyniak, the owner, filed an answer and cross-complaint in Orange County Superior Court, alleging breach of contract. The Rohrabacher’s failed to pay the month-to-month lease, ‘return to premises in its original condition, less ordinary wear and tear’ and provide Polyniak with written notice of a forwarding address, the suit alleges. The lawsuit seeks $19,557.” [Orange County Register, 12/30/13]

Rohrabacher’s Landlord Planned To Introduce Evidence Of His Claim That Rohrabacher Left The Rental Home In Less-Than-Original Condition

Rohrabacher’s Landlord Planned To Introduce Evidence Of His Claim That Rohrabacher Left The Rental Home In Less-Than-Original Condition. “The lawsuit says Polyniak intends to introduce evidence of his claim that Rohrabacher left the home in less-than-original condition. In the meantime, photos have surfaced online showing stains and damage to a home that one source claims to be the Rohrabacher’s former home. Rohrabacher did not dispute that it was his home pictured in the photos - just that it was not his dirt. The photos are not included in court papers and neither Polyniak nor his lawyer returned calls or emails to the Register to validate the information.” [Orange County Register, 12/30/13]

Rohrabacher Said The Photos, Released By The Landlord, Were “Doctored” And Released Other Pictures

Rohrabacher Said The Photos Released By The Landlord Were “Doctored.” “Rohrabacher tweeted Tuesday: ‘U saw doctored pics. ... The photos, videos & move-in papers expose this lie.’ ’Somebody could’ve put dirt there after we left,’ Rohrabacher said last week, responding to the mess the photos depict.” [Orange County Register, 12/30/13]

Rohrabacher Provided Pictures To The Register Showing Slightly Chipped Stove And Work Stairway. “The Berhane pictures, provided by Rhonda Rohrabacher to the Register, show a home that appears to have been occupied. A worn stairway carpet and slightly chipped stovetop are the only signs of wear. Dana said Berhane’s video and snapshots will be introduced as evidence. They are not yet part of the filing. A hearing is scheduled for April 21 in Orange County Superior Court.” [Orange County Register, 12/30/13]

Rohrabacher Claimed A Property Assessor Documented The Condition Of The Home Before They Moved Out

Rohrabacher Claimed A Property Assessor Documented The Condition Of The Home Before They Moved Out, But The Assessor Could Not Immediately Be Reached For Comment. “A friend of the Rohrabacher’s, Petros Berhane, who is a property assessor, went into the home on Aug. 4, 2012, after the family had moved out, to document the condition of the home, according to Dana Rohrabacher. Berhane is out of the country and couldn’t immediately be reached.” [Orange County Register, 12/30/13]

Rohrabacher Used Fellow Congressman And Others As Character References To Secure The Rental Home

Rohrabacher Used Fellow Congressmen As Character References To Secure Rental. “When Congressman Dana Tyrone Rohrabacher moved into a four-bedroom, four-bathroom, million-dollar Costa Mesa rental home on April Fool's Day 2010, the immaculate, 6,300-square-foot property could have been featured in a glossy real-estate magazine. […] And, no joke, white maggots squirmed underneath a kitchen stove that may not have ever been cleaned during Rohrabacher's $3,350-per-month occupancy, which was secured, in part, with character references from fellow OC congressmen Ed Royce, John Campbell and .” [OC Weekly, 12/19/13]

2008 – 2012: CREW Said Rohrabacher Benefitted From Office And Abused His Position; He Received $60,000 In Disbursements That Included Furniture And Telephone Charges

Citizens For Responsibility And Ethics In Washington (CREW) Listed Rohrabacher As A Politician Who Benefitted From Office

Citizens For Responsibility And Ethics In Washington (CREW) Listed Rohrabacher As A Politician Who Benefitted From Office. “Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Huntington Beach) on Monday denounced a report by a political watchdog group that lists him among politicians who benefit personally from their offices or extend benefits to family members. ‘Family Affair,’ the report by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, D.C., reviewed every sitting member of the House of Representatives through the 2008 and 2010 elections. Rohrabacher, who lives in Costa Mesa, was among 248 politicians profiled and one of 25 from California.” [, 3/28/12]

Citizens For Responsibility And Ethics In Washington Stated Rohrabacher Abused His Position, And Running Had Become “Quite Lucrative For The Rohrabacher Family.” “In a news release, the group called Rohrabacher's methods ‘egregious’ and stated that he had ‘abused his position.’ ‘Running for public office has become quite lucrative for the Rohrabacher family,’ CREW Executive Director Melanie Sloan said in the news release. ‘I wonder how tough the interview process was when Ms. Rohrabacher first applied for the job. Conduct like this reinforces the widely held view that members of Congress are more interested in enriching themselves and their family members than in public service.” [Los Angeles Times, 3/28/12]

CREW: Rohrabacher Received $60,000 In Reimbursements Between 2008 And 2012

2008 – 2012: Citizens For Responsibility And Ethics In Washington Said Rohrabacher Received More Than $60,000 In Reimbursements And His Wife Received “Nearly $200,000 In Salary And Reimbursements.” “The group, known as CREW, noted that the congressman got more than $60,000 in reimbursements from his campaign committee during the last two election cycles, while his wife received nearly $200,000 in salary and reimbursements during the same time.” [Los Angeles Times, 3/28/12]

Rohrabacher: “Half The Members Of Congress Aren't Rich, And The Ones Who Aren't Rich Have To Work.” “Rohrabacher, a 12-term member who represents the 46th Congressional District and chairs the Oversight and Investigations Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, confirmed the figures but said they hardly qualified as news. ‘This is maybe the 20th time I've commented, because every other year, the same thing comes up,’ he said. ‘Half the members of Congress aren't rich, and the ones who aren't rich have to work.’” [Los Angeles Times, 3/28/12]

Rohrabacher Was Reimbursed For Telephone And Furniture

Rohrabacher’s Campaign Committee Reimbursed Rohrabacher For Telephone, Furniture Rental And Other Expenses, In Addition To Reimbursing His Wife Over $8k For Supplies And Snacks. “The committee also reimbursed Dana Rohrabacher $63,926 for telephone bills, fundraising, postage, furniture rental and other expenses, in addition to reimbursing his wife $8,144 for office supplies, fundraising and snacks.” [Los Angeles Times, 3/28/12]

Rohrabacher Voted Against Establishing The Office Of Congressional Ethics

Rohrabacher Voted Against Establishing The Office Of Congressional Ethics. In 2008, Rorahbacher voted against “adoption of the self-executing rule (H Res 1031) that would provide for automatic adoption of the resolution that would establish an Office of Congressional Ethics to consider alleged violations by House members and employees.” The rule was adopted 229 to 182. [H Res 1031, Vote #122, 3/11/08; CQ Floor Votes, 3/11/08]

Republican Conference Voted To Gut The Office Of Congressional Ethics

House Republican Conference Voted Behind Closed Doors To Take Away The Independence Of The Office Of Congressional Ethics. “On the evening of Jan. 2, members of the House Republican Conference voted to change how the U.S. House of Representatives handles allegations of ethical misbehavior. The vote -- done with essentially no advance discussion and behind closed doors on a holiday -- was not proposed by the party’s leadership, but it won wide support among rank-and-file members. After controversy, they quickly reversed course the next day. The change would have placed the sole independent player within the House’s ethics enforcement system -- the Office of Congressional Ethics -- under the control of the House Ethics Committee, which is populated by the lawmakers themselves.” [Politifact, 1/3/17]

The Proposal Was Approved 119 To 74, With No Recorded Vote, As An Amendment To The Rules Package For The 115th Congress. “The proposal was approved by GOP lawmakers by a 119-74 margin (we know the total but individual lawmakers’ votes were not recorded) as an amendment to a rules package that needed to be taken up in advance of the the [sic] opening of the 115th Congress, which was the following day.” [Politifact, 1/3/17]

New York Times: Change Would “Effectively Kill” The Office Of Congressional Ethics. “House Republicans, overriding their top leaders, voted on Monday to significantly curtail the power of an independent ethics office set up in 2008 in the aftermath of corruption scandals that sent three members of Congress to jail. The move to effectively kill the Office of Congressional Ethics was not made public until late Monday, when Representative Robert W. Goodlatte, Republican of Virginia and chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, announced that the House Republican Conference had approved the change.” [New York Times, 1/2/17]

Rohrabacher Received $165,266 In Privately Funded Travel

Rohrabacher Received $165,266 In Privately Funded Travel. As of February 2018, Rohrabacher had gone on 22 privately funded trips, receiving a total of $165,266 in travel since 2000. [Political Moneyline, accessed 2/21/18]

Rohrabacher’s Pribvately Funded Travel Dates Sponsor(s) Location(s) Total Amount 6/12/15 - 6/15/15 Organization of Iranian - American Paris, France $0 Communities of the US 4/4/15 - 4/12/15 German Marshall Fund of the US, Robert Berlin, Germany, Elmau, $11,666 Bosch Stiftung Germany 7/7/14 - 7/8/14 Heartland Institute Las Vegas, NV $999 8/23/12 - 8/25/12 Steamboat Institute Steamboat Springs, CO $0 10/21/10 - 10/22/10 US-Russia Business Council San Francisco, CA $826 3/13/10 - 3/14/10 Young America's Foundation Santa Barbara, CA $0 11/10/06 - 11/11/06 Young American Foundation Santa Barbara, CA $1,208 10/5/06 - 10/7/06 New Yorker Festival New York, NY $1,645 12/11/05 - 12/17/05 Committee to Promote the Just Cause of Yi Bangkok, Thailand $3,458 Tong 8/20/05 - 8/30/05 Albanian American Foundation , Montenegro, Kosovo $11,522 3/21/05 - 4/1/05 Islamic Institute Berlin, Germany, Qatar, Riga, $19,969 Latvia 8/15/04 - 8/25/04 Airbus Toulouse, France $10,990 4/11/03 - 4/22/03 Islamic Free Market Institute Foundation Doha, Qatar, Vienna, Austria $19,797 2/28/03 - 3/3/03 Freedom Alliance Puerto Rico $3,574 1/12/03 - 1/19/03 Chinese International Economic Tokyo, Japan, , Taiwan $10,174 Cooperation Association 7/1/02 - 7/2/02 Bigelow Aerospace Corp. Las Vegas, NV $970 3/22/02 - 3/30/02 Islamic Free Market Institute Foundation London, England, Qatar $18,870 1/11/02 - 1/16/02 Institute of Strategic and International Malaysia $21,000 Studies Malaysia 11/24/01 - 11/27/01 American Foreign Policy Council Bonn, Germany $1,826 10/13/01 - 10/14/01 Council for National Democracy Boston, MA $553 2/16/01 - 2/26/01 Taiwan Assoc. for Industry and Commerce, Taiwan, Philippines, Kuwait $16,110 Phillipines United Against Crime, Kuwait FDTN 4/13/00 - 4/17/00 Government of Qatar, Islamic Institute of Qatar $10,109 America Total: $165,266 [Political Moneyline, accessed 2/21/18]

Rohrabacher Consistently Voted With The Republican Establishment

Rohrabacher Has Voted With His Party 93% Of The Time

Rohrbacher Has Voted With The Republican Party 93% Of The Time. According to CQ, over his career, Rohrabacher has voted with other members of the Republican Caucus 93% of the time. [CQ Vote Studies, accessed 2/21/18]

Party Unity Year Support Oppose 2017 95% 5% 2016 96% 4% 2015 92% 7% 2014 92% 8% 2013 92% 8% 2012 95% 5% 2011 93% 7% 2010 97% 3% 2009 91% 9% 2008 95% 5% 2007 95% 5% 2006 90% 10% 2005 94% 6% 2004 91% 9% 2003 92% 8% 2002 94% 6% 2001 93% 7% 2000 94% 6% 1999 94% 6% 1998 90% 10% 1997 92% 8% 1996 92% 8% 1995 94% 6% 1994 97% 3% 1993 95% 5% 1992 95% 5% 1991 92% 8% 1990 90% 10% 1989 84% 16% Lifetime Average 93% 7% [CQ Vote Study, accessed 2/21/18]

Rohrabacher Voted With 90% Of The Time

Rohrabacher Voted With Ryan 90% Of The Time. According to ProPublica, over his career, Rohrabacher had voted with Speaker Ryan 90% of the time. [ProPublica, accessed 2/21/18]

Vote Comparison Congress Total Votes Votes Disagreeing Percent Agreement 115th 19 6 68% 114th 550 61 89% 113th 1097 118 89% 112th 1485 154 90% 111th 1472 117 92% 110th 1717 149 91% Lifetime Average 6340 605 90% [ProPublica, accessed 2/21/18]

Voted To Elect Paul Ryan Speaker Of The House

2017: Voted To Make Rep. Paul Ryan Speaker Of The House. In January 2017, Rohrabacher voted for Paul Ryan to be Speaker of the House. Ryan was elected by a vote of 239-189. [Election to the Speaker, Vote #2, 1/3/17; CQ, 1/3/17]

2015: Voted To Make Rep. Paul Ryan Speaker Of The House. In October 2015, Rohrabacher voted for Paul Ryan to be Speaker of the House. Paul Ryan received 236 votes, received 184 votes, and Daniel Webster received 9 votes. [Election to the Speaker, Vote #581, 10/29/15]

Funded By Special Interests

Top Overall Industries

Rohrabacher Top Contributions To Campaign Committee By Industry Industry Total Real Estate $581,793 Retired $515,190 Health Professionals $310,457 Misc Manufacturing & Distributing $263,825 Lawyers/Law Firms $262,237 Securities & Investment $192,809 Air Transport $192,000 Republican/Conservative $154,893 Automotive $143,950 Misc Finance $136,880 [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 2/21/18]

Top Overall Sectors

Rohrabacher Top Contributions To Campaign Committee By Sector Sector Indivs Other Cmtes Total Finance, Insurance & Real Estate $979,836 $178,760 $1,158,596 Misc Business $724,784 $109,440 $834,224 Other $661,738 $0 $661,738 Ideological/Single-Issue $150,740 $356,558 $507,298 Health $350,892 $154,050 $504,942 Transportation $161,600 $212,950 $374,550 Lawyers & Lobbyists $316,862 $22,425 $339,287 Construction $181,049 $99,500 $280,549 Energy & Natural Resources $133,354 $105,850 $239,204 Communications/Electronics $150,250 $54,300 $204,550 [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 2/21/18]

Rohrabacher Received $115,685 From Insurance Companies

Career: Rohrabacher Received $115,685 From Insurance Companies. According to Center for Responsive Politics, over the course of his congressional career, Rohrabacher received $115,685 from insurance companies and their employees. [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 2/21/18]

Rohrabacher Received $329,689 From Finance And Securities And Investments Interests

Career: Rohrabacher Received $329,689 From Finance And Securities And Investments Interests. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, over the course of his congressional career, Rohrabacher received $329,689 from finance and securities & investment interests and their employees. [Center for Responsive Politics, accessed 2/21/18]

Rohrabacher Voted For Key Republican Priorities In The 115th Congress

Rohrabacher Voted For Republican Repeal & Ripoff

Rohrabacher Voted For The American Health Care Act. In May 2017, Rohrabacher voted for repeal and replace major parts of the . According to , the bill “would eliminate tax penalties for people who go without health insurance. It would roll back state-by-state expansions of Medicaid, which covered millions of low-income Americans. And in place of government-subsidized insurance policies offered exclusively on the Affordable Care Act’s marketplaces, the bill would offer tax credits of $2,000 to $4,000 a year, depending on age. […] The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said the first version of the bill would trim the federal budget deficit considerably but would also leave 24 million more Americans without health insurance after a decade. Average insurance premiums would be 15 percent to 20 percent higher in 2018 and 2019, but after that, they would be lower than projected under current law.” The bill passed by a vote of 217-213. [HR 1628, Vote #256, 5/4/17; New York Times, 5/4/17]

American Health Care Act Would Gut Protections For People With Pre-Existing Conditions

Politifact Found That AHCA “Would Weaken Protections” For Those With Pre-Existing Conditions, “Would Allow States To Give Insurers The Power To Charge People Significantly More.” “An ad by the American Action Network says that under the American Health Care Act ‘people with pre-existing conditions are protected.’ The only kernel of truth here is that the amendment has language that states insurers can’t limit access to coverage for individuals with pre-existing conditions. However, the ad omits that the House GOP health plan would weaken protections for these patients. The legislation would allow states to give insurers the power to charge people significantly more if they had a pre-existing condition. While Republicans point to the fact that those patients could get help through high-risk pools, experts question their effectiveness. Current law does not allow states to charge people with pre-existing conditions significantly more. We rate this claim Mostly False.” [Politifact, 5/24/17]

American Health Care Act Would Lead To 23 Million More Uninsured – Disproportionally Older People With Lower Incomes

CBO Estimated 14 Million More People Would Be Uninsured In 2018; 23 Million More Uninsured By 2026. “CBO and JCT estimate that, in 2018, 14 million more people would be uninsured under H.R. 1628 than under current law. The increase in the number of uninsured people relative to the number under current law would reach 19 million in 2020 and 23 million in 2026 (see Table 4, at the end of this document).” [CBO, 5/24/17]

CBO Found Increase In Uninsured Would Disproportionately Impact Older People With Lower Income. “Although the agencies expect that the legislation would increase the number of uninsured broadly, the increase would be disproportionately larger among older people with lower income—particularly people between 50 and 64 years old with income of less than 200 percent of the federal poverty level (see Figure 2).” [CBO, 5/24/17]

CBO: Even In States Without Waivers, More People Would Be Uninsured Than Under Current Law. “CBO and JCT expect that under the current version of the legislation, the effects on health insurance coverage would be similar to those previously estimated for the half of the population that resides in states that would not obtain a waiver from the EHB or community-rating requirements. In general, under H.R. 1628, as passed by the House, fewer people would have coverage through the nongroup market, Medicaid, and employment- based coverage, and more people would be uninsured in those areas than under current law.” [CBO, 5/24/17]

American Health Care Act Would Create An Age Tax On Older Americans

American Health Care Act Allows Insurers To Charge Older Customers Five Times More Than Younger Adults. “Raises premiums for older people. The Affordable Care Act limited insurers from charging older customers more than three times what they charge younger adults. The House bill would raise that to five times. This may enable younger consumers to find cheaper coverage, but older policyholders would face higher rates.” [Huffington Post, 3/6/17]

New York Times: ACHA Achieved Lower Premiums Not Through Increased Choice And Competition, But By Making Health Insurance So Unaffordable For Many Older Americans They Would Leave The Market. “There are a lot of unpleasant numbers for Republicans in the Congressional Budget Office’s assessment of their health care bill. But congressional leadership found one to cheer: The report says that the bill will eventually cut the average insurance premiums for people who buy their own insurance by 10 percent. […] But the way the bill achieves those lower average premiums has little to do with increased choice and competition. It depends, rather, on penalizing older patients and rewarding younger ones. According to the C.B.O. report, the bill would make health insurance so unaffordable for many older Americans that they would simply leave the market and join the ranks of the uninsured.” [New York Times, 3/14/17]

Rohrabacher Voted For FY18 Senate Republican Budget That Set The Stage For Tax Reform

Rohrabacher Voted For Agreeing To The Senate Republican’s Version Of The FY18 Budget. In October 2017, Rohrabacher voted for “Black, R-Tenn., motion to concur in the Senate amendment to the concurrent resolution that would provide for $3.1 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018, not including off-budget accounts. It would allow the cap on defense spending to be raised to $640 billion for fiscal 2018, without the need for offsets. It would require the Senate Finance Committee to report legislation under the budget reconciliation process that would increase the deficit by no more than $1.5 trillion over the period of fiscal 2018 through fiscal 2027. It would also instruct the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee to report legislation under the budget reconciliation process that would reduce the deficit by $1 billion over the period of fiscal 2018 through fiscal 2027. The concurrent resolution would authorize the establishment of various reserve funds, including a deficit-neutral reserve fund related to repealing or replacing the 2010 health care overhaul law, and a revenue- neutral reserve fund related to modifying the federal tax system.” The budget passed 216-212. [H Con Res 71, Vote #589, 10/26/17; CQ Floor Votes, 10/26/17]

Washington Times: “The Goal Of The Budget Was To Set Up What's Known As The ‘Reconciliation’ Process” For Tax Reform. “Already months overdue the fiscal year began Oct. 1 the budget calls for about $1 trillion in discretionary spending this year, and envisions deficits of $641 billion. But even Republicans said those numbers were probably irrelevant, and it will take a bipartisan deal later this year to set actual spending levels for 2018. Instead, the goal of the budget was to set up what's known as the ‘reconciliation’ process, which allows big financial measures to pass the Senate by majority vote, without having to overcome a filibuster.” [Washington Times, 10/20/17]

HEADLINE: House approves Senate-passed budget plan, paving way for tax reform [CBS News, 10/26/17]

Senate Budget Cut $473 Billion From Medicare And More Than $1 Trillion From Medicaid Over 10 Years. “Under Capitol Hill's byzantine budget rules, the nonbinding budget resolution is supposed to lay out a long-term fiscal framework for the government. This year's measure calls for $473 billion in cuts from Medicare over 10 years and more than $1 trillion from Medicaid. All told, Senate Republicans would cut spending by more than $5 trillion over a decade, though they don't attempt to spell out where the cuts would come from.” [Associated Press, 10/19/17]

Senate Budget Eliminated House Republican’s Requirement That Tax Legislation Be Revenue Neutral. “The path to a compromise earlier looked contentious. The House’s budget writers, led by fiscal hawk Rep. Diane Black of Tennessee, drew out a legislative map that would require any tax bill to be deficit-neutral and to be coupled with billions in mandatory cuts. Members of the Senate budget panel, by contrast, have given themselves much more flexibility. The Senate’s budget allows the GOP’s tax plan to add up to $1.5 trillion to the deficit over 10 years, which proponents say will allow for more aggressive tax cuts.” [NPR, 10/20/17]

Senate Budget Promoted Reducing The State And Local Tax Deduction. “The Chairman of the Committee on the Budget of the Senate may revise the allocations of a committee or committees, aggregates, and other appropriate levels in this resolution, and make adjustments to the pay-as-you-go ledger, for one or more bills, joint resolutions, amendments, amendments between the Houses, motions, or conference reports relating to changes in Federal tax laws, which may include reducing federal deductions, such as the state and local tax deduction which disproportionally favors high-income individuals, to ensure relief for middle- income taxpayers, by the amounts provided in such legislation for those purposes, provided that such legislation would not increase the deficit over either the period of the total of fiscal years 2018 through 2027.” [H Con Res 71, Text As Engrossed In The Senate, 10/19/17]

Rohrabacher Voted For FY18 House Republican Budget That Cut Medicare And Medicaid

Rohrabacher Voted For FY18 Republican House Budget. In October 2017, Rohrabacher voted for “adoption of the concurrent resolution that would provide for $3.2 trillion in new budget authority in fiscal 2018, not including off-budget accounts. It would assume $1.22 trillion in discretionary spending in fiscal 2018. It would assume the repeal of the 2010 health care overhaul law. It also would propose reducing spending on mandatory programs such as Medicare and Medicaid and changing programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (also known as food stamps). It would call for restructuring Medicare into a "premium support" system beginning in 2024. I would also require the House Ways and Means Committee to report out legislation under the budget reconciliation process that would provide for a revenue-neutral, comprehensive overhaul of the U.S. tax code and would include instructions to 11 House committees to trigger the budget reconciliation process to cut mandatory spending. The concurrent resolution would assume that, over 10 years, base (non-Overseas Contingency Operations) discretionary defense spending would be increased by a total of $929 billion over the Budget Control Act caps and non-defense spending be reduced by $1.3 trillion.” The budget pass 219-206. [H Con Res 71, Vote #557, 10/5/17; CQ Floor Votes, 10/5/17]

AP: House Budget “Reprises A Controversial Plan To Turn Medicare Into A Voucher-Like Program.” “The House on Thursday passed a $4.1 trillion budget plan that promises deep cuts to social programs while paving the way for Republicans to rewrite the tax code later this year. The 2018 House GOP budget reprises a controversial plan to turn Medicare into a voucher-like program for future retirees as well as the party's efforts to repeal the "Obamacare" health law. Republicans controlling Congress have no plans to actually implement those cuts while they pursue their tax overhaul.” [Associated Press, 10/5/17]

CBPP: FY18 Budget As Passed By House Budget Committee “Would Cut Medicare Spending By $487 Billion Over The 2018-27 Period, Largely By Shifting More Health Care Costs To Beneficiaries.” “The 2018 budget resolution that the House Budget Committee approved this week would end Medicare’s guarantee of health coverage by converting the program to a premium support system. Overall, it would cut Medicare spending by $487 billion over the 2018-27 period, largely by shifting more health care costs to beneficiaries. President Trump’s budget, by contrast, would spare Medicare from cuts.” [CBPP, 7/21/17]

House Budget Called For $5 Trillion In Spending Cuts, Including Slashing Medicaid By $1 Trillion. “The plan, passed by a nearly party-line 219-206 vote, calls for more than $5 trillion in spending cuts over the coming decade, promising to slash Medicaid by about $1 trillion over the next 10 years, repeal the ‘Obamacare’ health law, and force huge cuts to domestic programs funded each year by Congress.” [Associated Press, 10/5/17]

Rohrabacher Voted For Eliminating Limits On Consumer Internet Privacy

Rohrabacher Voted For A Resolution To Eliminate Limits On What ISPs Could Do With Customer Information, Including Browsing Habits, Usage History, Location Data, And Social Security Numbers. In March 2017, Rohrabacher voted for a resolution “that wipes away landmark online privacy protections, the first salvo in what is likely to become a significant reworking of the rules governing Internet access in an era of Republican dominance. In a party-line vote, House Republicans freed Internet service providers such as Verizon, AT&T and Comcast of protections approved just last year that had sought to limit what companies could do with information such as customer browsing habits, app usage history, location data and Social Security numbers. The rules also had required providers to strengthen safeguards for customer data against hackers and thieves.” The resolution passed 215-205. [S J Res 34, Vote #202, 3/28/17; Washington Post, 3/28/17]

Washington Post: ISPs “Will Be Able To Monitor Their Customers’ Behavior Online And, Without Their Permission, Use Their Personal And Financial Information To Sell Highly Targeted Ads.” “If Trump signs the legislation as expected, providers will be able to monitor their customers’ behavior online and, without their permission, use their personal and financial information to sell highly targeted ads — making them rivals to Google and Facebook in the $83 billion online advertising market. The providers could also sell their users’ information directly to marketers, financial firms and other companies that mine personal data — all of whom could use the data without consumers’ consent. In addition, the Federal Communications Commission, which initially drafted the protections, would be forbidden from issuing similar rules in the future.” [Washington Post, 3/28/17]

Washington Post: The House just voted to wipe away the FCC’s landmark Internet privacy protections [Washington Post, 3/28/17]

Rohrabacher Voted For Repealing Wall Street Reforms

Rohrabacher Voted For The CHOICE Act To “Overhaul Financial Industry Regulations And Repeal Many Provisions Of The 2010 Dodd-Frank Law.” In June 2017, Rohrabacher voted for “passage of the bill that would overhaul financial industry regulations and repeal many provisions of the 2010 Dodd-Frank law. It would convert the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau into an executive agency funded by annual appropriations and would modify operations at the Federal Reserve and at the Securities and Exchange Commission. It would repeal the prohibition on banking entities engaging in proprietary trading and would modify regulations governing the amount of capital that banks are required to maintain. It would also nullify the Labor Department's April 2016 "fiduciary" rule regarding standards for individuals who provide retirement investment advice to act in the best interests of their clients.” The bill passed 233-186. [HR 10, Vote #299, 6/8/17; CQ Floor Votes, 6/8/17]

HEADLINE: House passes Choice Act that would gut Dodd-Frank banking reforms [CNBC, 6/8/17]

New York Times: CHOICE Act “To Erase A Number Of Core Financial Regulations,” Including Limits On Risk Taking Enacted After The Financial Crash, And “Would Weaken The Powers Of The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.” “The House approved legislation on Thursday to erase a number of core financial regulations put in place by the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, as Republicans moved a step closer to delivering on their promises to eliminate rules that they claim have strangled small businesses and stagnated the economy. […] The Choice Act would exempt some financial institutions that meet capital and liquidity requirements from many of Dodd-Frank’s restrictions that limit risk taking. It would also replace Dodd-Frank’s method of dealing with large and failing financial institutions, known as the orderly liquidation authority — which critics say reinforces the idea that some banks are too big to fail — with a new bankruptcy code provision. In addition, the legislation would weaken the powers of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.” [New York Times, 6/8/17]