The Republican Governors Association is going after the director of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, trying to determine if he violated election law.
The RGA has filed a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request for records related to what it called “Director Richard Cordray’s potential violation of the Hatch Act while exploring a run for Ohio governor.” Cordray has long been rumored to be considering a run for the Ohio governor’s seat, although he has not yet confirmed it.
The Hatch Act executive-branch employees from participating in political activity. In essence, the act means that if Cordray were to run for governor, he would have to first resign his position as director of the CFPB.
But Cordray has allegedly discussed a run with other political figures – which could be a Hatch Act violation. Now the RGA is requesting logs from Cordray’s government-issued cell phone, his office phone logs, schedule, and any emails to certain people or containing terms that might pertain to a possible gubernatorial run.
“Ohioans deserve to know whether Richard Cordray is using his Consumer Financial Protection Bureau office for political gain at the expense of taxpayers,” said RGA Communications Director Jon Thompson. “If these new revelations are correct, and Cordray did discuss potential gubernatorial debates with Ohio Democrats, he should admit truthfully what he discussed, if he is engaged in prohibited political activity, and why he is so focused on not doing his job.”
The RGA joins Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, in demanding more information on possible Hatch Act violations by Cordray. Earlier this month, Hensarling asked Acting Special Counsel Adam Miles to launch an investigation into whether Cordray violated the act.
Were it determined that Cordray had violated the Hatch Act, he could be subject to penalties ranging from reprimand to firing, Cleveland.com reported.
House staff finds “ample evidence” to hold Cordray in contempt
Hensarling demands investigation into whether CFPB director violated Hatch Act