Past is precedent
“The book royalties will appear in her 2023 disclosure,” the spokesperson told The Daily Beast. “This is consistent with guidance from the House Ethics Committee.”
But that does not actually appear consistent with ethics guidance.
The ethics instruction guide for 2022 congressional financial disclosures makes clear that members must disclose not only royalties they received, but anticipated royalties as well—“any royalties currently due from the publisher for completed sales.”
Let me check on that…
When The Daily Beast informed Boebert’s office about the rule, the spokesperson replied that they had reached out to the Ethics Committee ahead of filing, receiving a reply on May 11 that “no royalties needed to be disclosed in the 2022 financial disclosure since there had been no payment of royalties in 2022.”
The spokesperson added that the office is consulting ethics experts again, and would amend the report if needed. If the account of the Committee’s communication is accurate, it would seem unlikely that they’d throw the book at Boebert.
Still, ethics experts told The Daily Beast that the rules were not complicated and are in place for a reason.
Rifle Royalty
Kedric Payne, vice president and senior director of ethics at nonpartisan watchdog Campaign Legal Center, told The Daily Beast that the rules “clearly require disclosure of royalty income.”
“Voters have a right to know that their elected officials are fully transparent about their financial interests,” Payne said.
Jordan Libowitz, communications director at government watchdog Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, agreed, and called the disclosure “odd.”
How odd, how unusual
“It does seem odd that she’s claiming there were no royalties earned—even if not paid—during the first six months of the book’s release. If she could not calculate the royalties, that would still need to be disclosed,” Libowitz said. “She does not disclose anything about the book on her forms, which is unusual in this type of situation.”
Boebert’s disclosure also didn’t include any details of her agreement with her publisher, Bombardier Books, an imprint of popular conservative house Post Hill Press. Brett Kappel, political attorney at Hammon Curran, noted that it should have been disclosed as an agreement and an asset.
“Other congressional authors who have the same publisher managed to report the book contracts correctly,” Kappel told The Daily Beast.
Kappel pointed to prior disclosures from Boebert allies—like Reps. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), Ronny Jackson (R-TX), and Jim Jordan (R-OH)—who all reported details about their agreements through Post Hill.
Post Hill did not reply to a request for comment.
Read the full story here.
