Investigate Rep. Randy "Duke"
Cunningham
Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in
Washingto
June 15, 2005
Washington, DC – Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics
in Washington (CREW) called on the House ethics committee today
to investigate San Diego Representative Randy "Duke'
Cunningham's (R-CA) sale of his house to a defense
contractor who had pending legislation before the House defense
appropriations subcommittee, of which Cunningham is an
influential member.
Cunningham sold his Del Mar house for $1,675,000 in November
2003 to Mitchell Wade, a defense contractor. Wade put the Del Mar
house back on the market shortly after buying it, where it
remained unsold and vacant for more than eight months. It
eventually sold for $700,000 less than what Wade had paid
Cunningham.
Cunningham sold his house through a realtor, Elizabeth Todd,
who he said had set a fair and independent price. However, Todd
and two family members have made 18 separate contributions
totaling $11,500 to Cunningham's congressional campaign committee
since 1997, according to records at the Federal Election
Commission.
According to Copley News Service, records state that
Cunningham sold the house to 1523 New Hampshire Avenue LLC.
Nevada state business records show that Wade owns that company.
It is the address of his Washington, D.C., office.
Several news reports reveal that Cunningham was supporting
Wade and his firm MZM Inc. in efforts to win Pentagon contracts.
Around the same time Cunningham's house was sold to Wade,
the defense contractor, whose business was suffering through a
flat period, and was awarded tens of millions of dollars in
defense and intelligence-related contracts.
"The fact that Congressman Cunningham's house sold
at a substantial loss at a time when real estate prices were
soaring strongly suggests that the house was sold well beyond its
value,' Melanie Sloan, executive director of CREW said
today. "The fact that it was sold at such a price to
someone with business before Cunningham's committee makes
the deal all the more suspicious.'
"This is just the kind of situation that the ethics
committee was intended to investigate. The committee's
failure to immediately take up this matter would be a dereliction
of their responsibilities and yet another sign that Chairman
Hastings is not serious about ethics.'
|