Will an Ethics Scandal—and Jimmy Carter’s Grandson—Bring Georgia’s GOP Governor Down?

A brewing controversy over whether Gov. Nathan Deal’s aides tried to shut down an investigation could imperil his reelection prospects.

Kent D. Johnson/AP

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Could a Carter from Georgia once again win because of a scandal-plagued Republican? Democrat Jason Carter—grandson of former President Jimmy Carter—is challenging first-term Georgia Gov. Nathan Deal this fall, and the incumbent Republican is facing an ethics controversy that could imperil his reelection chances.

Deal has been embroiled for years in a low-grade scandal regarding allegations that his staff smothered a state ethics investigation of his campaign finances. But the controversy has recently heated up. This spring, a former head of the state’s ethics commission won a lawsuit in which she claimed that she was improperly pushed out of her job for digging into Deal’s campaign. Her replacement—fearing that she might also be jettisoned from the commission—has now come forward and alleged that the governor’s aides tried to interfere with the ethics commission.

Last week, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported that in July 2012 Holly LaBerge, the current head of the state’s ethics commission, wrote a memo outlining political intimidation by Deal’s staff. In the memo, she noted that the governor’s top lawyer, Ryan Teague threatened to strip her agency of its rulemaking authority in order to deep-six the investigation of Deal’s 2010 gubernatorial campaign. LaBerge’s memo also said that Deal’s chief of staff, Chris Riley, pressured her to close the matter, which the commission eventually did. “I was mad that the governor’s legal counsel thought he could call me up and threaten me and threaten my agency,” LaBerge told the local Fox station.

The FBI and the state inspector general have been reviewing the ethics commission’s activities, and LaBerge’s attorney said the ethics chief would want whistleblower protections for her cooperation. If she is granted protection, she might be in the position to disclose more about this episode, and Deal could face more damaging stories.

Deal’s ethics commission troubles date back to 2011. Then LaBerge’s predecessor, Stacey Kalberman, and Kalberman’s deputy, Sherilyn Streicker, began examining Deal’s 2010 campaign spending. They suspected that Deal, who had served nine terms in Congress before running for governor, might have improperly directed campaign funds to businesses to which he had ties. Kalberman and Streicker alerted the ethics panel’s five commissioners of their intention to issue subpoenas for information. The commissioners responded by slashing Kalberman’s salary by $35,000, effectively forcing her out, and eliminating Streicker’s job.*

This April, a jury sided with Kalberman in a lawsuit claiming that she was targeted for political retribution, granting her $700,000 in compensation. (The case ended up costing the state over $1.1 million, including legal fees.) “I always knew it was about somebody’s desire to quash the Deal investigation,” Kalberman told the local NBC affiliate, after the case concluded.

Once Kalberman left the state ethics commission in 2011, LaBerge filled the post. She was chosen at the suggestion of Deal’s chief lawyer. At the alleged urging of Deal’s staff, LaBerge—who would later complain of being strong-armed—quickly dispensed with the investigation Kalberman had initiated, and the commission dismissed the case against Deal, with the governor’s campaign agreeing to pay a mere $3,350 for minor filing problems.

Deal has denied any wrongdoing on the part of his aides. “They were simply urging the [ethics commission] staff to proceed in a timely fashion,” the governor told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution.

Prior to the state ethics commission’s quashed inquiry, Deal had another run-in with government watchdogs. In 2010, when Deal was a congressman, the Office of Congressional Ethics—an independent, bipartisan panel—examined allegations that he had used his House seat to benefit his family business, Gainesville Storage & Disposal. Deal denied abusing his power, calling the investigation a “politically motivated witch hunt.” But the congressional ethics panel found that Deal had failed to disclose $75,000 in wages from a car salvage company—violating congressional limits on outside income.

The congressional investigation also charged that Deal exploited his position to dissuade state officials from changing an automobile inspection program in a way that would harm his business. “It is undisputed that as a ‘public servant,’ Representative Deal took active steps to preserve a purely state program, one that had generated financial benefit for Representative Deal and his business partner,” the panel’s report said. Deal resigned right before the House ethics committee’s deadline for taking action and ran for governor—and the inquiry came to an end.

Georgia voters didn’t place too much stock in Deal’s House-era ethics troubles, electing him governor with 53 percent of the vote in 2010. But polls show they might not be so forgiving the second time he claims innocence. RealClearPolitics’ average of polls has Deal up by just 1.7 percent. A poll conducted last week by Landmark Communications for a local TV station, the first since LaBerge’s memo became public, put Carter ahead with an 8-point advantage. Deal is clearly in a tight race, and he surely won’t be helped if the Case of the Smothered Ethics Investigation becomes a full-fledged scandal.

Correction: An earlier version of this article incorrectly said that Deal had appointed a majority of the commissioners when Kalberman’s salary was cut.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate