Resolution Recommending That the House of Representatives Find Michael Joseph in Contempt of Congress for Refusal to Comply with Subpoenas Duly Issued By the Committee on Ethics

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the resolution holding Michael Joseph in contempt of Congress for his failure to comply with duly authorized subpoenas issued by the Committee on Ethics.

At a time when public confidence in Congress is at historic lows and the House's ability to self-police Member conduct is under intense scrutiny, enforcing lawful congressional process is vital to delivering swift transparency and accountability for any misconduct.

A witness who refuses to cooperate with the Ethics Committee hinders the thoroughness and swiftness of an investigation. If the committee must authorize and issue a subpoena for that witness, more delays result.

If after those additional steps the witness decides to flout the subpoena, the committee is ultimately deprived of key evidence needed to resolve the allegations.

A subpoena from the House Ethics Committee is not a suggestion. It is a lawful demand for information needed by the House to fulfill its constitutional responsibilities to enforce the official code of conduct, adjudicate violations, and to impose appropriate discipline.

The investigative subcommittee in the matter of Representative Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick repeatedly sought documents and testimony from Mr. Joseph, yet he failed to comply with voluntary requests for information and multiple subpoenas in the 118th and 119th Congresses.

While other witnesses did not fully cooperate with the committee's investigation, Mr. Joseph's conduct went further. Twice he failed to appear for subpoenaed testimony in the current Congress, and he was made aware numerous times that his failure to comply with the subpoenas could result in contempt proceedings. He had notice of and was properly served all the subpoenas by the investigatory subcommittee, and he never asserted any valid privilege or basis for noncompliance.

The bipartisan investigative subcommittee unanimously found, and the full committee agreed, that his conduct was contemptuous. His noncompliance also unnecessarily and significantly delayed the committee's investigation.

Contempt referrals like these are a rare step because almost all subpoenaed witnesses cooperate with the committee before contempt proceedings need to be initiated.

But the rareness of this step should not obscure its importance. The effectiveness of the committee's oversight hinges on the expectation that subpoenas cannot and will not be ignored.

This contempt resolution is not intended to be a punitive measure. It is a deterrent to future noncompliance and obstructive conduct by witnesses in future investigations.

With this resolution, we can establish a clear and necessary boundary for future witnesses. If you are subpoenaed by the committee, you cannot simply decide that compliance is optional.

By demonstrating that noncompliance has consequences, this resolution will empower the Ethics Committee in its continued efforts to uphold civic confidence and the integrity of this body.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, I have no other speakers. I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source