Providing For Consideration Of Conference Report On H.R. 2918, Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2010
Floor Speech
Mr. NADLER of New York. I thank the gentleman for yielding me time, Madam Speaker.
The Constitution prohibits Congress from passing a bill of attainder, a bill that, no matter what its form, punishes either a named individual or an easily ascertainable group of people.
Last week, to the great shame of this House, we passed a bill of attainder, a bill stating that no Federal funds shall go to a specifically named organization, ACORN.
Now, in this conference report, we are about to do it again. Why? Because of a desire to punish ACORN. And yet, as ACORN's lawyer wrote to us recently, this is, ``to my research, unprecedented in congressional history. Never before has one corporation or entity been the subject of such broad reaching punishment by congressional mandate.
``The punishment here did not follow some criminal or administrative process with basic due process protections. It flowed out of a Fox News network-led call for a pubic lynching. There was no statement of charges and no reference to a judicial or administrative finding of wrongdoing by ACORN. All that occurred was a Member of Congress making a motion supported with a speech full of negative and largely inaccurate observations about ACORN, followed by a vote.''
The fact is ACORN has never been convicted of anything. Lots of charges. So far, no proof in any court or any administrative proceeding. But some charges may be true. And they may or may not--I think not, but that's just a personal opinion--indicate substantial misfeasance. But that's why we have courts and administrative agencies and congressional investigating committees.
It may be that ACORN is guilty of various infractions, and, if so, it ought to be vetted or maybe sanctioned by the appropriate administrative agency or by the judiciary. But Congress must not be in the business of punishing individual organizations or people without trial, and that is what the provision in this conference report does. It prohibits any Federal funds from going to ACORN for any purpose, clearly as a punishment for alleged misdeeds. This is a classic bill of attainder, and as such, it is flatly prohibited by the Constitution.
We must not ignore the Constitution. Whatever one may think of the subject matter or the organization, the Constitution and the ban on bills of attainder are there for the protection of all our liberties. And we ignore the constitutional provisions at our peril.
This bill of attainder should not be in this conference report, and I will, therefore, vote against the conference report.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Let me respond to some of the remarks that have been made so far, Madam Speaker. First, I have to say that, in addressing the issue of ACORN, the gentleman from Worcester said that ACORN was the target of right-wing radio this week. The fact of the matter is there is a Justice Department investigation that, at this moment, is being undertaken to address this issue. So to argue that somehow this is just a product of right-wing radio is silly.
Mr. NADLER of New York. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DREIER. Of course. I'm happy to yield.
Mr. NADLER of New York. There is an investigation, and let it proceed and let it come to a conclusion, but there is no conclusion yet.
Mr. DREIER. If I can reclaim my time, let me say that I was simply responding to the gentleman from Worcester, who was saying that somehow the ACORN concerns that have been raised are nothing but developed from right-wing radio, as he described it.
It is true that a number of very, very smart investigative journalists have come forward and brought to the forefront some of the most outrageous abuses of taxpayer dollars, and we have seen these reports carried on television. The gentleman mentioned Fox News. We've heard it reported on the radio.
I believe that it is a great service, as we see hardworking Americans, hardworking Americans trying to make ends meet, and that kind of abuse of their tax dollars is outrageous, as has been reported. That kind of abuse is outrageous.
Mr. NADLER of New York. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DREIER. Of course, I'm happy to yield to my friend.
Mr. NADLER of New York. The point is, of course, as I said--and, by the way, it was I who talked about right-wing radio, not the gentleman from Worcester.
Mr. DREIER. If I could reclaim my time, Madam Speaker, the gentleman was not on the floor when Mr. McGovern began his opening statement. The gentleman did, in fact.
So now I will say both my friends from Massachusetts and New York are now saying that right-wing talk radio is somehow responsible for this, when, in fact, it has been some very shrewd investigative journalists. And we have seen talk radio and some of the cable television networks bring us to the forefront. Unfortunately, it's taken quite a while for the so-called mainstream media to begin the kind of coverage of ACORN that we are finally seeing.
Mr. NADLER of New York. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. DREIER. Of course, I'm happy to yield to my friend.
Mr. NADLER of New York. Thank you.
The point is, of course, I'm not going to debate the merits of the charges against ACORN. Charges have been made. As I said, some of them may be valid. They may be not valid. And if they're valid, they may indicate pervasive corruption; they may indicate minor errors. We don't know. We'll find out.
But the point is the Constitution prohibits Congress from acting on that information by punishing an organization. They should be punished, if indeed they should be punished, by an administrative agency, by cutting off funds, by HUD or whatever.
Mr. DREIER. Madam Speaker, if I could reclaim my time, let me say to my friend that the American people get it. They understand that ACORN is responsible for its own actions. They have seen what has taken place. It has been outrageous behavior. And the notion of somehow standing here and defending that when we are dealing with the funding bills themselves, the appropriations process, is just plain wrong.
Let me also say to my friend from Worcester managing this measure that he responded to my remarks by saying that he didn't want to have lectures given and he was tired of excuses being made. You know, the American people get it, too. The notion of pointing the finger of blame back and forth is not what they want.
Children make excuses and get slapped down by their parents. That has happened to me as a kid. It happens to everybody. And the idea of standing here saying, Well, we were lectured here and excuses are being made, so we somehow can continue to do what it is that we want to do. Well, Madam Speaker, I have to tell you that we didn't do things perfectly, but the fact of the matter is we didn't shut down the appropriations process. We did not shut down the appropriations process, denying Democrats and Republicans the opportunity to participate, as has been the case throughout the history of our country, and I think it's just plain wrong to do that. And the American people get that, too.
So we're not providing any lecturing. We're just saying regular order. The rules of the House should be followed, and they have been ignored consistently.
When one looks at the statements that have been made by many of our colleagues on the other side of the aisle who were critical of us when we were in the majority, it's incredible to see that they have taken and ramped up, ramped up the kind of behavior that they criticized on our part.
In fact, on the fiscal year 2000 measure, the fiscal year 2000 measure, as the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill was moving through, the ranking member of the Committee on Appropriations, the now chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, Mr. Obey, said, in talking about the Legislative Branch bill, This bill should not be passed until we know how deep the cuts that are being made contemplated for veterans, for education, for health care, and other areas of major responsibility to our people. Because, in the end, if this bill is one of the first out of the gate and signed into law before the other cuts are made, then the American people are really going to have a right to ask whether we are more concerned with taking care of ourselves than we are with taking care of their own problems.
Those are the words of the chairman of the Appropriations Committee today, who is utilizing the ``putting Congress first,'' the Legislative Branch Appropriations bill, as the first measure for tying the continuing resolution to that. And I think that it's a very, very unfortunate thing.
When we had an exchange up in the Rules Committee, I asked the distinguished Chair, As we look at our priorities--homeland security, veterans, our men and women in uniform who are in Iraq and Afghanistan--and we have now chosen that the priority for passage is the funding for the Congress of the United States, the distinguished Chair's response was, Uh-huh. Right. She said, That's it.
And so here we are, putting Congress first, when the American people believe we should be focusing on our border security, the threat of terrorism, funding for our troops. Those should be the priorities that we have. And the notion of standing here, Madam Speaker, having subverted the opportunity for the American people, Democrats and Republicans alike, to be heard in this appropriations so that we could get everything done by September 30, when we failed to meet that, is just plain wrong.
With that, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. McGOVERN. Madam Speaker, I yield 30 seconds to the gentleman from New York.
Mr. NADLER of New York. The gentleman from California says the American people get it. They know what terrible things ACORN has done. That's not the point.
We do not punish people by referendum or by unpopularity. Congress should not punish people. That's why the Constitution says we cannot pass a bill of attainder. We have courts. We have due process. We have administrative agencies to punish people or organizations for doing wrong things.
Mr. DREIER: Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. NADLER. Not for the moment.
Once Congress passes a bill of attainder and undertakes to punish an organization for doing whatever it did, we sacrifice our liberties, we sacrifice our due process protections, and that's why it's not up to us to punish. It's up to the court to punish.
Source