Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge Act of 2012

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I hope our colleagues will support this amendment that Senator Leahy and I have worked on. This is an expansion of our Public Corruption and Prosecution Improvements Act which passed the Judiciary Committee last year.

Mr. President, I am proud to co-sponsor this important amendment with Senator PATRICK LEAHY, the distinguished chairman of the Judiciary Committee.

Our amendment is drawn from bipartisan, bicameral legislation--including our Public Corruption Prosecution Improvements Act, which passed the Judiciary Committee last year.

Public corruption is not a Republican or Democratic problem. It is a Washington, DC, problem. And it is a problem in statehouses and city halls across this country. Our citizens deserve to be governed by the rule of law, not the rule of man. Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, a few rotten apples have a tendency to spoil the bunch.

The amendment we will vote on today will strengthen the enforcement of U.S. Federal laws aimed at combating betrayals of public dollars and the public trust. Our amendment does this by making clarifications to public corruption laws and by giving prosecutors precise tools to use in their battle against corrupt officials.

Our amendment increases the maximum punishments on several offenses, including theft and embezzlement of federal funds, bribery, and a number of corrupt campaign contribution practices. For example, it cracks down on theft or bribery related to entities that receive Federal funds, by increasing the maximum sentence for a conviction from 10 to 15 years and lowering the threshold that prosecutors must prove, from $5,000 to $1,000.

It also clarifies the law in response to several court decisions narrowly interpreting the public corruption statutes. For example, the bill revises the definitions of ``illegal gratuities'' and ``official acts,'' clarifying that an entire ``course of conduct'' can be the result of bribery.

Federal investigators who seek to root out corrupt officials will benefit from new tools provided in this legislation. The bill would extend the statute of limitations on certain serious public corruption offenses, giving prosecutors more time to investigate and build a case.

And it expands the criminal venue provisions, allowing prosecutors to bring the case against corrupt officials in any district where some part of the corruption occurred. The bill similarly expands the venue for perjury and obstruction of justice.

I would like to take a minute or two to address concerns that I have heard, including from some on my side of the aisle.

One criticism I have heard is that this legislation ignores federalism principles.

This concern is directed at a portion of the amendment clarifying that the mail and wire fraud statute applies to any public official who uses the interstate mails or wires to advance a fraudulent scheme involving illegally undisclosed self-dealing.

The Supreme Court has interpreted the mail and wire fraud statutes more narrowly--asking that Congress clarify the definition of illegally undisclosed self-dealing.

Under this amendment, the Federal government would only be able to prosecute State officials where they can show, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the State official in question had knowingly or intentionally violated relevant State laws concerning the disclosure of material financial interests.

In other words, this legislation expressly defers to the States to determine what financial disclosures their public officials should be required to make.

Additionally, this provision would require the Federal government to show that the State official in question had engaged in an official act for the material purpose of benefitting the illegally concealed financial interest that they knowingly or intentionally failed to disclose.

Finally, the Federal government would have to show that the course of conduct included a constitutionally-sufficient federal nexus via use of the interstate mails or wires to perpetrate the fraud.

As for federalism principles generally, it is important to note that, under current law, the Federal government still has the authority to prosecute corrupt State officials for bribery and kickback schemes under the mail and wire fraud statutes.

This amendment simply updates and clarifies the honest services fraud statute to reach corrupt conduct--i.e., undisclosed self-dealing--that Congress intended to be part of the criminal law.

Some opponents of this amendment believe that we should repeal portions of current law so that the Federal government has no role whatsoever in rooting out public corruption at the State and local level. I fundamentally disagree.

Consider the all-too-common case of a corrupt State governor or State judge that local prosecutors are loathe to indict--or even investigate--for fear of reprisal.

Finally, I have heard some ask: Would this legislation criminalize the giving of baseball caps, jerseys, or other ceremonial gifts to Members of Congress?

The answer is very simple: No, it would not.

First, the amendment would only apply to status gratuities worth more than $1,000. Second, the amendment would also require prosecutors to prove that the government official in question knowingly accepted the illegal gratuity in violation of the relevant ethics rules or regulations governing their conduct.

I urge my colleagues to support the amendment. I look forward to engaging with any of my colleagues who have concerns or questions.

I thank Chairman LEAHY for his leadership on this and other legislation we have crafted together. I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source