Amending the Rules of the House of Represenatives to Reinstate Certain Provisions

Date: April 27, 2005
Location: Washington, DC


AMENDING THE RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TO REINSTATE CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE RULES RELATING TO PROCEDURES OF THE COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT TO THE FORM IN WHICH THOSE PROVISIONS EXISTED AT THE CLOSE OF THE 108th CONGRESS -- (House of Representatives - April 27, 2005)

Ms. PELOSI. Mr. Speaker, I commend the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter) for upholding a high ethical standard in the House, and I rise in strong support of the resolution before us.

Mr. Speaker, this is a great day for the American people. Across the country they have spoken out and editorial boards have reflected their views throughout our nation that not any one of us is above the law. No Member of Congress is above the law.

I come to this podium as the House Democratic leader, but I also would note that I bring to my office that I serve in now and to this podium the experience of serving on the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct for 6 years, and an additional 7th year to be part of the Livingston task force. Mr. Livingston, a Republican Member, chaired our committee, and the gentleman from Maryland (Mr. Cardin) was our ranking member on the task force that wrote the rules that we have been talking about this evening.

They were very important. We came together in a bipartisan way, hammered out all of the challenges that Members proposed, and came up with bipartisanship. When we did that, we were acting in the tradition of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in the House of Representatives, bipartisan in nature in terms of writing the rules and in implementing them.

My friends, we all should be deeply indebted to all of the Members who have served on the bipartisan Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Anyone who has served on it will tell Members it is not an easy task, and one that any one of us would like to avoid. It is very hard to pass judgment on your peers.

What I learned on the committee was that there are only three things that matter in the discussion: the facts, the rules of the House, and the law of the land. Anything else, discussion, hearsay and the rest of it was irrelevant to the decision-making. So in a bipartisan way, friendships were developed, we worked together. Members are down in the lower levels of the Capitol for long, long hours; and it was sometimes very difficult and sad to make those judgments. We deliberated; we exchanged ideas. Indeed, we even prayed over our decisions because we knew what impact they would have on the lives of our colleagues.

In short, we took our responsibility to act in a bipartisan way very, very seriously. And so should the committee regarding the rules that we will be returning to now. They should be taken in the most serious way. I hope when we vote on these rules tonight, we will have a big vote and that big vote will show not only our support for this resolution but our respect for the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct and its need to act in a bipartisan way.

One concern that I do have that has not been addressed is something that has happened not by a rules change but by a practice, a one-time practice.

Mr. Speaker, this book is called the ``House Rules and Manual,'' and it determines how we function in the House and how each of the committees functions. This rule says here: ``All staff members shall be appointed by an affirmative vote of a majority of the committee.'' The rules governing staffing have been the standing rules of the House since the bipartisan task force recommendations were adopted in the 105th Congress, in the 106th Congress, the 107th Congress, the 108th Congress, and they are indeed the rules of the House now even without action being taken tonight.

Central to a bipartisan upholding of a high ethical standard is nonpartisan staffing of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Certainly the Chair and the ranking member have their staff person for liaison purposes to the committee, but the work of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct must be done in a nonpartisan way. Those are the rules of the House. They must be upheld. They have been departed from in this Congress.

I would hope that it is implied in what we do here that the intent of Congress is to obey the rules of the House. If any Member has a different view of the intent of Congress regarding the hiring of staff for the committee in a nonpartisan way, I think that Member should speak up now because the intent of Congress should be clear, unequivocal, and not controversial.

I want to commend those that served during the 108th Congress, and especially the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley); and I agree with the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Hefley) whole-heartedly: if there are rules changes that need to be made, let us subject these rules to the scrutiny that Members feel they should have, and let us do it in a bipartisan way.

In fact, on at least two, maybe three, occasions, I have brought that very proposal to the floor in a privileged resolution by saying, ``let us form a bipartisan task force to examine the rules and see how we go forward.'' We can still do that, but we cannot do it until these rules are in place for the committee to function and then to review them.

I commend the gentleman from West Virginia (Mr. Mollohan) and am so proud of the dignified, serious way he approached his responsibilities to upholding a high ethical standard. And the gentleman from Washington (Mr. Hastings) is absolutely right, we will not compromise ever on the integrity of the House. I support the gentleman's statement and associate myself with the gentleman's statement in that regard.

And as we return to bipartisanship in upholding a high ethical standard in the House, let us also heed the voice of the American people who want us to return to bipartisan cooperation in growing our economy so we can create good-paying jobs in our country. Let us expand access to affordable health care for all Americans. That is what the American people want us to do. Let us work in a bipartisan way to broaden opportunities for our children so no child is left behind and so our children can go to college without going into crushing debt.

Let us listen to the American people who want us to work in a bipartisan way to truly protect our homeland, to strengthen Social Security; and let us listen to the American people when they say, ``we need relief at the pump now. We cannot pay these high prices at the pump. We cannot pay these high prices at the pharmacy.''

I contend that ethics impact policy. Certainly a high ethical standard is its own excuse for being. Integrity of the House should be unquestioned, and part of our responsibility is to uphold that ethical standard. But ethics does impact policy. The American people must believe that we are working in this House in the public interest and not in the special interest. A higher ethical standard is essential to creating policy which is consistent with our values.

And so I support this resolution, and I urge our colleagues all to vote for it and hope that the strong vote that it will receive will not only speak to the resolution but speak to the respect that we all have for the ethics process, for the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, for upholding a high ethical standard, and for saying not any one of us is above the law.

http://thomas.loc.gov

arrow_upward