The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4975, LOBBYING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2006” mentioning the U.S. Dept. of Justice was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H1874-H1877 on April 27, 2006.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4975, LOBBYING ACCOUNTABILITY AND
TRANSPARENCY ACT OF 2006
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, by direction of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 783 and ask for its immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:
H. Res. 783
Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the bill (H.R. 4975) to provide greater transparency with respect to lobbying activities, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the Majority Leader and the Minority Leader or their designees. After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. In lieu of the amendments recommended by the Committees on the Judiciary, Rules, and Government Reform now printed in the bill, the amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of the Rules Committee Print dated April 21, 2006, modified by the amendment printed in part A of the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, shall be considered as adopted in the House and the Committee of the Whole. The bill, as amended, shall be considered as the original bill for the purpose of further amendment and shall be considered as read. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no further amendment to the bill, as amended, shall be in order except those printed in part B of the report of the Committee on Rules. Each further amendment may be offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such further amendments are waived. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the bill, as amended, to the House with such further amendments as may have been adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
Sec. 2. In the engrossment of H.R. 4975, the Clerk shall--
(1) add the text of H.R. 513, as passed by the House, as new matter at the end of H.R. 4975;
(2) conform the title of H.R. 4975 to reflect the addition of the text of H.R. 513 to the engrossment;
(3) assign appropriate designations to provisions within the engrossment; and
(4) conform provisions for short titles within the engrossment.
Sec. 3. After passage of H.R. 4975, it shall be in order to take from the Speaker's table S. 2349 and to consider the Senate bill in the House. All points of order against consideration of the Senate bill are waived. It shall be in order to move to strike all after the enacting clause of the Senate bill and to insert in lieu thereof the provisions of H.R. 4975 (as engrossed pursuant to section 2 of this resolution). All points of order against that motion are waived. If the motion is adopted and the Senate bill, as amended, is passed, then it shall be in order to move that the House insist on its amendment to the Senate bill and request a conference with the Senate thereon.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from California (Mr. Dreier) is recognized for 1 hour.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, for the purpose of debate only, I yield the customary 30 minutes to the gentlewoman from New York (Ms. Slaughter), pending which I yield myself such time as I may consume. During consideration of this resolution, all time yielded is for the purpose of debate only.
Mr. Speaker, as we all know very well, a few recent disgraceful scandals involving members of both political parties have cast a pall over the American people's faith in their Congress. The actions of a few have undermined our effectiveness and shaken the trust of our constituents.
Bold, responsible, commonsense reform of our current lobbying and ethics laws is clearly needed. We owe it to our constituents. We owe it to ourselves. We owe it to this institution. This is not a partisan issue. Let me say once again, Mr. Speaker, this is not a partisan issue. It is an issue that goes to the integrity of the United States Congress, and every single Member has a stake in it.
When Speaker Hastert and I kicked off the effort for lobbying and ethics reforms in January, we promised an exhaustive and bipartisan process. Mr. Speaker, that is exactly what has happened. Members were asked for their suggestions. All ideas were thrown on the table. And, Mr. Speaker, every idea was considered. In fact, we had hoped to have this bill on the floor earlier, but we were determined not to short-
circuit debate and this process. We wanted every idea and every provision to be fully and carefully deliberated.
At the Rules Committee we conducted three original jurisdiction hearings. We heard from 12 outside expert witnesses, and we took testimony from many Members. The bill moved through regular order, and five different committees held markups.
Mr. Speaker, this entire process has been thorough, deliberate, and bipartisan. It has included a tremendous amount of input from Members on both sides of the aisle, from our constituents, and from experts on this institution and from a number of outside organizations. We have followed a legislative path that is fitting for our goal of enhancing the integrity of this great institution. And, Mr. Speaker, I want to express my appreciation to my Democratic colleagues and to my Republican colleagues for their involvement and their input that they have had in this process.
Today we will consider the result of this nearly 4-month-long, bipartisan reform effort, H.R. 4975, the Lobbying Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006. This legislation aims to uphold the highest standards of integrity when it comes to Congress's interaction with outside groups. This legislation focuses on transparency and accountability.
{time} 1115
It makes it harder to abuse the rules and easier to enforce them. It focuses, Mr. Speaker, on bright lines of right and wrong and tough consequences for crossing those lines.
With every single provision, we are erring on the side of integrity. We are focusing on the need for the highest level of integrity. And with every single provision, we take an approach of the more information the better.
Specifically, lobbyists will be required to file their disclosure forms more often, with more detail and online.
This bill fulfills the public's right to know who is seeking to influence Congress. Putting lobbyist disclosure reports on the Internet will empower voters and improve oversight much more effectively than adding pages to the already thick book of rules. Unlike today, when lobbyist reports are hard to find and hard to follow, this bill will make the information easy to access, easy to search and easy to sort on the Web.
We have also added tough consequences for not playing by the rules. The penalties for lobbyists who fail to disclose have been doubled from
$50,000 to $100,000, and a criminal penalty provision has been added. Knowingly and willfully failing to comply with the provisions of the act could result in up to 3 years in prison.
And because these reports are only meaningful if they contain accurate information, we have increased oversight. The House Inspector General will perform random audits of reports and is empowered to refer violations by lobbyists to the Department of Justice for prosecution.
H.R. 4975 also reforms the earmark process by building on the procedural reforms being implemented by the Appropriations Committee, reforms, Mr. Speaker, that under the leadership of Chairman Jerry Lewis have seen a reduction of earmarks by 37 percent.
As it stands now, earmarks can be added to bills anonymously and without debate. This fuels public mistrust and encourages inflated spending in Congress. This bill requires sponsors of earmarks to be listed in appropriations bills. It also allows a point of order to be brought against appropriation bills and conference reports that do not include a list of earmarks and their sponsors. Mr. Speaker, if a Member feels strongly enough about a proposed earmark, they need to be willing to attach their name to it.
I have to say, Mr. Speaker, that I feel very strongly about this, and I will not be supportive of a conference report that comes back on this issue that does not include broad earmark reform, including not only appropriations, but the authorizing process as well.
H.R. 4975 enhances disclosure with regard to Members who seek jobs in the private sector. The bill requires more transparency during employment compensation negotiations to avoid the perception and possibility of unethical behavior.
This legislation takes a tough line on privately funded travel by banning it for the remainder of the 109th Congress. Many privately funded trips are serious, educational, and valuable. Some are not. We need to arrive at reform that allows Members to get out from under the Capitol dome, while at the same time draw the line on trivial junkets.
There are strong opinions on this provision. Many Democrats, including those with whom I serve on the Rules Committee, do not want a travel ban. But there is widespread agreement that the current system is ripe for abuse and needs to be tightened. In fact, there is a strong bipartisan amendment to address this issue, and again we will have a very rigorous debate and a number of amendments that will be considered that will address concerns like the issue of travel.
Another important piece of this reform package concerns pensions of former Members convicted of specific crimes committed while serving in Congress.
Mr. Speaker, under this bill, if Members commit crimes, such as bribery or fraud, they lose the government's contributions to their congressional pension. Taxpayers should not be forced to subsidize the retirement of former Members who are convicted of crimes.
Finally, because one of the primary aims of this legislation is to increase accountability, we have greatly enhanced ethics training for staff and Members. Our aim is for everyone to know and understand the rules and the guidelines. Member and staff familiarity with ethics requirements will go a long way toward making sure rules are not broken in the first place.
Mr. Speaker, this legislation is the product of intensive study and deliberation. It is bold; it covers a lot of ground; and it restores balance to a system that has and was being abused.
We have done all of this while making sure that we protect the first amendment right of every American to petition their government. Input from constituents and advocates is essential for effective governing, and I am confident that as we seek to level the playing field and facilitate open government, we have not undermined the constitutionally protected right for the public to interact with their elected leaders.
Mr. Speaker, as with all legislation that reaches the floor, compromises have been made along the way that reflect the will of both Democrats and Republicans. Every attempt to address Members' concerns has been made over the past 4 months. I should also note that this rule will provide the opportunity for, as I said, further debate on amendments that deal with some of the larger issues that have been brought forward.
Now, despite this outreach and attempt to find consensus, I am fully aware that some misgivings about specific provisions remain. I would simply ask each Member to look at the bill as a whole and answer these questions: Does this bill increase transparency? Does it increase accountability? Does it put more information in the hands of the American people? Does it protect the first amendment right of citizens to petition their government? And does it strengthen the integrity of the United States Congress?
I am absolutely convinced that the answer to every single one of those questions is an overwhelming ``yes.'' This bill is a vast improvement over the status quo.
Mr. Speaker, today, Members of the House can show that our desires for meaningful reform and for upholding the integrity of Congress are stronger than partisan divisions and political calculations. We have the opportunity and we have the duty to turn our voices for reform into votes for reform.
I urge my colleagues to vote for an ethical and effective Congress that is worthy of the public trust. I urge support for the rule and the underlying legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, after an interminable era of scandal, this Congress was given the greatest opportunity in a generation to change the way business is done in Washington. We were given a chance to truly make a difference and to do something lasting. We were given the chance to help the citizens of this Nation believe in their government once again.
But that chance has been squandered, because this Congress has failed. And in so doing, the hypocrisy and cynicism displayed today by the majority of the House will be neither missed nor forgotten by the American people.
We have before us the Lobbying Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006. It is supposed to be a reform bill. But you can't be bold enough to reform if you don't muster the courage to address the problems.
The corruption of this Republican-led Congress is beyond debate. The American people don't trust it anymore. Fewer than 30 percent approve the job it is doing. The only remaining question was how the members of the leadership were going to respond, how committed were they going to be to reforming their bankrupt philosophy of government?
This rule and this bill give us the all-too predictable answer to this burning question: This leadership doesn't want reform, and they just aren't going to allow it.
As virtually every outside observer has noted in recent days, this legislation is a sham. It won't do anything to reduce influence peddling in Washington or to purge this body of the corruption that has infected it so deeply.
I know we are going to hear much more on this later, but what I really want my fellow Americans to focus on right now is something just as telling as the contents of this bill, and that is the process by which it was created.
As I and my Democratic colleagues have said again and again throughout the entire Congress, a corrupt legislative process produces corrupt legislation. If bills are written and changed behind closed doors, then there will be no way to know what is hidden in them. If amendments to bills are rejected, not because of their contents, but because of the party they come from, then democracy will have been denied.
If the Members of the body are committed to undermining the two-
centuries-old rules of the House, they are also intent on undermining the will and the needs of the citizens of this country. And so it has been with this rule, and with this bill.
When the bill faced an original jurisdiction markup on April 5, Democrats presented numerous amendments to it in an attempt to actually give it some substance, and all of these amendments were defeated on a party-line vote.
During its markup, the Judiciary Committee was the only body that adopted any bipartisan amendments on this legislation. Democrats successfully introduced amendments in the Judiciary Committee requiring lobbyists to disclose more of their activities, such as fund-raisers for candidates and parties that they fund honoring Members of Congress.
But the bill we thought we had when we left for recess 2 weeks ago is not the one we saw when we came back. Most of the amendments accepted by the Judiciary Committee had mysteriously disappeared while we were away. The one that survived was done away with last night, a self-
executing rule. The majority decided to do this on their own, without telling anyone and while nobody was looking. It was an indefensible abuse of power.
My Democrat colleagues and I also offered a substitute to this bill that addressed the many errors it is silent on. Among its many components, our legislation would establish a new Office of Public Integrity to audit and to investigate compliance with lobbying disclosure rules, because it doesn't matter if you have transparency if no one is enforcing the rules and making sure that they comply.
It would have prevented special interest provisions from being added into bills in the dead of night by requiring all legislation to be made public 24 hours before it is voted on.
Last night in the Rules Committee, my Republican friends had one last chance to open up the process and allow some real debate on the bill. But in typical fashion, they blocked a host of significant amendments, including 20 of the 21 amendments submitted by Democrats. They wouldn't allow our tougher substitute on the bill to even be considered, which means, frankly, that half of the country is disenfranchised in this debate today and we are only able to debate this hollow sham of a reform bill.
So I ask my friends in the majority, what kind of reform is that? What conclusions are you asking the American people to draw from this kind of behavior? When you don't even allow the body to consider and debate alternative approaches to reforming Congress, what are you hiding from? When you subvert our democratic process and at the same time pretend to be the party of reform, how can you possibly expect us to trust you any longer? When your leadership doesn't even have faith in the legislative process, how can the American people have faith in them?
Lobbyists are not the reason our Congress no longer works for working Americans. Congress is the problem. No lobbyist can get into the room unless a Member allows it.
We heard so much in January about reform that was coming. But here we are, 4 months later, doing exactly the same thing and producing exactly the same result: bad bills passed through a broken House; bills just like this one, that have a catchy name but don't deliver what they promise; bills that aren't written for the people of the Nation, but rather for special interests.
No wonder the American people are so angry. Their congressional leadership is so clearly out of touch. Every member of the majority should be ashamed of this bill today. At least then you will have something in common with the American people that you profess to serve.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to yield 2 minutes to my colleague, the gentleman from California (Mr. Royce).
Mr. ROYCE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule. This legislation, while not perfect, is a step in the right direction. What it does is begin to draw brighter lines for Members and for staff and for lobbyists and the public. It increases oversight, and it increases accountability.
The bill also addresses earmarks. Too often earmarks are placed in legislation at the behest of lobbyists, many times at the last minute to avoid scrutiny. This bill would require that lists of earmarks in legislation be made public before votes on bills or conference reports, and that any Member could bring a point of order against the list of earmarks and subject it to a 30-minute debate.
{time} 1130
Reform would be meaningless without changes in the way earmarks are handled. We need fiscal restraint. We need common sense when it comes to the budget.
The future of all Americans depends on an economy free of crippling deficits, free of crippling tax hikes, and free of a skyrocketing national debt. The extent of which earmarks unnecessarily burden the American taxpayers is unprecedented. Last year's earmarks amounted to nearly $100 for every man, woman and child in America.
While lobbying reform is necessary to preserve the integrity of our government, earmark reform is vital to our long-term fiscal well-being. Bringing earmarks to the light of day will promote fiscal responsibility, and it is going to promote more effective government as well.
So, Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the rule for lobbying reform.
Ms. SLAUGHTER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. McGovern).
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. Speaker, this is a sad day for the United States House of Representatives. This rule, quite frankly, is an insult to every single Member of this body. This rule should be open, and instead this rule is typically restrictive. This rule should be defeated.
The underlying bill, contrary to what you have heard here today, is not a reflection of bipartisan deliberation, because the truth is that deliberation is all but dead in this House. What everyone knows, and this leadership does not want to acknowledge, is that there is a direct connection between the corruption that has become so commonplace and the breakdown of the deliberative process.
The sweetheart deals for special interests, liability protection for big drug companies, tax breaks for big oil companies at a time when these companies are gouging Americans at the pump, they get slipped into bills without the knowledge of the majority in this House, Democrat and Republican. Why? Because the Rules Committee regularly waives the rules that requires that Members have at least 3 days to review the legislation.
They waive the rules that allow us to read the bill before it comes to the floor. Conference committees meet in secret. Big-ticket items are even put into bills after conference committees are closed. You can pass all the rules you want, but if you don't follow them, what good are they?
The Rules Committee did hold a series of hearings on this bill, and speaker after speaker expressed their concerns with the way this House is being run. And yet the underlying bill does nothing to open up the process. The underlying bill does nothing to shine some light on this corrupt process. Nothing will change as a result of this bill. Norm Ornstein, the congressional scholar, testified before the Rules Committee and he said, the problem goes beyond corrupt lobbyists or the relationship between lobbyists and lawmakers. It gets to a legislative process that has lost the transparency, accountability and deliberation that are at the core of the American system.
The failure to abide by basic rules and norms has contributed, I believe, to a loss of sensitivity among many Members and leaders about what is and what is not appropriate. Three-hour votes, 1,000-page-plus bills sprung on the floor with no notice, conference reports changed in the dead of night, self-executing rules that suppress debate along with an explosion of closed rules are just a few of the practices that have become common and are a distortion of regular order, and yet this bill does not even address any of those issues.
I would say to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, if you want to show some bipartisanship, if you want to promote a process that has some integrity, this should be an open rule. All Members should have an opportunity to come here and offer amendments to this bill to improve the quality of deliberations on this House floor. They should be able to come and to offer amendments to clean this place up.
This rule is an outrage. Of all of the bills that we have considered here, if any one of them deserves an open rule, it is this. This is about the rules that govern this House. Vote ``no'' on this rule.
Mr. DREIER. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw the pending resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bonner). The resolution is withdrawn.
____________________
