[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 194 (Thursday, December 7, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S18249-S18250]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           MAKING TECHNICAL CHANGES TO SENATE RESOLUTION 158

  Mr. HELMS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate 
proceed to the immediate consideration of Senate Resolution 198 
submitted earlier today by Senators Lott and McCain.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will report.
  The assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       A resolution (S. Res. 198) to make certain technical 
     changes to S. Res. 158.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the immediate 
consideration of the resolution?
  There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the 
resolution.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Under current Senate rules, a Member, officer, or 
employee may accept travel reimbursement from a foreign government or 
foreign educational or charitable organization. Will a Member, officer, 
or employee be permitted to continue participating in such programs 
under the new gift rule?
  Mr. LEVIN. Yes. The new gift rule, effective January 1, 1996, will, 
however, change the current approval process. Now, a Member, officer, 
or employee must receive prior approval of the Ethics Committee in 
order to participate in such travel. After January 1, the Member, 
officer, or employee will no longer be required to seek authorization 
from the Ethics Committee. An employee, however, must obtain 
authorization from the Member or officer for whom he or she works.
  Mr. McCONNELL. So the absence of a separate section in the new gift 
rule addressing foreign-sponsored travel does not mean foreign-
sponsored travel has been prohibited?
  Mr. LEVIN. To the contrary, foreign-sponsored travel is treated like 
any other travel: so long as it is in connection with the duties of the 
Member, officer, or employee; it is not substantially recreational in 
nature; it is not provided by a registered lobbyist or foreign agent; 
and it is properly disclosed, and authorized, in the case of an 
employee, reimbursement for expenses connected with such travel may be 
accepted.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I appreciate the clarification.
  Section 1(c)(9) of the new gift rule creates an exception from the 
gift limitation for informational material sent to a Senate office. The 
current practice in the Senate also permits the receipt of 
informational material with some limitations. First, the material must 
be provided by the person or entity which produces, publishes, or 
creates the informational material. Second, current practice also 
permits those who produce, publish, or create the material to provide a 
set of books, tapes, or discs. For example, several years ago PBS 
provided each Senator with a set of video tapes of its series, ``The 
Civil War.'' However, the Senate does not permit a Senator to accept a 
collection of materials, such as a specialized reporting service or 
other collections issues periodically. For example, a Member could not 
receive a set of encyclopedias, or the U.S. Code Annotated. Is it the 
intent to incorporate these limitations within the new gift rule?
  Mr. LEVIN. Yes, the exception for informational materials is intended 
to foster communication with the Senate. Items such as books, tapes, 
and magazine subscriptions may continue to be received in the office, 
so long as they were provided by the author, publisher, or producer and 
so long as the informational materials did not constitute a specialized 
reporting service or other collection of the type you have described.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I thank the Senator for the clarification. The new 
gift rule contains an exception for employments benefits, such as a 
pension plan. It permits a Member, officer, or employee to participate 
in an employee welfare and benefits plan maintained by a former 
employer. Current Senate rules and practice also permit such continued 
participation, with one limitation. To the extent a Member, officer, or 
employee participates in such a plan of a former employer, the 
participant may not accept continued contributions from that former 
employer. Is it intended that the new gift rule incorporate this 
current Senate practice?

  Mr. LEVIN. Yes, I say to the Senator. It is our intent that a Member, 
officer, or employee be permitted to maintain his or her participation 
in a plan, but not to receive continued contributions from a former 
employer.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I appreciate the clarification.
  Mr. LEVIN. Madam President, I rise to clarify that the resolution we 
are about to pass contains only technical 

[[Page S 18250]]
clarifications of the Senate gift rule and would not in any way alter 
the substance or the intent of that rule.
  This technical corrections measure would correct an erroneous cross 
reference in the text of the gift rule and make three minor corrections 
to the text of the Brown amendment on reporting of income and assets.
  It would also clarify that the personal friendship exception, which 
by its terms applies to ``anything'' accepted on the basis of personal 
friendship under the circumstances described, would cover personal 
hospitality provided by a friend. This clarification is being made 
because of confusion over the relationship between the personal 
friendship exception and the personal hospitality exception. In my 
view, the exception for ``anything'' provided on the basis of personal 
friendship already covers personal hospitality, so this clarification 
would not change either the substance or the intent of the rule.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I appreciate all of the work of the 
Ethics Committee staff and others to ensure that the tough new gift 
restrictions scheduled to go into effect January 1, 1996, will not have 
any technical problems associated with their implementation. The Ethics 
Committee has provided very useful technical guidance, and I believe 
that its effort to clarify questions now will generally improve the 
effective implementation of the new rule.
  I do, however, have a concern about one interpretation described by 
Senator McConnell and Levin, and wanted to outline that concern for the 
record. In one of the several colloquies between Senator Levin and 
Senator McConnell designed to provide interpretive guidance to the 
Ethics Committee, a question is raised about the exception regarding 
informational materials provided to Senators and staff. This exchange 
is designed to ensure that acceptance of sets of books, such as 
encyclopedias or the annotated U.S. Code, would continue under the new 
rule to be prohibited--as is true under current Senate practice. This 
exchange is an effort to apply a tough, narrow interpretative standard 
to this provision, and I support its intent.
  However, it might be inferred from the statements in the colloquy 
that the provision of all videotape--or even CD or audiotape--sets 
should be exempted from the new rule. An example is offered by Senator 
McConnell of a series of videotapes produced by the Public Broadcasting 
Service--its much-acclaimed series on the Civil War--which years ago 
was permitted, under current rules, to be given to Members of Congress. 
One can imagine other examples of such videotape sets being offered to 
Senators, such as the recent PBS series on baseball, which might be 
treated similarly under current rules.
  It is true current Senate rules would not prohibit members from 
receiving such taped sets. However, I have always understood the intent 
of the informational materials exception in the new rule to be to 
foster free and unfettered communication with Members of the Senate and 
staff, allowing them to accept information that is generally designed 
to inform their legislative or other policy work.
  In my judgment, a television entertainment series on the Civil War, 
or on the history of baseball, or on a similar topic, should generally 
be considered in a different light than other informational material 
that might, for example, help legislators form judgments about OSHA 
reform, the EPA, or some other topic. Thus such sets of videotapes 
should be considered gifts subject to the limits contained in the new 
rule. I believe the Ethics Committee should make judgments about how to 
interpret and apply this provision on a case-by-case basis, considering 
a number of factors in its interpretation, including most importantly 
the public policy nature of the informational material and its 
usefulness in informing legislators on appropriate issues.
  While the technical amendments do not address this issue, this 
question has been raised now and I thought it would be useful to offer 
my own views for the further guidance of the Committee. I urge the 
Committee to consider carefully its interpretation of this provision. I 
will monitor closely the implementation of the rule in this area to 
ensure that it does not allow a loophole to develop that may be subject 
to abuse. If such abuse were to take place, I intend to move quickly to 
stop it.
  Mr. HELMS. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
resolution be agreed to, and the motion to reconsider be laid upon the 
table, and that any statements relating to the resolution appear at the 
appropriate place in the Record.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  So the resolution (S. Res. 198) was agreed to, as follows:

                              S. Res. 198

       Resolved, That (a) paragraph 1(c) of rule XXXV of the 
     Standing Rules of the Senate (as added by section 1 of S. 
     Res. 158, agreed to July 28, 1995) is amended--
       (1) in clause (3) by striking ``section 107(2) of title I 
     the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (Public Law 95-521)'' 
     and inserting ``section 109(16) of title I of the Ethics 
     Reform Act of 1989 (5 U.S.C. App. 6)''; and
       (2) in clause (4)(A) by inserting ``, including personal 
     hospitality,'' after ``Anything''.
       (b) Paragraph 3 of rule XXXIV of the Standing Rules of the 
     Senate (as added by section 2(a) of S. Res. 158, agreed to 
     July 28, 1995) is amended--
       (1) in the matter before clause (a) by striking ``paragraph 
     2'' and inserting ``paragraph 1''; and
       (2) in clause (b) by striking ``income'' and inserting 
     ``value''.
       (c) Paragraph 4 of rule XXXIV of the Standing Rules of the 
     Senate (as added by section 2(b)(1) of S. Res. 158, agreed to 
     July 28, 1995) is amended by striking ``paragraph 2'' and 
     inserting ``paragraph 1''.

                          ____________________