[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 198 (Wednesday, December 13, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E2352-E2353]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                          CIVILITY IN CONGRESS

                                 ______


                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, December 13, 1995

  Mr. HAMILTON of Indiana. Mr. Speaker, I would like to insert my 
Washington report for Wednesday, December 6, 1995, into the 
Congressional Record.

                          Civility in Congress

       In his recent press conference announcing why he would not 
     be a candidate for President, Colin Powell mentioned the 
     ``incivility that exists in political life today''. He's 
     right. In national politics and in Congress we have seen a 
     clear decline of basic civility. This year in Congress there 
     have been mean personal attacks, shouting across the aisle, 
     shoving matches, hissing and booing, and Members going out of 
     their way to antagonize those of the other party. Press 
     accounts have described the situation in Congress as 
     ``nasty'', ``full-scale partisan warfare'', and ``the 
     politics of poison''. Partisan tensions are as bad as I can 
     remember. As one senior Member recently noted, ``Boy, it's 
     mean out there.''
       President Clinton recently called for more mutual respect 
     in public discourse, echoing the sentiments of President Bush 
     who called for an end to the ``climate of ugliness'' on 
     Capitol Hill. The situation certainly isn't as bad as in 
     other countries where we see brawls and fistfights breaking 
     out among members of parliament, but it does merit some 
     attention.


                          Hinders Legislation

       The bitter, contentious exchanges in Congress certainly do 
     not reflect well on the institution, lead to public cynicism, 
     and make the job of legislating more difficult. As Thomas 
     Jefferson stated, ``It is very material that order, decency, 
     and regularity be preserved in a dignified public body.'' 
     Excessive partisan bickering poisons the atmosphere of 
     Congress and hurts the ability of Members to come together to 
     pass legislation for the good of the country. In a democracy 
     like ours, the willingness of Members of Congress to listen 
     and to talk to each other in a civil way is essential to our 
     ability to reach a consensus on the difficult policy issues 
     facing our nation--from balancing the budget to sending 
     troops to Bosnia.
       Certainly spirited debate is appropriate for the many 
     important policy questions before Congress. Members have 
     strong feelings on particular issues, and naturally get upset 
     when they believe that programs very important to their 
     constituents are being gutted or when they feel the other 
     side is putting up unnecessary roadblocks to their 
     legislative agenda. But Members can carry the legitimate 
     debate too far and argue in ways that undermine serious 
     policy deliberation.


                              Past History

       The problem of a breakdown of civility in Congress is 
     certainly not a new one. In past years, especially during 
     periods of national turmoil such as the Civil War or the 
     civil rights movement, there have been major breakdowns in 
     decorum. Over the years, Members have been formally punished 
     by the House for making statements such as describing another 
     Member as one ``who is the champion of fraud, who is the 
     apologist of thieves, and who is such a prodigy of vice and 
     meanness that to describe him would sicken imagination and 
     exhaust invective''. Heated debate at times led to 
     fistfights, pistol duels, and, a frequent response in earlier 
     days, hitting another Member over the head with a cane.


                              Enforcement

       Congress has two basic ways of disciplining Members for 
     inappropriate speech. If the remarks occur during debate on 
     the House floor, another Member can object and request that 
     the speaker's ``words be taken down''. If the words are ruled 
     inappropriate by the Chair, the speaker either can withdraw 
     the statement or be prohibited from speaking on the floor for 
     the remainder of the day. Broader enforcement can come from 
     the House Standards of Official Conduct Committee--the House 
     ethics committee--which has been given wide-ranging powers to 
     punish Members for any actions which do not ``reflect 
     creditably on the House of Representatives''. Formal charges 
     could be filed against a Member, and the Standards Committee 
     could recommend a range of sanctions. In the past, Members 
     have been formally censured by the full House for disorderly 
     words spoken in debate.


                                Remedies

       The vast majority of the contacts between Members of 
     Congress are civil and courteous. But there are intemperate 
     exchanges--often getting extensive media coverage--which hurt 
     the ability of the institution to properly function. Several 
     steps would be helpful in minimizing them.
       First, the Standards of Official Conduct Committee should 
     issue an advisory opinion to all Members of Congress spelling 
     out to them what are the proper limits of discourse and what 
     are the consequences of going beyond the limits. The 
     Standards Committee has a separate Office of Advice and 
     Education which was set up specifically for such an advisory 
     role to help head off misconduct before it occurs.
       Second, we need more consistent enforcement by the Chair 
     and by the Standards Committee. Rulings by the Chair can be 
     spotty and inconsistent, and the rules requiring penalties 
     for improper remarks have at times been waived. The Standards 
     Committee has failed to act on some fairly egregious cases of 
     improper speech in recent years.
       Third, outside groups can be helpful watchdogs in keeping 
     an eye on Members' statements. A bipartisan group like the 
     Former Members of Congress, for example, could play a useful 
     role in monitoring and publicizing proper and improper 
     discourse on the floor.
       Fourth, we need tougher enforcement by the voters. At times 
     a Member of Congress might rise to prominence through a 
     negative, confrontational style. If other Members think the 
     nasty approach to politics works, they will emulate it. The 
     voters need to send a clear signal that negative and nasty 
     doesn't work.
       Finally, Members must take it upon themselves to uphold 
     appropriate standards of debate. In the end, it is up to each 
     of us in Congress to set the proper tone and to work with our 
     colleagues to maintain decorum.


                               conclusion

       Breakdowns in civility in Congress can reflect the passions 
     of the moment, the polarizing nature of the policy issues, or 
     even a less civil tone in the larger society. But that is no 
     excuse for letting particularly intemperate and inflammatory 
     speech go unchecked. Reining in the excesses can go a long 
     way toward improving the ability of Congress to tackle the 
     tough legislative agenda before us.
       (Information was taken from a Congressional Research 
     Service report, ``Decorum in House Debate'')
     
[[Page E2353]]


                       SENATE COMMITTEE MEETINGS

  Title IV of Senate Resolution 4, agreed to by the Senate on February 
4, 1977, calls for establishment of a system for a computerized 
schedule of all meetings and hearings of Senate committees, 
subcommittees, joint committees, and committees of conference. This 
title requires all such committees to notify the Office of the Senate 
Daily Digest--designated by the Rules Committee--of the time, place, 
and purpose of the meetings, when scheduled, and any cancellations or 
changes in the meetings as they occur.
  As an additional procedure along with the computerization of this 
information, the Office of the Senate Daily Digest will prepare this 
information for printing in the Extensions of Remarks section of the 
Congressional Record on Monday and Wednesday of each week.
  Meetings scheduled for Thursday, December 14, 1995, may be found in 
the Daily Digest of today's Record.

                           MEETINGS SCHEDULED

                              DECEMBER 15
     9:30 a.m.
       Labor and Human Resources
         To hold hearings on proposed legislation to amend 
           provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act relating to 
           the minimum wage.
                                                            SD-430
     2:00 p.m.
       Foreign Relations
         To hold hearings on Eric James Boswell, of California, to 
           be Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, and 
           Anthony Cecil Eden Quainton, of the District of 
           Columbia, to be Director General of the Foreign 
           Service, both of the Department of State.
                                                            SD-419

                              DECEMBER 19
     10:00 a.m.
       Judiciary
         To hold hearings to examine trends in youthful drug use.
                                                            SD-226
     2:00 p.m.
       Judiciary
         To hold hearings on pending nominations.
                                                            SD-226