[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 80 (Tuesday, June 4, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H5789-H5792]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
OFFICE OF GOVERNMENT ETHICS AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1996
Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 3235) to amend the Ethics in Government Act of
1978, to extend the authorization of appropriations for the Office of
Government Ethics for 3 years, and for other purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3235
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Office of Government Ethics
Authorization Act of 1996''.
SEC. 2. GIFT ACCEPTANCE AUTHORITY.
Section 403 of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 (5
U.S.C. App. 5) is amended--
(1) by inserting ``(a)'' before ``Upon the request''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(b)(1) The Director is authorized to accept and utilize
on behalf of the United States, any gift, donation, bequest,
or devise of money, use of facilities, personal property, or
services for the purpose of aiding or facilitating the work
of the Office of Government Ethics.
``(2) No gift may be accepted--
``(A) that attaches conditions inconsistent with applicable
laws or regulations; or
``(B) that is conditioned upon or will require the
expenditure of appropriated funds that are not available to
the Office of Government Ethics.
``(3) The Director shall establish written rules setting
forth the criteria to be used in determining whether the
acceptance of contributions of money, services, use of
facilities, or personal property under this subsection would
reflect unfavorably upon the ability of the Office of
Government Ethics, or any employee of such Office, to carry
out its responsibilities or official duties in a fair and
objective manner, or would compromise the integrity or the
appearance of the integrity of its programs or any official
involved in those programs.''.
SEC. 3. EXTENSION OF AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
The text of section 405 of the Ethics in Government Act of
1978 (5 U.S.C. App. 5) is amended to read as follows: ``There
are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title
such sums as may be necessary for each of fiscal years 1997
through 1999.''.
SEC. 4. REPEAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
(a) Repeal of Display Requirement.--The Act entitled ``An
Act to provide for the display of the Code of Ethics for
Government Service,'' approved July 3, 1980 (5 U.S.C. 7301
note), is repealed.
(b) Conforming Amendments.--
(1) FDIA.--Section 12(f)(3) of the Federal Deposit
Insurance Act (12 U.S.C. 1822(f)(3)) is amended by striking
``, with the concurrence of the Office of Government
Ethics,''.
(2) Ethics in government act of 1978.--(A) The heading for
section 401 of the Ethics in Government Act of 1978 is
amended to read as follows: ``establishment; appointment of
director''.
(B) Section 408 of such Act is amended by striking ``March
31'' and inserting ``April 30''.
SEC. 5. LIMITATION ON POSTEMPLOYMENT RESTRICTIONS.
Section 207(j) of title 18, United States Code, is amended
by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
``(7) Political parties and campaign committees.--(A)
Except as provided in subparagraph (B), the restrictions
contained in subsections (c), (d), and (e) shall not apply to
a communication or appearance made solely on behalf of a
candidate in his or her capacity as a candidate, an
authorized committee, a national committee, a national
Federal campaign committee, a State committee, or a political
party.
``(B) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to--
``(i) any communication to, or appearance before, the
Federal Election Commission by a former officer or employee
of the Federal Election Commission; or
``(ii) a communication or appearance made by a person who
is subject to the restrictions contained in subsections (c),
(d), or (e) if, at the time of the communication or
appearance, the person is employed by a person or entity
other than--
``(I) a candidate, an authorized committee, a national
committee, a national Federal campaign committee, a State
committee, or a political party; or
``(II) a person or entity who represents, aids, or advises
only persons or entities described in subclause (I).
``(C) For purposes of this paragraph--
``(i) the term `candidate' means any person who seeks
nomination for election, or election, to Federal or State
office or who has authorized others to explore on his or her
behalf the possibility of seeking nomination for election, or
election, to Federal or State office;
``(ii) the term `authorized committee' means any political
committee designated in writing by a candidate as authorized
to receive contributions or make expenditures to promote the
nomination for election, or the election, of such candidate,
or to explore the possibility of seeking nomination for
election, or the election, of such candidate, except that a
political committee that receives contributions or makes
expenditures to promote more than 1 candidate may not be
designated as an authorized committee for purposes of
subparagraph (A);
``(iii) the term `national committee' means the
organization which, by virtue of the bylaws of a political
party, is responsible for the day-to-day operation of such
political party at the national level;
``(iv) the term `national Federal campaign committee' means
an organization that, by virtue of the bylaws of a political
party, is established primarily for the purpose of providing
assistance, at the national level, to candidates nominated by
that party for election to the office of Senator or
Representative in, or Delegate or Resident Commissioner to,
the Congress;
``(v) the term `State committee' means the organization
which, by virtue of the bylaws of a political party, is
responsible for the day-to-day operation of such political
party at the State level;
``(vi) the term `political party' means an association,
committee, or organization that nominates a candidate for
election to any Federal or State elected office whose name
appears on the election ballot as the candidate of such
association, committee, or organization; and
``(vii) the term `State' means a State of the United
States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto
Rico, and any territory or possession of the United
States.''.
SEC. 6. PAY LEVEL.
Section 207(c)(2)(A)(ii) of title 18, United States Code,
is amended by striking ``level V of the Executive Schedule,''
and inserting ``level 5 of the Senior Executive Service,''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Florida [Mr. Canady] and the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. Frank]
will each be recognized for 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Canady].
general leave
Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend
their remarks on H.R. 3235, the bill under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Florida?
There was no objection.
{time} 1545
Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3235, the Office of Government
Ethics Authorization Act of 1996, which reauthorizes the Office of
Government Ethics for a period of 3 years. The Office of Government
Ethics was established in 1979 as the entity within the Office of
Personnel Management to administer executive branch policies relating
to financial disclosure, employee conduct, and conflict of interest
laws.
[[Page H5790]]
Congress authorized funding for the Office of Government Ethics in
1983 and 1988. The most recent authorization expired on October 1,
1994. H.R. 3235 reauthorizes the Office of Government Ethics through
fiscal year 1999.
The system of ethics in Government enacted by Congress is designed to
ensure that executive branch decisions are neither tainted nor appear
to be tainted by any questions of conflict of interest on the part of
the employees involved in those decisions. The Ethics in Government Act
states that the Office of Government Ethics is responsible for
providing overall direction of executive branch policies relating to
preventing conflicts of interest on the part of officers and employees
of any executive branch agency. Over time, the responsibilities of the
office have expanded by statute and executive order to include
providing interpretive guidance on, and administrative support for a
number of additional requirements related to employee conduct. These
functions comprise the ethics in government program of the executive
branch.
Section 2 of the bill under consideration authorizes the Director of
the Office of Government Ethics to accept gifts on behalf of that
agency. Federal departments and agencies are not permitted to accept
gifts unless they have specific statutory authority to do so. While the
Office of Government Ethics currently has no such authority, 19
executive branch agencies and departments do have gift acceptance
authority.
In testimony before the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Director
Potts stated that the office intends primarily to use its government
acceptance authority to support its education and training program in
carrying out the office's training mission. The office provides
multiagency ethics training sessions for Federal employees at locations
both in Washington, DC, and throughout the United States. Often there
is no Federal facility available that can provide adequate space and
services for such training sessions. The gift acceptance authority
contained in H.R. 3235 will allow the Office of Government Ethics to
accept donated non-Federal facilities which in the past have been
offered by State and local governments.
This gift acceptance authority includes the requirement that the
Director promulgate rules establishing criteria governing gift
acceptance to ensure the acceptance of any gift will not compromise the
integrity of the agency's programs or create unfavorable appearances.
It is the intention of the sponsor that these rules will safeguard
against even the appearance of a conflict of interest in the acceptance
of gifts by the Office of Government Ethics.
The 19 executive branch agencies and departments that have gift
acceptance authority are not required currently to prescribe
regulations governing the use of such authority. After the Director
promulgate regulations establishing a set of criteria governing gift
acceptance, these regulations will serve as a source of model guidance
to be used by departments and agencies.
H.R. 3235 also adds a new limitation on post-employment restrictions.
This provision will allow campaign related communications by former
government officials which are currently prohibited. Currently former
Members, staff, and certain executive branch employees are subject to a
blanket 1-year prohibition on communications to Members, staff, or the
employee's former executive branch agency, where the intent of the
communication is to influence the actions that individual's former
office. However, those individuals who wish to take a leave of absence
or resign from an office to work on a campaign are prohibited from
making anything more than ministerial communications with their former
office.
The purpose of the existing 1-year cooling-off period is to prohibit
an individual from pecuniary gain as a result of past relationships at
that individual's former office. However, in the case of a leave of
absence or resignation to work on a campaign, the issue is not one of
pecuniary gain from past office relationships. Instead, the issue is
one of allowing necessary communications integral to any campaign-
related employment. Therefore, where the intention of the former
employee is to participate in the electoral process subject to the
narrow exception established by the protection of this bill, the
revolving door restrictions of title 18 will no longer apply.
Finally, section 6 of the bill amends section 207(c) of title 18.
This amendment is necessary so that Senior Executive Service level 4
employees will not be subject to the post-employment restrictions of
section 207, which was the intention of the 1989 Ethics in Government
Act amendments. Section 6 amends the last clause of the definition of
``senior'' official in section 207(c) by tying the basic rate of pay to
a level equal to or greater than that of level 5 of the Senior
Executive Service.
Section 207(c) of title 18 was amended in 1989 to define ``senior''
officials in part as those officials serving in any position for which
the basic rate of pay is equal to or greater than that of an employee
serving in an Executive level 5 position. In 1989, the definition of
``senior'' officials encompassed individuals at levels 5 and 6 of the
Senior Executive Service.
The change made by section 6 of the bill is necessary because
Congress has chosen for purposes unrelated to post-employment
restrictions to freeze the rates of pay for positions on the Executive
Level Schedule. The rates of pay for positions in the Senior Executive
Service are set by the President through executive order. On January 7,
1996, Executive Order 12984 increased the basic rate of pay for a
Senior Executive Service level 4 employee to an amount above that of an
Executive Level 5 position. The result of this executive order is the
unintended consequence of Senior Executive Service level 4 employees
being subject to post-employment restrictions originally intended only
for Senior Executive Service level 5 and 6 employees.
Mr. Speaker, the Committee on the Judiciary reported H.R. 3235 by
voice vote. H.R. 3235 is the product of the combined efforts of the
majority and minority in the Judiciary Committee with the significant
input of the administration and the Office of Government Ethics. I
would particularly like to thank the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr.
Frank], the ranking member of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, for
his work on this legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself less time
than anyone else has taken today to express my appreciation for the
gentleman's kind remarks, my agreement with the substance.
Mr. HORN. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this legislation is to provide
the reauthorization of the Office of Government Ethics and its
activities. This extension and authorization would be for 3 years.
The Office of Government Ethics serves a useful function in assisting
executive branch officials and employees to assure that they conduct
their affairs in an atmosphere free of questions of improper influences
on the decisionmaking process.
At a time when the activities of executive branch officials and
employees are the subject of a number of inquiries, the Office of
Government Ethics must be aggressive in ensuring that the highest
standards of ethical conduct are followed by those the office is
designed to serve.
The Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and
Technology, which I chair, also has jurisdiction over this office. We
will work with Mr. Canady's subcommittee to monitor the Office of
Government Ethics' effectiveness in the performance of its mandate.
This legislation has bipartisan support. It deserves that support. I
congratulate Chairman Hyde and Chairman Canady on their work to bring
this matter to a vote.
Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of
my time.
Mr. CANADY of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my
time.
Mr. SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Upton). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Florida [Mr. Canady] that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3235.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
[[Page H5791]]
SENSE OF CONGRESS THAT SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE DISPOSE OF REMAINING
COMMODITIES IN DISASTER RESERVE
Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
agree to the concurrent resolution (H. Con. Res. 181) expressing the
Sense of Congress that the Secretary of Agriculture should dispose of
all remaining commodities in the disaster reserve maintained under the
Agricultural Act of 1970 to relieve the distress of livestock producers
whose ability to maintain livestock is adversely affected by the
prolonged drought conditions existing in certain areas of the United
States, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H. Con. Res. 181
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate
concurring), That, in light of the prolonged drought and
other adverse weather conditions existing in certain areas of
the United States, the Secretary of Agriculture should
promptly dispose of all commodities in the disaster reserve
maintained under section 813 of the Agricultural Act of 1970
(7 U.S.C. 1427a) to relieve the distress of livestock
producers whose ability to maintain livestock is adversely
affected by the disaster conditions, such as prolonged
drought or flooding.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Nebraska [Mr. Barrett] and the gentleman from Texas [Mr. Stenholm] each
will be recognized for 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Barrett].
Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this concurrent resolution expresses a sense of Congress
that the Secretary of Agriculture should dispose of all remaining
commodities in the disaster reserve. At the present time, the Commodity
Credit Corporation is holding approximately 45 million bushels of feed
grains, primarily corn, barley, and sorghum. Release of this grain
should help relieve the distress to livestock producers who are
adversely affected by the prolonged drought conditions which are
existing in certain areas of the United States.
Mr. Speaker, passage of this House concurrent resolution calling for
the release of Government-owned feed grain is very important for
several reasons. First, the drought is causing many areas of our
country their worst natural disaster of this century. Dry areas include
Texas, New Mexico, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, in particular. In some
of those areas, it is now being compared to the 1930s dust bowl.
Farmers who own livestock are being severely hit with the drought
conditions, especially when coupled with the low point in the cattle
cycle and record high grain prices.
The grain in this disaster reserve, nearly 45 million bushels, as I
said, is worth approximately $200 million and would provide for all the
cattle on feed in these affected States enough feed to feed them for
perhaps a little over 2 weeks.
Passage of House Concurrent Resolution 181 not only makes sense, it
saves money. The Federal Government is currently spending approximately
$10 million a year to store this grain.
In my opinion, the Government should not be paying huge storage fees
and holding grain from the marketplace when this country is
experiencing record low grain supplies.
This is an important concurrent resolution. I thank the leadership
for providing its swift consideration. The release of this grain across
the country should provide some temporary relief for our Nation's
livestock sector.
Support for the resolution shows that this Congress is aware of the
severe disaster taking place in drought regions across this country and
of course we are willing to use what resources we have to make the
situation just a little bit better.
I urge the adoption of House Concurrent Resolution 181.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of House Concurrent Resolution 181,
which has been introduced by my colleagues on the Agriculture
Committee, Mr. Barrett and Mr. Emerson. I applaud the actions of my
colleagues in this effort and am pleased to join them in bringing the
bill to the House floor this afternoon.
I would also like to note that the Clinton administration has been
working on a similar effort to make Government-owned feed grain stocks
available to hard-pressed livestock producers. I'm certain that
Secretary Glickman will welcome the support shown by this concurrent
resolution to continue this process.
There is no doubt that there is a need to alleviate the stress facing
producers in many parts of this country due to the severe drought in
the southern Plains and flooding and excessive rainfall in the northern
Plains and eastern corn belt. These natural disasters come at a time
when grain stocks are at their lowest levels in decades causing record
market prices and cattle producers are receiving even less for their
animals than during the Great Depression based on inflation-adjusted
dollars.
The release of this grain would be in addition to the actions already
taken by the Clinton administration to help alleviate the stress in the
livestock and crop sectors. These actions include release of
conservation reserve program acres for haying and grazing, extension of
noninsured crop disaster assistance program coverage, extension of the
livestock feed program, the release of additional funds for emergency
loans, advance purchases of beef for the school lunch program, and
export credit guarantees for meat.
In my own State of Texas we are facing devastation in the livestock
and crop sectors in the range of $6.5 billion and the summer has just
begun. Sixty-two percent of the rangeland in Texas is rated as being in
poor to very poor condition and producers are facing $374 million in
added feed costs for beef cows alone due to the deterioration of range
and pasture lands. Dairy producers in Texas are facing a possible
doubling of their normal feed costs due to the increases in the cost of
feed and hay they depend on for daily milk production.
Similar statistics are available from other States: State
agricultural officials in Oklahoma have indicated the possibility of
5,000 to 10,000 producers going out of business in that State. Kansas
is facing their worst wheat crop since the Depression with the 180
million bushel harvest--less than half the normal.
There is no opposition to the bill that I am aware of and this should
have very little effect on the normal movement of grain because it will
probably be distributed directly to producers outside the normal
channels of grain merchandising.
I would encourage my colleagues to support this resolution. The
livestock sector in our country contributes billions of dollars to our
economy and if we do not take actions to help stem the liquidation of
herds now, we will pay the price later for rebuilding that
infrastructure.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the
gentleman from California [Mr. Cunningham].
Mr. CUNNINGHAM. Mr. Speaker, I join in support of this resolution. It
is true that we have had a lot of droughts, a lot of floods, especially
in my State of California, where agriculture is the No. 1 commodity.
But I just this weekend spoke to a group of poultry producers, and they
also say a large reason for the increase in cost and shortage of grain
is that we have given so much grain overseas, in some cases sold it
below the price, that our people are now having to pay expensive prices
here in the United States.
For example, the price of chickens is going to go up 50 percent
because of the cost of the grain. I would urge the producers of this
resolution and the committee to take a close look before we sell grain
overseas or give it away that affects our producers here in this
country that we need to take a second look at it. I rise in strong
support, and I thank my colleagues on both sides of the aisle.
Mr. RICHARDSON. Mr. Speaker, New Mexico is the driest that it has
been in 101 years. People in the West need help from a severe drought
that has devastated New Mexico, Texas, Arizona, Nevada, and southern
California.
I rise in strong support of this legislation which will offer some
relief for ranchers who do not have feed for their cattle.
The dry conditions mean no pasture, no hay, and a limited amount of
grain.
[[Page H5792]]
The shortage of grain on a worldwide basis has heightened the already
disastrous situation for ranchers affected by the drought. Because of a
lack of grain, producers in my district are being forced to sit back
and watch their cattle starve.
This legislation will allow the USDA to release 46 million bushels of
feed grain that is being held in reserves.
Although this resolution is not amendable I would like to urge the
USDA to make this grain available directly to the ranchers in the
drought affected States who are in need.
New Mexico ranchers need this relief now.
Mr. BENTSEN. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of House
Concurrent Resolution 181, which directs the Department of Agriculture
to release the national grain reserve. This action is necessary because
of the severe drought conditions being experienced in the Plains and
Southwest portions of this country.
Severe drought conditions have stunted the growing season for Texas
cotton, wheat, and grain farmers. Soil erosion is becoming a critical
issue as the dry season is beginning and summer winds will literally
scour fields clean of nutrient rich topsoil.
Texas cattle producers are also being devastated by the drought
because it requires them to buy more feed at a time when prices are
extraordinarily high. Livestock producers in general are suffering
tremendous losses because the natural forage withered due to lack of
measurable rainfall.
This resolution allows the release of the reserve only if the
President declares a natural disaster in the region, which President
Clinton has done, or if we pass this concurrent resolution declaring
that such reserves should be released.
Without immediate assistance, ranchers will continue to cull their
herds, which will result in higher beef prices for consumers once the
supply is exhausted. Mr. Speaker, this is not simply a rural issue. If
prices of feed grain and beef are allowed to fluctuate wildly, all of
us will feel the impact at the supermarket. We need stable food prices,
and this resolution can help achieve that goal. I urge the Department
of Agriculture to release this reserve directly to the cattle producers
and not through the Commodity Credit Corporation to speed the aid
directly to where it is needed.
Banks should also be allowed to extend nonperforming loans without
increasing reserves. Allowing banks the flexibility to assist farmers
will ensure my State's farmers can survive through this drought.
Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for
time, and I yield the balance of my time.
Mr. STENHOLM. Mr. Speaker, I have no further requests for time, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. Barrett] that the House suspend the rules
and agree to the concurrent resolution, House Concurrent Resolution
181, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the concurrent resolution, as
amended, was agreed to.
The title was amended so as to read: ``Concurrent resolution
expressing the Sense of Congress that the Secretary of Agriculture
should dispose of all remaining commodities in the disaster reserve
maintained under the Agricultural Act of 1970 to relieve the distress
of livestock producers whose ability to maintain livestock is adversely
affected by disaster conditions existing in certain areas of the United
States, such as prolonged drought or flooding.''.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________