[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 125 (Thursday, September 12, 1996)]
[House]
[Pages H10334-H10335]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT
(Mr. MILLER of California asked and was given permission to address
theHouse for 1 minute and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, ``I have a number of concerns
regarding the Ethics Committee's contract and instructions to the
special counsel.
``First, I am concerned that the scope and authority and the
independence of the special counsel will be limited by the guidelines
the Ethics Committee has established.
``The committee shall give the special counsel full cooperation in
the issuance of subpoenas.''
point of order
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will state his point of order.
Mr. LINDER. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman is not adhering to the rulings
of theHouse again with respect to speaking on the floor regarding
matters before the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, if I may be heard on the point
of order?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair will hear the gentleman from
California.
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, the words I have uttered up
until the time I was interrupted are not my words. They are in fact the
words of Speaker Gingrich on July 28, 1988, in a letter from Speaker
Gingrich to theHonorable Julian Dixon, the former Chair of the
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Therefore, Mr. Speaker,
this is proper.
If I can continue to be heard on the point of order, Mr. Speaker, I
am not speaking to a matter that is currently before the Committee on
Standards of Official Conduct. I am speaking to a matter that was
before the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in 1988, where
the question was raised at that time as to whether or not that
committee had, one, limited the scope of inquiry by the special
counsel, where the question was raised as to the contract between the
special counsel and the committee, and whether or not the committee
was----
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman will kindly suspend. The Chair
is prepared to rule.
[[Page H10335]]
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I have not been heard on the
point of order. I have a right to be heard.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair is acceding to the gentleman from
California's points. The gentleman may proceed in that context.
Mr. MILLER of California. I only wanted you to do that after I
presented the evidence.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has ruled. The gentleman may
proceed in order, with his 1-minute time limitation.
Mr. MILLER of California. Further, ``The committee shall give the
outside counsel full cooperation in the issuance of subpoenas.
``The outside counsel shall be free, after discussions with the
Committee, to make such public statements and reports the counsel deems
appropriate.
``The outside counsel shall have full authority to recommend what
formal charges be brought before the Ethics Committee.
``The committee shall not countermand or interfere with the outside
counsel's ability to take steps necessary to conduct a full and fair
investigation.''
The Speaker went on to say it was his impression from the press
reports that ``the Ethics Committee has specifically failed to meet the
test that was set forth by Common Cause.''
He says, ``I would therefore like a copy of the resolution, the
guidelines adopted by the Ethics Committee outlining the authority the
committee has given the special counsel in order to carry out the
responsibilities of the outside counsel.''
Mr. Speaker, if it was good in 1988 for Speaker Wright, then it is
good today for Speaker Gingrich.
____________________