[Congressional Record Volume 142, Number 134 (Wednesday, September 25, 1996)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1691]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




[[Page E1691]]



                           THE ETHICS PROCESS

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. PORTER J. GOSS

                               of florida

                    in the house of representatives

                      Tuesday, September 24, 1996

  Mr. GOSS. Mr. Speaker, I offer these comments in response to those 
submitted by my dear friend, the ranking member of the Rules Committee, 
Mr. Moakley, late last week. Mr. Moakley was continuing the dialog 
about our ethics process and I wish to respond directly to his 
comments.
  I am delighted to know that members of the minority are now engaging 
in a productive discussion about the need to review--and consider 
changes to--our current ethics process. As I have said for some time, 
it is my view--shared by many of our colleagues on both sides of the 
aisle--that the process is broken and needs comprehensive reform.
  Of course the existence and authority of the Ethics Committee is 
provided for under rule X, which is the unique province of our Rules 
Committee. I agree that matters relating to this committee and its 
functions are best addressed without partisanship and with the best 
interests of this institution in mind. All of my efforts to date in 
attempting to bring about constructive change in the current process 
have been made in a spirit of bipartisan cooperation.
  The Rules Committee included a commitment to review the ethics 
process, as prescribed by House rule X, in our oversight plan for the 
104th Congress. I refer interested observers to the Government Reform 
and Oversight Committee's report from March 1995 which incorporated the 
oversight plans of all committees as required by rule X(2)(d). 
Specifically, the Subcommittee on Legislative and Budget Process' 
intentions with respect to the ethics process can be found on page 169 
of that report, which states that ``the subcommittee intends to review 
the mandate of the [standards] committee as established in rule X, 
clause 4 as amended by the Ethics Reform Act of 1989 and the manner in 
which its members are chosen and required to serve.'' That particular 
oversight recommendation was made as part of our committee's overall 
oversight agenda, and adopted by voice vote of our committee with no 
complaint by the minority on February 14, 1995.

  Since that time I have made several efforts to proceed with what I 
have always believed would be a bipartisan review of the current 
process, followed by a bipartisan discussion of options for reform for 
the next Congress. I had many conversations with our subcommittee's 
ranking minority member, Martin Frost during which he expressed 
continued reluctance to proceed on this subject. In fact, we conducted 
a lengthy written correspondence as well, and in deference to him and 
to the apparent wishes of the Democrat leadership, I postponed our 
formal review several times. I did, however, proceed in my capacity as 
a Member of this House in late January of this year and put forward 
House Resolution 346, embodying my own ideas about ways in which the 
process should be revised.
  At that time, Chairman Solomon released a statement that said: ``We 
are honoring the request of the ranking minority member on the Goss 
subcommittee, Mr. Frost, by not proceeding with hearings at this time. 
But I think we have an obligation to begin to gather reactions and 
suggestions from Members and persons outside the Congress on these 
proposals so that we are prepared to proceed with formal hearings later 
this year.''
  It has always been clear to me that ethics process reform should be a 
bipartisan effort and should be based on input from all points of view. 
I don't think there is any disagreement on that point. In fact, during 
our committee's unprecedented hearings to take input from Members and 
outside witnesses about ideas for building upon the changes that were 
made to our rules in this Congress as we prepare for the 105th 
Congress, it became clear that many Members already have developed 
ideas about improving the ethics process.
  The purpose of all of my efforts on this subject is to move the 
review process forward in a productive manner so that we do not find 
ourselves in the position where Members want change yet we are locked 
into the current process for another whole Congress. It is my view that 
there is advantage to having Members involved in that effort who have 
had frontline experience with our current process.
  I look forward to working with all my colleagues on a bipartisan 
basis in addressing this issue.

                          ____________________