[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 19 (Thursday, February 13, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E258-E259]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                         ETHICS PROCESS REFORM

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. LEE H. HAMILTON

                               of indiana

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, February 13, 1997

  Mr. HAMILTON. Mr. Speaker, today I am introducing, along with 
Representative David Dreier, a resolution to reform the House ethics 
process by having private citizens help investigate charges of Member 
misconduct.
  It has been clear for some time that the process under which the 
House considers disciplinary action against Members is in need of 
serious reform. Major breakdowns in the process over the last several 
months may mean that the House is finally ready to make the needed 
changes.
  The reform that Representative Dreier and I are urging was develop 
during our work on the Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, 
which we led during the 103d Congress. The joint committee was charged 
with considering and recommending institutional changes that would make 
Congress more effective and help restore public confidence in the 
institution. Ethics process reform was a major focus of the joint 
committee, and we considered it at length. The proposal that the joint 
committee recommended with broad, bipartisan support is the one we are 
introducing today.
  Our proposal would help restore the integrity of the House ethics 
process by involving outsiders in the investigation of ethics 
complaints against Members. The Speaker and the minority leader would 
jointly appoint a pool of 20 independent factfinders to be called on by 
the Standards Committee for ethics investigations as needed, on a case-
by-case basis. These individuals would be private citizens, and might 
include, for example, former Members or retired judges. Lobbyists and 
other individuals with business before the House would not be eligible. 
In a particular case, the Standards Committee could call upon four or 
six of these independent factfinders to investigate charges of 
misconduct against a Member. They could question witnesses, collect and 
examine evidence, and then report their findings of fact and 
recommendations to the full committee. The committee would then make 
recommendations to the full House, and the full House would make the 
final decision on whether sanctions are appropriate.
  This proposal still retains an appropriate role for the Standards 
Committee and it does not remove from the House its constitutional 
responsibility to police its Members for official misconduct. It simply 
turns over the investigatory phase of the ethics process to private 
citizens. Involving outsiders in the process in a meaningful way has 
several advantages. First, it will help restore public confidence in 
the process by reducing the inherent conflicts of interest involved 
when Members judge fellow Members--either that they are protecting a 
friend and colleague or are misusing the ethics process to attack an 
opponent. Second, it will help ensure that ethics complaints are acted 
on by the House more quickly. The addition of ordinary citizens to the 
process would force action on cases that could be held up indefinitely 
under the current system. Third, it will alleviate the enormous time 
burdens on

[[Page E259]]

Members who serve on the Standards Committee, and will make serving on 
the committee much less onerous. Various other professions are 
increasingly calling on outsiders to help them police their membership; 
the House should too.

  Our reform, as I mentioned, received strong bipartisan support on the 
Joint Committee on the Organization of Congress, and it is strongly 
supported by congressional scholars including Norm Ornstein of the 
American Enterprise Institute, Tom Mann of the Brookings Institution, 
and Dennis Thompson, director of the program in ethics and the 
professions at Harvard.
  Mr. Speaker, it is essential that complaints of unethical conduct by 
a Member of Congress be investigated fully, impartially, and promptly. 
We owe that to the accused Member and we also owe that to the 
institution of the House. I believe that this reform will help insulate 
the ethics process from the partisan rancor which sometimes exists in 
the House, and will make the process fairer and more credible to the 
public. It is an important step in making the House more effective and 
in restoring public confidence in the institution.

                          ____________________