[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 85 (Wednesday, June 18, 1997)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1248-E1249]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




    CONGRESSMAN TOM CAMPBELL'S RELATIONSHIP WITH THE UNIVERSITY OF 
                         CALIFORNIA AT BERKELEY

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. TOM CAMPBELL

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Wednesday, June 18, 1997

  Mr. CAMPBELL. Mr. Speaker, 2 years ago, the Haas School of Business 
at the University of California at Berkeley received a grant from the 
U.S. Information Agency [USIA] for work connected with the Haas 
School's efforts to open a business school in St. Petersburg, Russia. 
My wife, Susanne Campbell, is the Executive Director of that program. 
She has reapplied to the USIA for this same grant this year.
  In December 1995, I won election to Congress. I am currently a member 
of the International Relations Committee. This committee has 
jurisdiction authorizing moneys for the USIA. I have informed the 
Committee on the Standards of Official Conduct of my wife's involvement 
with UC-Berkeley and the USIA, and sought counsel as to what conduct 
would be appropriate.
  I have been advised by the committee that under clause 3 of the House 
Rule 43 of the Code of Official Conduct, a Member ``shall receive no 
compensation * * * to accrue to his beneficial interest from any 
source, the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence 
improperly exerted from his position in the Congress.'' In addition, 
clause 5 of the Code of Ethics for Government Service reiterates clause 
3 of House Rule 43, by providing that a Federal official should ``never 
accept for himself or his family, favors or benefits under 
circumstances which might be construed by reasonable persons as 
influencing the performance of his governmental duties.'' Additionally, 
Federal officials should ``[n]ever discriminate unfairly by the 
dispensing of special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for 
remuneration or not.''
  The committee informs me that, under these rules, there is no 
question that my wife may seek USIA funding for her program while I am 
a Member of Congress. Since the USIA grant does not include her salary, 
the committee has advised that no legal threshold is reached that would 
require a further ethics discussion.
  As to my official conduct, House Rule 8 of the Code of Official 
Conduct states that, ``[e]very Member * * * shall vote on each question 
put, unless he has a direct personnel

[[Page E1249]]

or pecuinary interest in the event of such question.'' The Ethics 
Manual cites numerous House precedents which tend to encourage voting, 
and provides hypotheticals for guidance. In my particular situation, 
the committee recommends that I recuse myself from debating, commenting 
upon and voting on USIA funding for my wife's specific program. I will 
follow this advice, and additionally refrain from communicating with 
any agency or person on matters related to this USIA Program. A vote on 
her program by itself is, of course, extremely unlikely.
  I have prepared this statement to make public, and also to deliver to 
any agency or person when appropriate in connection with my work as a 
Member of Congress so that, should a matter of my congressional 
business involve USIA funding or the University of California at 
Berkeley, the recipient can weigh my advice or opinion knowing of the 
interest that I may have. However, I do assure any such recipient, and 
my constituents, that I have never, and will never, decide a matter of 
public policy differently because of my wife's relationship with the 
University of California at Berkeley.

                          ____________________