[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 153 (Wednesday, November 5, 1997)]
[House]
[Page H10047]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




   ANNOUNCEMENT OF INTENTION TO OFFER RESOLUTION RAISING QUESTION OF 
                        PRIVILEGES OF THE HOUSE

  Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to clause 2 of rule IX, I hereby 
give notice of my intention to offer a resolution which raises a 
question of the privileges of this House.
  The form of the resolution is as follows:

       Whereas, Loretta Sanchez was issued a certificate of 
     election as the duly elected Member of Congress from the 46th 
     District of California by the Secretary of the State of 
     California and was seated by the U.S. House of 
     Representatives on January 7, 1997; and
       Whereas A Notice of Contest of Election was filed with the 
     Clerk of the House by Mr. Robert Dornan on December 26, 1996; 
     and
       Whereas the Task Force on the Contested Election in the 
     46th District of California met on February 26, 1997 in 
     Washington, D.C. on April 19, 1997 in Orange County, 
     California and October 24, 1997 in Washington, D.C. and
       Whereas Mr. Dornan's unproven allegations and the actions 
     of the Committee on House Oversight have resulted in an 
     unprecedented attack against Latino voters and created a 
     chilling effect with a message to Latinos that their votes do 
     not count;
       Whereas the allegations made by Mr. Robert Dornan have been 
     largely found to be without merit: charges of improper voting 
     from a business, rather than a resident address; underage 
     voting; double voting; and charges of unusually large number 
     of individuals voting from the same address. It was found 
     that voting from the same address included a Marines barracks 
     and the domicile of nuns, that business addresses were legal 
     residences for the individuals, including the zoo keeper of 
     the Santa Ana zoo, that duplicate voting was by different 
     individuals and those accused of underage voting were of age; 
     and
       Whereas the Committee on House Oversight, subpoenaed the 
     records seized by the District Attorney of Orange County on 
     February 13, 1997 and has received and reviewed all records 
     pertaining to registration efforts of that group; and
       Whereas the House Oversight Committee is not perusing a 
     duplicate and dilatory review of materials already in the 
     Committees possession by the Secretary of State of 
     California;
       Whereas the Task Force on the Contested Election in the 
     46th District of California and the Committee have been 
     reviewing these materials and has all the information it 
     needs regarding who voted in the 46th District and all the 
     information it needs to make judgments concerning those 
     votes; and
       Whereas the Committee on House Oversight has after nine 
     months of review and investigation failed to present credible 
     evidence to change the outcome of the election of 
     Congresswoman Sanchez and is pursuing never ending and 
     unsubstantiated areas of review; and
       Whereas, Contestant Robert Dornan has not shown or provided 
     credible evidence that the outcome of the election is other 
     than Congresswoman Sanchez's election to the Congress; and
       Whereas, after nearly a year and the expenditure of over 
     $500,000, of taxpayer's money, the continued probe of the 
     Sanchez election unfairly targets Latino voters and 
     discourages their full participation in the democratic 
     process;
       Whereas, the Committee on House Oversight should complete 
     its review of this matter and bring this contest to an end: 
     Now, therefore, be it
       Resolved, That unless the Committee on House Oversight has 
     sooner reported a recommendation for its final disposition, 
     the contest in the 46th District of California is dismissed 
     upon the expiration of November 7, 1997.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, the Chair's previous 
ruling under rule IX will be entered in the Record at this point.
  There was no objection.
  The text of the Chair's prior statement is as follows:

       Under rule IX, a resolution offered from the floor by a 
     Member other than the Majority Leader or the Minority Leader 
     as a question of the privileges of the House has immediate 
     precedence only at a time designated by the Chair within two 
     legislative days after the resolution is properly noticed.
       Pending that designation, the form of the resolution 
     noticed by the gentlewoman from New York will appear in the 
     Record at this point.
       The Chair will not at this point determine whether the 
     resolution constitutes a question of privilege. That 
     determination will be made at the time designated for 
     consideration of the resolution.

                          ____________________