[Congressional Record Volume 149, Number 54 (Thursday, April 3, 2003)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E684]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                 PRESIDENTIAL GIFTS ACCOUNTABILITY ACT

                                 ______
                                 

                             HON. DOUG OSE

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Thursday, April 3, 2003

  Mr. OSE. Mr. Speaker, today, I rise to introduce a revised version of 
my ``Presidential Gifts Accountability Act.'' During the 107th 
Congress, I introduced an initial bill, H.R. 1081. Both versions of 
this good government bill establish responsibility in one agency for 
the receipt, valuation and disposition of Presidential gifts.
  In January 2001, there were press accounts of President Clinton's 
last financial disclosure report, which covered calendar year 2000 and 
January 1-20, 2001. This report revealed that the Clintons chose to 
retain $190,027 in gifts, each over $260, during this period. In 
February 2001, there were press accounts of numerous furniture gifts to 
the White House residence, which the Clintons returned to the U.S. 
Government. These press stories led me to question how the current 
Presidential gifts system works and what legislative changes, if any, 
are needed to prevent future abuses.
  I believe that the American people have the right to know what gifts 
were received and retained by their President. Additionally, I believe 
that donors should not receive an unfair advantage in the policymaking 
process or other governmental benefits.
  To prevent future abuses, in March 2001, I introduced H.R. 1081, the 
``Accountability for Presidential Gifts Act,'' which had bi-partisan 
support during the 107th Congress. The Government Reform Subcommittee 
on Energy Policy, Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs, which I 
chair, spent nearly a year gathering the empirical data to support and 
improve such a legislative effort.
  The Subcommittee found that several laws, involving six Federal 
offices and agencies, govern the current system. In February 2002, the 
Subcommittee released a 55-page document summarizing the Subcommittee's 
findings. The Subcommittee identified a host of problems with the 
Presidential gifts system, such as consistently undervalued gifts and 
questionable White House Counsel rulings. Since the current system is 
subject to abuse and political interference, I believe that there is a 
need for centralized accountability in one agency staffed by career 
employees. My bill establishes responsibility in one agency--staffed by 
career employees--for the receipt, valuation and disposition of 
Presidential gifts.
  On October 28, 2002, my Subcommittee's analysis was presented in 
House Report 107-768, ``Problems with the Presidential Gifts System.'' 
The Report summarized how the current system works, my Subcommittee's 
investigation and findings, and recommendations made in my 
Subcommittee's hearing and a second hearing by the Government Reform 
Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management and 
Intergovernmental Relations. The Report's findings included: Non-
Competitive Hiring of Political Appointee for Career Job, Some Gifts 
Over the Reporting Threshold Were Not Disclosed, Some Gifts Were 
Solicited, Many Gifts Were Undervalued, Some Gifts Were Not Included in 
the White House Database, Some Gifts Were Lost, Questionable White 
House Counsel Rulings, Some U.S. Property Was Taken, Most Furniture 
Gifts Were Coordinated, Some Gift Certificates Were Accepted, and Huge 
Gifts to the Presidential Library

  The total value of gifts retained by the former First Family over an 
8-year period creates at least an appearance problem. The fact that so 
many gifts were undervalued raises many questions. The fact that gifts 
were misplaced or lost show sloppy management and maybe more. The fact 
that U.S. government property was improperly taken is troubling. And, 
the fact that, after the former First Lady's election to the U.S. 
Senate and before she was subject to the Congress' very strict gift 
acceptance rules, the former First Family accepted nearly $40,000 in 
furniture gifts and the First Lady solicited nearly $40,000 in fine 
china and silver is disturbing at best. Public servants, including the 
President, should not be able to enrich themselves with lavish gifts.
  The revised version of my bill, which I am introducing today, 
reflects several recommendations made by public witnesses at both 
hearings on the earlier version. these include the President of Common 
Cause and the Director for Public Service of The Brookings Institution, 
both of which expressed support for the bill. I believe that, if 
enacted, this bill will provide transparency for the public, establish 
discipline in the multi-agency system, and ensure accountability. A 
section-by-section analysis of the bill's provisions is attached to 
this introductory statement.
  The current system is clearly broken and needs to be fixed.
  To expedite progress, I am also sending a letter to the President 
today to recommend some changes in the current system, which he can 
make administratively to provide transparency, discipline, and 
accountability. These include interagency coordination, establishment 
of a unified database with a single numbering system, and annual public 
disclosure of all Presidential gifts over $100 (except a gift from a 
foreign government or a relative). A copy of this letter is also 
attached to this introductory statement.

                                     House of Representatives,

                                    Washington, DC, April 3, 2003.
     Hon. George W. Bush,
     The White House,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. President: Today, after a lengthy investigation 
     and two hearings of Government Reform Subcommittees, I 
     introduced an improved version of my ``Presidential Gifts 
     Accountability Act.'' This good government bill establishes 
     responsibility in one agency for the receipt, valuation, and 
     disposition of Presidential gifts. In the meantime, I am 
     writing you to recommend some changes in the current system, 
     which can be made administratively.
       Several laws, involving six Federal offices and agencies, 
     govern the current system. The Subcommittee on Energy Policy, 
     Natural Resources and Regulatory Affairs, which I chair, 
     identified a host of problems with the system in use during 
     the prior Administration, such as consistently undervalued 
     gifts and questionable White House Counsel rulings. These are 
     presented in House Report 107-768, ``Problems with the 
     Presidential Gifts System.'' Since the system is subject to 
     abuse and political interference, I believe that there is a 
     need for centralized accountability in one agency staffed by 
     career employees. My bill establishes responsibility in one 
     agency for the receipt, valuation and disposition of 
     Presidential gifts.
       At the second hearing in June 2002, it was revealed that 
     only minor changes were made by your Administration to 
     address the problems revealed in the first hearing in 
     February 22. In July 2002, my Subcommittee invited your staff 
     and the six affected agencies to a meeting to identify 
     changes, which could be made administravely. The attendees 
     confirmed that, since the Subcommittee's investigation began: 
     there has been no interagency meeting or other coordination 
     between the six agencies; there is no unified database system 
     in use by the six agencies for the receipt, valuation and 
     disposition of Presidential gifts; and, there is no single 
     numbering system for Presidential gifts. Please consider such 
     coordination and establishment of a unified database with a 
     single numbering system. In addition, I recommend annual 
     public disclosure of all Presidential gifts over $100 (except 
     a gift from a foreign government or a relative).
       As the Director for Public Service at the Brookings 
     Institution stated, ``In this moment of heightened public 
     confidence in government, the presidential gift process 
     offers the potential for staggering embarrassment and 
     diminished accountability. The current fragmented process for 
     logging, valuing, and manging gifts to the president defies 
     bureaucratic logic, and appears designed more to frustrate 
     accounatbility than enhance it. One could design a more 
     unwieldy system if one started out do so.'' I agree with his 
     assessment.
           Sincerely,
                                                         Doug Ose,
     Member of Congress.

                          ____________________