[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 50 (Thursday, March 22, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H2936-H2942]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FRESHMEN DEMOCRATS PROMOTE ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Klein) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am Ron Klein, and I represent
Florida's 22nd Congressional District in Congress, which is southeast
Florida, Fort Lauderdale to West Palm Beach area, and I have the
privilege of anchoring tonight's freshmen's Special Order. We decided
as a group of freshman, and there was a large group of us that were
elected this year, to meet on a regular basis and to discuss policy,
those of us who had contested races, those of us who did not have
contested races, but all of us new with this process coming in with a
fresh perspective and the belief that hopefully we could influence the
process in a way that would move things along, which is, I think, the
loud message we heard from the people that elected all of us, both
Democrats and Republicans this year.
Tonight our Special Order is going to focus on the importance of
accountability and oversight within our Nation's government. There is
no question that the ability to exercise accountability and oversight
among the executive and legislative branches, that is our branch and
the President's branch, is vital to making sure that our government is
operating and governing within the highest ethical and moral standards,
and makes sense. It is also important to make sure our government is
doing the right thing for our people.
It seems that every time we are turning on the news lately or pick up
the newspaper, there seems to be some story about where there is no
accountability. And the oversight and lack of accountability seems to
be the prime topic of conversation back home in our districts, in our
offices, in our supermarkets, in our churches and synagogues. If you
just think about the most recent one, the United States attorney
scandal, where a number of U.S. attorneys were fired; and, of course,
there is a question about for what purpose they were fired and whether
there is a reason, and now there is a question of getting all the
information out on the table.
The ongoing concerns over Valerie Plame and the outing of Valerie
Plame. And, of course, I think most of us as Americans understand, when
someone works for this country as a member of our intelligence
services, we owe that person the highest degree of respect and
integrity and make sure that their position is held confidential. And
certainly anybody who is responsible for outing that person should be
held accountable and punished.
Conditions at Walter Reed Hospital. And we are going to talk about
that a little more tonight, and, unfortunately, other veterans
hospitals. And I am happy to say that in my area and in many other
parts of the country that there are some very good things going on in
our veterans hospitals and our veterans outpatient clinics, but many
times it is a matter of having the resources to have enough doctors in
place. And I know I have heard from time to time about long waiting
lines. But there are places like Walter Reed and other places that have
now been identified where you had mold and you had ceilings falling in
and lack of care, and people that were working there that were
overworked and unfortunately not providing the type of treatment that
should be awarded. The highest level of respect should be awarded to
our men and women who are our heroes in this country.
And, of course, the no-bid government contracts being awarded to
companies doing business in Iraq to the tune of billions of dollars of
waste, and certainly not accomplishing the major goals. One of the
goals we went in there with, of course, was to take out Saddam Hussein,
but I think everybody understood very quickly that if we were going to
be successful in changing the hearts and minds, that some of the
rebuilding activities, getting electricity on, getting hospitals up,
creating jobs, those kinds of things would be very, very important to
making the people of Iraq feel that this was a worthy cause to set up
their own government. Unfortunately, we have spent billions of our
money over there, and, unfortunately, the condition is in many ways
worse today than it was with the fall of Saddam Hussein.
The news on these subjects is everywhere. So tonight we are going to
talk about accountability and oversight, and my colleagues who are
going to join me tonight as freshman Members recently elected are going
to be talking about how we are working to restore those features of
accountability and oversight to Washington and our government.
A couple things I just want to touch on before I turn over to my
colleague Congressman Hodes. On November 7, which was last year's
election, we believe that the American people, I know we all heard this
as we walked door to door and heard from the American people, they
wanted change. It wasn't necessarily Democrat or Republican; they
wanted people to come together, find common ground, and move forward.
And fortunately for this country, this House has, in fact, started that
process. There were six items very quickly that were passed in the
beginning called the 100 Hours, the Six for '06, everything from fixing
the Medicare prescription drug program, which I know many of our
seniors are concerned about making it easier to use, less costly to the
taxpayers; minimum wage, making the minimum wage higher, of course, is
a key issue; lower student loan rates; and a number of other issues
like energy policy. These are the things that we came to work on and
that were done.
We also passed the lobbying reform bill and a full disclosure bill
which has already significantly reduced the influence that lobbyists
have on this legislative process. We need to do more, but we certainly
took a lot of the right steps by not allowing lobbyists to take Members
of Congress out to lunch. We had that in Florida, we changed that, and
I am glad we changed that here, too.
And, of course, the earmark process. And for those of you who don't
know what earmark is, that is this idea: In the past, Congressmen,
Members of the Senate and House, would go behind closed doors and add
millions and tens of millions of dollars, even hundreds of millions in
some cases, of special projects in the dark of night to the budget
without any consideration by all the Members of Congress. And that
needs to change, and I am very happy to say that with new earmark
reforms in place, that will change.
The way it is changing is very clear: Anything that is presented
needs to be presented in the light of day. It needs to be publicly
disclosed and laid out for the Members of the Congress so that a
legitimate project in Alaska should be a legitimate project in Florida.
Even though it may benefit one State, we all
[[Page H2937]]
represent this country, but it has got to be done the right way.
This week we passed important legislation which curbs waste in
Federal contracting; strengthens protection for whistleblowers, and
those are, of course, people that discover and come forward when there
is waste and corruption in government; and also provides long overdue
of the veterans health care crisis and other Federal issues. We are
going to talk about accountability of tax dollars. We are going to talk
about a number of other things.
I am joined by some colleagues here, and I would like to introduce
them. We have got Congressman Ellison, who is going to join us and talk
to us a minute; Congressman Hodes. Congressman Welch is going to join
us for a few minutes.
You look like you are poised and ready to go, Congressman Hodes, so
why don't you kick off and give us a little oversight on what you are
going to talk about on oversight and accountability.
Mr. HODES. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for being here with
us tonight. I am delighted to be a new Member in the House of
Representatives, the people's House, sent by my constituents to help
restore the fabric of our democracy, which, during the past 6 years,
has really been torn and undermined by a rubber-stamp Congress which
refused to ask questions of an administration conducting its policies
largely in secret, taking the American people down a path with
counterfeit leadership, a leadership that used fear and intimidation to
lead, instead of real leadership which helps people face reality, come
together and seek common ground and solutions.
And for many people, when they think of the United States House of
Representatives, they think of Congress as a body which raises revenue
and figures out how to spend it. It sets taxes and sets a budget. And
that is how a lot of folks think about Congress, and sure we spend a
lot of our time doing that.
{time} 2000
But there is another very important function of the United States
Congress in our constitutional scheme, and it is completely independent
of what party is in the White House, what party is in the majority in
Congress, what party is in the majority in the Senate. It is the way
that, in the wisdom of the Founding Fathers, they set up this great
government of ours so that there would be checks and balances, there
would be controls. And the accountability and oversight function of
Congress is what we have restored with this Democratic majority.
There have been great leaders who have recognized that important
feature and that important job of Congress. And I have got a chart
here, a little board and a quote that is really important and talks a
lot about what it means for Congress to exercise its function of
accountability.
President Woodrow Wilson said, ``It is the proper duty of a
representative body to look diligently into every affair of government
and to talk much about what it sees. It is meant to be the eyes and the
voice and to embody the wisdom and will of its constituents. The
informing function of Congress should be preferred, even to its
legislative function.''
So here is President Wilson, some years ago, recognizing that the
oversight and accountability function of Congress is perhaps even more
important than the legislative function.
So for this Congress, while the last Congress might have been called
``the rubber-stamp Congress'' or the last Congress might have been
called ``the Katrina Congress'' because they presided over such a
disaster for us, I bet that this Congress, under Democratic majority,
is going to be ``the accountability Congress.''
Now, one thing that is interesting, I want to take us back for a
moment as we sort of set the tone for tonight to talk about something
that happened in ancient times. It has been said that the ancient
Romans had a tradition. Whenever one of their engineers constructed an
arch, at the capstone was hoisted into place, the engineer assumed
accountability for his work in the most profound way possible, he stood
under the arch. In the President's war on terror, the capstone he chose
is Iraq, but it is everyday Americans, and especially our veterans,
returning soldiers who are wounded and our veterans who stood under the
arch as it crumbled.
Over the past few weeks, we have sustained blow after blow as the
President's plan fell apart. But it is not the President who will pay
the billions necessary to stabilize Iraq, it is not the President who
slept in molding infested rooms at Walter Reed Hospital, it is not the
President who lost his job because of a political decision. But maybe
it ought to be.
The confluence of events of recent weeks, the Valerie Plame scandal,
the Walter Reed scandal, the politically motivated firing of U.S.
Attorneys, is the result of an administration that went too far for too
long without any meaningful oversight, without any meaningful
accountability, without a Congress to hold it accountable. It has been
said that absolute power corrupts absolutely. And for years, absolute
power is what our Republican colleagues, who were in control until
November of 2006, gave to this administration.
Tonight, I come to the floor with my colleagues to talk about
restoring accountability to government because the arch has fallen on
us, and we are going to repair it.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Hodes. I think you laid it out
very well.
I think the average American believes very strongly in accountability
and oversight because they understand, that's how they live their
lives. If you have a business, you can't do anything without keeping
track of your books, keeping track of you inventory, keeping track of
your personnel, your employees, and knowing that there is an end-point.
And you will make money or not make money by running it efficiently
with oversight. And I think that nobody is asking for any more than
that in government. And, unfortunately, as you have pointed out very
eloquently, that is exactly what has gone on without anybody looking
after it. And many of the committees were either not operating or were
abolished in the last number of years, and that just doesn't make any
sense.
So I think you pointed out very appropriately that we are glad I
think in a way that the Democrats are leading, but I think the
Republicans are now joining us. And, again, this is a bipartisan
approach to fixing this.
Mr. Ellison, I know that you have been leading and talking about this
as well, so give us some of your thoughts, please.
Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, let me thank my colleagues, the gentlemen
from Florida and New Hampshire, both for their eloquent remarks. I am
looking to my colleague, Congressman Welch and his remarks, but I would
like to say that the bedrock idea behind accountability in government
is trust in government. If somebody is not accountable, if they are not
answerable, if they don't have to tell you whatever you want to know,
if they can tell you to take a hike, take a walk and they don't have to
listen to you and they are not answerable to you and not accountable to
you, as the public, then what you cannot have is trust.
Trust goes away when accountability goes away. Trust leaves the room
when there is no one to answer the question about what happened. Trust
leaves the room when you cannot have a public official look you in the
eye and say here is what happened, the good, the bad and the ugly.
Accountability is not about perfection because when you have a human
endeavor, there is no such thing. But accountability is about being
able to say, you know what, those folks up there on Capitol Hill, I
believe that they are doing the best they can because when I asked my
question, they gave me an answer. When I came forward with my concerns,
they gave me a reply. They had the documents. They were able to say,
here is what is going on.
But when government, Madam Speaker, will not answer, we have
problems, we have a lack of trust, and unfortunately sometimes people
disengage. But this Congress is here to turn that around. This Congress
is here to say, no, there will be accountability. You can trust your
government. You can expect that your government is going to be
operating on your behalf.
Let me turn to an example. One example is that for the last several
years
[[Page H2938]]
we have had prosecutors, United States Attorneys, trying to do the best
they could in many instances at ferreting out corruption in government.
We saw prosecutions go on, former Congressman Cunningham and others,
and we saw prosecutors who were appointed by a Republican
administration to essentially do their job. As you know, Madam Speaker,
prosecutors are not like other attorneys. Their job is to seek justice,
find the truth. They are ministers of justice, whereas other attorneys,
very correctly, have, within the rules, no other obligation than to
zealously represent their client. But prosecutors have a higher calling
than that, and that is because it is their job to protect the public.
But what we found out recently is that eight of them have been fired,
and it appears very clearly that the reasons were entirely political.
Eight of them have been fired, and the evidence that has been unearthed
so far in only 3 months of this ``accountability Congress,'' as the
distinguished gentleman from New Hampshire is calling the phrase, in
this accountability Congress, the first 3 months we have seen getting
to the bottom of this question of justice being undermined.
The Democrats have brought back accountability. And what we have seen
that is unfolding right now is that the Justice Department has released
thousands of pages of e-mails based on the demands of the
accountability Congress, and internal documents as well, related to
this U.S. Attorney scandal. These documents would not be in the public
domain. They wouldn't be in front of the people. They wouldn't be
available for questions to get to be asked and answered but for this
accountability Congress.
I am so proud to be associated with this accountability Congress
because what it means is that the U.S. Attorneys, whether they be U.S.
Attorneys or food inspectors or people who work at the hospitals taking
care of our veterans, they now can know that there is not going to be
an intolerable condition that exists for too long before some inquiring
person in Congress says, what is going on over there. Thank heavens for
it.
And I just want to point out, and I will get back to this in a little
while, I just want to point out that even Patrick Fitzgerald, who was a
prosecutor in a recent case that you may have heard of, the Scooter
Libby trial, in which he obtained four convictions out of five counts,
he himself was rated as ``not distinguished.'' He was not distinguished
in the eyes of the Bush administration officials. And I can see why
they would find such a gentleman as ``not distinguished,'' because he
did not evidence enough loyalty and obedience to the administration,
but he certainly did bring forth some real accountability in
government.
I am going to yield back now, but I am going to be sticking around
because I have more to say about this. I am going to yield back now;
but before I do, I just want to say that accountability breeds trust in
government and trust in government promotes an active, engaged
citizenry which is fundamental to democracy.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Ellison.
I think that, again, the example you gave is something that is on our
front pages. We are hearing about it and we are listening.
Some people have said, well, what is the difference if someone is
coming forward or if they are coming forward under oath. Well, I like
to see, when someone comes forward, that they put their hand up and
say, I swear to tell the whole truth. I can't imagine somebody wouldn't
want to do that and what are they hiding if they are not prepared to do
that. That seems to be a little battle going on between the Congress
and its investigative authority and the President. But, again, I think
you put your hand up, we are expecting the truth anyway, and I think
that is an appropriate thing to do.
Mr. Welch, our representative from Vermont in our class, why don't
you share with us some of your thoughts on this.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. You know, it is very elemental: you get what
you pay for, you account for what you buy, you are responsible to the
people that hire you, you are responsible to the voters.
The opportunity that I have had about addressing some of these issues
of accountability, maybe I can just tell a few stories about some of
the hearings we have had, because it is worse than I expected. I come
from Vermont, where we don't know how to waste things. We do it over
recycle, reuse, do all of those things. But, you know, I am on the
Oversight and Government Operations Committee, and we have had a number
of hearings. And let me just tell a few stories, because I think rather
than have me give some conclusions, let people just hear what some of
the facts are.
We had some hearings on Iraq expenditures, Iraq relief money. And the
Government Accountability Office has come up with an audit that
suggests that a minimum of $10 billion was wasted. But a couple of
graphic examples came forward that just stunned me, frankly. One was
that our Federal Reserve, at the orders of the government, sent $12
billion in taxpayer money, in cash, loaded in skids, shrink wrapped in
plastic cellophane over to Iraq. Now, why did that happen? It wasn't
accounted for, but it was sent over there to pay salaries for people
who were working in Iraqi ministries. And of course it happened at a
time when there was a desperate effort on the part of the
administration to show some progress in Iraq. And one of the ways of
trying to show progress is that we have these ministries up and running
and we have employees who are working and doing the basic jobs of
providing electricity, of dealing with pensions, and the things that
are the functions of government.
Most of that money went missing because it turned out that some of it
was literally handed out from the back of pick-up trucks in Baghdad,
and it went to employees who were ghost employees. There were these
various ministers in the Iraq Government who had a position of
influence and saw an opportunity and they took it and made millions and
millions of dollars of taxpayer money.
Now, you know, there is no Republican, there is no Democrat, there is
no Independent who can fathom the idea of literally loading 347 tons of
100-dollar bills on C-147 transports and sending it to a foreign
country to be handed out on street corners. At home, when I go to
Vermont and I tell this story, I almost pinch myself because it is so
astonishing that I am wondering whether it is true. Unfortunately, it
is true. That is something that is happening with taxpayer dollars.
Another example: $57 million was spent, Madam Speaker, awarded a
contract to a Falls Church company that was going to construct housing
in Baghdad, I think it was outside of the airport, it was going to be
for, Congressman Hodes is on that committee, so if I get some of these
details wrong, you can correct me. But basically it was a housing
contract that was going to provide housing for trainees of the Baghdad
police. Not a bad idea. One problem: the housing was never built. The
only residue of the $57 million are hundreds of mobile homes that are
now parked, unoccupied, on a tract of land outside the Baghdad Airport.
Now, even our government got embarrassed at this. And someone in the
State Department suggested that what we should do, since we had all
these homeless people in Baghdad but they couldn't live there, we
didn't have housing units set up, we just had these facilities, the
suggestion was why don't we donate these mobile homes to the victims of
Katrina. And I had the opportunity to ask the question everybody else
would ask, was it their plan to move the folks in New Orleans to
Baghdad or was it their plan to move the mobile homes from Baghdad to
New Orleans? That actually happened, all right.
A third example: this isn't so much about wasting taxpayer dollars;
it is about violating basic rules of political integrity really.
{time} 2015
This whole question of global warming that people now recognize is
real, it is urgent, and it is immediate. And I believe it is becoming a
bipartisan consensus. We are not arguing whether it is true.
Well, we were arguing whether it was true. In our committee we had
before us a press person that worked for the administration, and his
job was to edit reports. Editing apparently included
[[Page H2939]]
taking scientific conclusions that were reached by scientists doing a
scientific method, experimentation, drawing conclusions, maintaining
academic integrity, and then putting them through what was an edit that
was a political filter that actually changed the outcome of the
scientific conclusions. And it was all intended to meet the political
agenda of the administration that wanted to resist the conclusion that
global warming was real, urgent, and immediate.
There are certain lines you can't cross, and that is one of them. The
people of this country, obviously, are entitled to the benefit of
honest science. Then we have to make a decision, all of us, about what
to do with it, what policies should we pursue. But, bottom line, we
have to have that integrity.
So these are just a few examples that I was exposed to as a Member of
Congress serving on committees. And I think it reinforces the point
that you are making because every American wants and is entitled to
accountability, honesty in whatever element of the government we are
working in, with our finances, with the services of scientists, and
every other sector.
So my friend, Mr. Klein, those are a few of the experiences I have
had serving on a committee here.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. The examples obviously go right back to what I
think we all believe in strongly as Americans: common sense. Use common
sense when you do anything. When you make decisions, use common sense.
When you follow up, use common sense. I mean, the examples that you
have cited are so extraordinary, they defy common sense.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. It is really true. And it is not a partisan
thing. I am trying to figure this out because all these things did
happen on the Republican watch. And it is a Congress that I think
turned its back on its responsibility. But I sometimes wonder whether
that concentration of all power and a reliance on ideology meant that
if you had an ideology and you had a set of facts and if they didn't
fit, you would throw the facts out and stick with the ideology. But it
is not a productive and winning strategy. So I have been mystified by
it.
And, Ron, you and I come out of State legislatures that are smaller,
where Republicans and Democrats tend to work together. You have this
close relationship and a lot of this stuff just doesn't happen there.
So it is mystifying to me how it happens here. But I think it is a lot
less likely to happen now that there is a cop on the beat and that our
committees are just checking under the covers to see what is going on.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. I am glad to see, Mr. Welch, some of the
legislation coming forward. Mr. Waxman and others have proposed
eliminating or limiting no-bid contracts and putting all this out
there. And I think this is a bipartisan issue. Nobody seems to have any
problem with it. But I think, as you said, it is long overdue.
Madam Speaker, we are joined by another Member of our freshmen group,
and it is Mr. Perlmutter from Colorado. We are now geographically
dispersed from the Southeast to the East to the Midwest and the West.
So why don't you give us some of your thoughts from the Colorado
perspective.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Good evening to my friends from the freshmen class.
And I just want to say I listened to my friend from Minnesota as well
as my friend from Vermont, and the reason we are here, the reason Mr.
Ellison is here, the reason Mr. Welch is here, Mr. Klein is here, Mr.
Hodes is here is because this Nation wanted checks and balances, and
checks and balances means accountability.
There has been no accountability in Washington for the last 6 years;
and as a result, we have had a variety of problems that have continued
to arise again and again and again and again. And we can start with the
no-bid contracts in Iraq, and the fact that there is some $10 billion
that has evaporated into the ether. That is the kind of thing that we
have to stop, and that is the kind of thing that the people of America
voted to bring a Democratic Congress into being so that there were
checks and balances to these no-bid contracts; checks and balances to a
loss, a complete loss, of $10 billion, the whereabouts of which we are
going to try to find, as the Congress of the United States of America
is supposed to do, so that we act as a counterbalance to the executive
branch. We aren't just here as a rubber stamp.
So start with Iraq. Let us talk about Katrina and the response that
was just a horrible failure by this administration to a massive
disaster in the United States of America, and the response after the
disaster occurred has also been a disaster. As a member of the
Financial Services Committee, it is clear that now we are 19 months
after the hurricane which basically decimated New Orleans and many
cities along the gulf coast, and yet we have not reconstructed,
renovated, rebuilt much of the housing that was completely obliterated
in that storm. So not only was the initial response a poor one, but
after that the response has been very minimal and has to be improved.
That is what checks and balances are about.
Checks and balances are when an administration, for whatever reason,
releases the name of a CIA agent to punish her, to punish her husband,
to whatever. It is completely wrong and needs to be stopped. And that
is why people expect accountability in our government and they like
checks and balances.
We have had revelations, Mr. Klein, over the past 2 or 3 weeks as to
some of the conditions, particularly at Walter Reed but other veteran
hospitals. Again, checks and balances and accountability would rein in
excesses or neglect, one or the other. We have seen far too much of it.
And we, as part of this freshmen class, are bringing those checks and
balances back.
Now, obviously the other side doesn't like it. My friends on the
Republican side, today they have been complaining with no end as to the
approach we are taking to bring benchmarks to this war in Iraq. And
they are complaining and complaining and complaining. But, finally,
there are going to be checks and balances on this President and the way
he has conducted the war in Iraq.
We are supporting our troops. We are supporting the veterans, and we
are bringing conditions and accountability to the administration and
accountability to the Iraqi people, as it is time for them to pick up
what we have been carrying now for the last 4 years.
The American people understand checks and balances. They were tired
of one-party government that led to excesses and neglect. We are here
to provide accountability. That is exactly what we are doing. The
administration doesn't like it. My friends across the aisle don't like
it. But that is what the people sent us here to do, and that is
precisely what we are doing.
And with that, Mr. Klein, my friend from Florida, I would like to
yield back to you or to any of our other friends who are on the floor
with us tonight to talk about why we are here.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. And I think we have
heard from some of our friends and we have a lot of others within the
Democratic side of the freshmen class. There are 41 of us. It is a big
class this year, along with the rest of them, Republicans as well. And
I think the message is pretty clear, the things you are talking about,
the checks and balances. And, by the way, we have our checks and
balances with the President. There are also checks and balances with
all the agencies. And those are some of the things we are talking about
tonight, to be sure things are operating the way they should. A big
budget. A lot of money. It has to be spent properly. We feel very
committed to that.
Mr. Hodes, I know you want to add another thought here.
Mr. HODES. Madam Speaker, I was thinking about what our colleague Mr.
Welch talked about in terms of the investigation into the way in which
the administration may have interfered for political purposes with the
administration of justice by the United States Attorneys, causing the
firing of United States Attorneys for political purposes. And it is
interesting to me.
I come from New Hampshire, a small State. And probably many of the
folks who may be listening tonight and many people in this Chamber,
although there aren't too many, have heard of the name Daniel Webster.
And Daniel Webster said a very important thing. He said: ``There is
nothing so powerful as the truth.'' And, really, that is what we are
talking about.
Our colleague Mr. Ellison talked about trust, and what we are really
[[Page H2940]]
talking about is bringing truth to government, bringing integrity to
government, bringing openness, bringing transparency, authentic honesty
back into the Halls of Congress and wherever oversight and
accountability take us. And in terms of what is happening with the
United States Attorney scandal, if we have learned one thing about this
administration, it is how it responds to its critics. When someone says
something they don't like, they get rid of them. The current U.S.
Attorney scandal is really just the latest example.
And now folks are probably seeing that there is a conflict. The White
House doesn't want people from the White House to come to Capitol Hill
in the open light of day under oath to tell the truth to committees in
Congress and committees in the Senate. And the question you have got to
ask is, what is there to hide? Why not come, take an oath, tell the
truth, and deal with the issues?
I started my legal career in New Hampshire as a prosecutor. I was
hired by a good Republican, a man named David Souter, who is now
sitting on the United States Supreme Court. And what I learned as a
prosecutor from David Souter was that the critical thing about the
prosecutor's role was that the prosecutor serves the people. My job was
to stand up and serve the people of my State. The job of the U.S.
Attorney is to stand up and represent the people of the United States.
U.S. Attorneys don't represent the President. They don't represent any
particular politician. They represent all of the people. And so their
judgment has to be independent judgment in order to see that justice is
done because what we are after is justice, not political retribution.
So you can imagine what happens in our great system of justice if
instead of thinking about truth and justice, the United States Attorney
is motivated by political influence. It perverts the system of justice.
It means no justice can be had. So the investigations that are going on
now, the accountability and oversight over the administration having
the folks come down and talk to our committees is absolutely critical.
It is fundamental to the preservation of the democratic fabric of this
country, because if an administration, if White House officials can
exert pressure on the United States Attorneys and remove their
independence, then the people can't depend upon our system of justice.
So this may be one of the most important of the investigations and
the new accountability that we are seeing in Congress. And, frankly,
what I have said to folks back home is we are not going to let this go
by without getting the answers. So when folks see the battle over the
subpoenas, when they see the White House resisting having its people
come down, folks are asking why. What are you afraid of? Let the truth
come out. Let's find out what happened. Now, that is accountability.
That is oversight, and that is why the American people sent us here.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Well said. I know that Mr. Ellison wanted to
add something to that also.
Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
I would like to see if the gentleman from New Hampshire would yield
to a question.
Mr. HODES. Absolutely.
Mr. ELLISON. Are you familiar with the terminology ``a chilling
effect''?
Mr. HODES. Absolutely, sir.
Mr. ELLISON. If a prosecutor, a minister of justice, is required to
make sure he doesn't step on any toes of the administration or a
particular political power or to make sure that he is not supposed to
offend a particular party and if such a prosecutor were to do so, they
might lose their job, could that have a chilling effect on the zealous
prosecution of anybody who might violate the law?
Mr. HODES. Mr. Ellison, that is called a Siberian express. That is
not just a chilling effect. That is ice cubes in your shoes. That puts
the fear in the prosecutor. Now, prosecutors are brave people, and
these U.S. Attorneys were brave people standing up to do their job. But
it has to have a chilling effect, and it is exactly what we are talking
about. The independence of our United States Attorneys is the hallmark,
the foundation of the Federal system of justice, and it has to be
preserved. And that is why it doesn't matter whether the White House is
Republican or Democrat. If this was a Democratic administration that
was doing this, we would be doing the same thing if we were following
Woodrow Wilson's advice and doing our job here in the Congress.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Mr. Perlmutter is about to jump through the
microphone.
{time} 2030
Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I do have a point that I want to make.
The power of the Federal Government is awesome, and if anybody is on
the receiving end of the power of the Federal Government, you have a
tough hill to climb. So the reason the people expect their U.S.
attorneys and their government to operate in truth and honesty and in
justice is because that power is so great, and when it is abused, the
trust of the people goes right out the door, and without the trust of
the people, we don't have much of a government here.
The people, in their unbelievable wisdom, maybe that is a little over
the top, but the people in their wisdom chose to elect a Democratic
Congress and a Democratic Senate because they know checks and balances
can stop that kind of abuse. And we are seeing it now.
It is a shame that we see that U.S. attorneys, who could have been
fired for any reason except for reasons that might ultimately be
unethical, were being let go and were being threatened. That is just
wrong, because the administration wanted to see the power of the
Federal Government come down on somebody they didn't like.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Madam Speaker, we have one of our senior
Members present, you can tell because the rest of us freshmen have dark
hair, one of the senior Members who is a mentor to all of us. Mr.
Larson of Connecticut is one of the people that truly all of us look up
to. Please join us.
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for
pointing out my age, but I am here primarily to salute you for
continuing to do this kind of work.
I think, as Mr. Perlmutter pointed out, that the American public, who
is always further ahead than the Congress is, found its voice in the
November election, and you have given voice to the American people here
in the people's Chamber, especially in the area of accountability.
Because, quite frankly, as we debate today and throughout the remainder
of this year, what we hear from our colleagues on the other side, and I
don't question their patriotism or their love of country, and hopefully
they don't question ours, but I do question their judgment.
Prior to you getting here, there has been a surrender of judgment on
issues of oversight and review. So you are a breath of fresh air. You
are the sunshine that needs to shine into every corner of this great
institution of ours, because the people you are sworn to serve and who
you have come here to represent, we are clearly proud in the
leadership, of the efforts of this majority-making class that has set a
new direction and a new course for this great country of ours.
I thank each and every one of you. Thank you for the opportunity to
speak here.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. We appreciate your guidance and counsel. As we
are listening to many of the things, we are glad to add a new energy to
the process here. You can see it here tonight.
I want to bring Mr. Ellison back in. He was really making a
passionate statement.
Mr. ELLISON. I also want to add my voice to great things to our
leadership, which includes Mr. Larson from the great State of
Connecticut. He is an able and well-qualified leader, and it is just
great to see him setting the proper tone for our class.
My question was this. We have several Members of the bar who are now
in Congress, and I just wanted to throw a question out.
The President has offered to make a deal, and the deal is that the
Democrats could interview, not under oath, not on the record, certain
White House aides about this scandal regarding the firing of the U.S.
attorneys who have been, it appears, perhaps fired for prosecutions
they did do and for prosecutions that in their discretion they did not
do that could somehow benefit
[[Page H2941]]
somebody who was running on the other side.
My question is, how does this deal stand in the light of this new
spirit of accountability? This deal that would say, yes, White House
aides can come in, no going on the record, no under oath, no
transcript, behind closed doors, how does that deal stand in the light
of this new spirit of accountability?
Mr. HODES. You know, I can give you a perspective on that. I won't
take too long to do that.
My experience, and I had many years as a prosecutor and also many
years as an attorney in court, is that the oath that you take to tell
the truth is a powerful thing. It is a meaningful thing, and it is an
important thing, because when a person swears to tell the truth, it has
the effect of opening one's eyes to the importance and the majesty of
the process that is involved in coming before a body, whatever body
that is, and holding up your right hand and swearing to tell the truth.
What happens then is, frankly, the person who is going to tell the
truth and swears to tell the truth is subjected to a host of
requirements and possible penalties if they don't tell the truth. That
also turns out to be a powerful motivator.
In this country we have trial by jury where witnesses come to tell
the truth. We have investigations by Congress where witnesses come to
tell the truth. And that really has proven to be the best, clearest,
most open way in an open, transparent democratic government, like the
one that we want to have and want to preserve, to get to the truth.
That is all we are asking. We are not intending to ask folks to say
or do anything they didn't do or to tell us something that isn't so. We
just want to get to the truth.
So a deal that has people behind closed doors without a transcript of
the proceedings, with no way to review what has been said and no
ability to do anything if they don't tell the truth, just doesn't cut
it.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Obviously there are so many things to talk
about in terms of the oversight and accountability. One of the things
that I think really hit hard for a lot of the people, particularly if
you served in the military, was the Walter Reed Hospital revelation.
Many of us have not served in the military. We may have some family
members that receive veterans benefits and things like that. We think
of people we ask to serve our country or may have served in the past.
They are American heroes on so many levels, and they deserve the
highest level of care. So it was shocking, and then shocking even more
so when we found out this has been going on for a while.
I think this oversight we have been talking about, the
accountability, the proper funding, the proper level of care, doctors,
nurses, things like that, so many people in the system are doing good
jobs, but there are clearly deficiencies.
Mr. Welch, you have some thoughts on that.
Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Yes, I do. Every American is appalled at what
was revealed, the degrading circumstances for our troops at Walter
Reed. There were many things that were obviously disturbing about it,
the vermin, the rodents, the peeling paint, the unsanitary conditions.
But that is the tip of the iceberg. What was really heartbreaking
when you met the veterans was that they were completely lost and
abandoned. We had people with head injuries that had very severe
cognitive problems who were in an administrative morass and nightmare.
They were abandoned really for 4 months before anyone knew that they
were there.
We had amputees who were a mile away from where they needed to be
without prosthetics and were supposed to somehow find a way to walk to
where their doctors' appointments were. The administrative breakdown
was enormous, and it really reflected a culture of disregard.
One of the things that came out as we started investigating this
situation out at Walter Reed was that the breakdown of services was
very predictable because there was a substantial reduction in the
number of personnel that were needed to provide the services.
Step one, you know that if you are having significant increased
military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan, you have to anticipate you
will have an increasing need for services to treat injured soldiers.
Two, in response to that, the government, the Bush administration,
following its ideological hard line about privatization, put to bid
certain services that were being offered at Walter Reed. It turned out
that the government workers who were government workers had an
opportunity to bid on that. They had the lowest bid. Mysteriously, and
we still haven't gotten to the bottom of this, Madam Speaker, their bid
was adjusted upward $7 million, not by them, but by the reviewer of
bids. They then came in second, and the contract was awarded to a
private company, IAP Worldwide Services.
Now, we don't know what the bottom-line connection is. What we do
know is the following: Number one, what had been personnel of 300 went
to 50. Now, it is cheaper to have 50 people on the payroll than it is
to have 300, but you also don't get the job done, especially when the
number of wounded soldiers is increasing. So that is shocking right
away.
Number two, this company, IAP, had all kinds of problems, even though
it received millions and millions of dollars doing Katrina relief.
Number three, the head of the IAP Company is a former very high
executive in Halliburton, a company that I just have to say has ripped
off the American taxpayer and made billions of dollars on this war in
Iraq.
Now, how is it that there is a disposition that is so powerful that
you put privatization and ideology ahead of a bottom line, the
nonnegotiable bottom line that you are going to provide the services
that our men and women in the service returning from Afghanistan,
returning from Iraq need? It is absolutely and completely unacceptable.
That shouldn't be a bipartisan thing. We ought to be doing whatever it
takes to make certain that our men and women do get the services that
they need.
Lack of accountability makes people lax. They are not looking over
their shoulder knowing that somebody is going to be checking to find
out if they are getting the job done, if they are ripping off
taxpayers, if they are performing up to standards.
That is a major responsibility. We are candid with one another. We
know that people are pretty fed up with government. The reason, there
are a lot of reasons for it, but one of them is they don't have
confidence that we are taking care of their taxpayer dollars. That gets
so embedded in people's sense that they lose faith that the government
will be there when there is a Katrina, when our soldiers are coming
home from Iraq. Our job, together, is to restore that confidence by
performance, not by talk; by accountability.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. I agree with that.
Mr. Perlmutter, I think you wanted to add something to that as well.
Mr. PERLMUTTER. I think I was elected to bring change to this Nation,
a new direction to the Nation and positive things to this Nation,
whether it is energy independence or assist with a whole variety of
things concerning change in the direction in Iraq. I did not come
looking to go on a witch hunt and to continue to do that.
The people obviously wanted checks and balances. They wanted
oversight and accountability. Something like Walter Reed or something
like we have just had with the Justice Department, those are things
that just appeared now. These are not us going back and trying to
dredge up old issues. These are things that have happened because of
the neglect of the administration. These are things that appear, and we
need to deal with them now.
I think the question is judgment. Before there wasn't good judgment.
There wasn't oversight. There wasn't accountability. There weren't
checks and balances. The people expect this from its Congress and from
its Senate with respect to the White House.
Walter Reed is a shame. It is a shame. It is supposed to be one of
our finest medical institutions anywhere in America or the world. It is
there for our bravest men and women who have served us valiantly and
have been harmed and hurt in a variety of ways, psychologically,
physically, and we need to make sure that a place like
[[Page H2942]]
Walter Reed really does provide the care and the service and the best
quality of medical services that we can provide, and not what has
occurred.
The Congress today is something that gives Americans a chance for
accountability, gives us a chance to deal with this administration on a
straight-up basis, and the fact we are here, we are going to see
improvements, just the fact that we are here, because it isn't just a
rubber stamp anymore. There really is oversight.
{time} 2045
Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, let me say in these final few moments
tonight, I want to say there have been over 91 hearings on Iraq alone.
But we have also had oversight hearings on Hurricane Katrina. Several
of them, in fact. Subcommittee Chair Waters went down to New Orleans to
get the real story from people who are living it.
On the Committee on Financial Services, we are going to be talking
about predatory lending. Today we talked about executive pay and
shining some light on that issue.
On the Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee Chairman Nadler held a
hearing on civil rights enforcement, what is the Attorney General's
civil rights division doing in the area of civil rights enforcement.
I have participated in hearings on the increase in immigration fees
and how those fees are going up in a precipitous manner and questions
were asked and officials were made to answer.
So as I said before, this is a time of accountability. We are slowly
trying to restore the public's faith in government. They have a right
to believe that their government is honest, fair dealing, accountable
and transparent. I couldn't have been prouder in the committee hearings
I personally have been a part of on issues from the National Security
Letters and the FBI executive pay, civil rights enforcement,
immigration; there has been a whole range.
I think the story is not necessarily one thing like the Valerie Plame
incident or Walter Reed or the U.S. Attorneys; but there is a
prevailing, systematic reexamination of how government does business. I
am proud to be associated with it.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Ellison. Mr. Hodes.
Mr. HODES. Thank you, Mr. Klein. It has been a pleasure to be with
you here tonight and have this conversation with the people of this
country about what oversight and accountability brings to government.
I started my remarks this evening with a quotation from former
President Woodrow Wilson. And I want to go back further in time to end
my remarks with a quote from John Stuart Mill who said: ``The proper
office of a representative assembly is to watch and control the
government, to throw the light of publicity of its acts, to compel a
full exposition and justification of all of them which anyone considers
questionable.''
And it is that light of publicity, the light that we shine with
accountability that helps preserve this government and leads to an open
and transparent government. I am privileged to serve on the Information
Subcommittee of the Government Oversight and Reform Committee. One of
the things that we did which is essential in terms of the
accountability of government, we brought to the floor and passed in
this Congress in a bipartisan way much-needed reforms to the Freedom of
Information Act. It is an act which every citizen can take advantage of
to gain information about the government, to hold the government
accountable, find documents and information that is the citizens' right
to have.
What we did was we restored the Freedom of Information Act to its
rightful place where there is now once again a presumption in this
government that the government should be open and disclose to its
citizens what is going on, what it has for information and documents
unless those documents fit into certain narrow exemptions. This has
been a critical thing that we have done in this Congress.
I am proud to be a new Member and working hard for accountability.
And when the American people see that they truly have an accountability
Congress working for them to eliminate waste, fraud, abuse and
corruption, to save taxpayer money, they will once again regain trust
in their elected officials and in the people's House.
Mr. KLEIN of Florida. I thank you, Mr. Hodes, for being part of our
freshman class and our working group that is going to be here every
week. The 110th Congress is strengthening oversight, and the proof is
in the pudding.
People can say, I have lost confidence in Congress, but look at what
we are doing. We have had dozens of hearings in the Foreign Affairs
Committee just on the ability of working with our diplomatic efforts
and all of the strategies in dealing with Iraq on the nonmilitary side.
In the past, there have not been enough opportunities to do that.
We've had hearings on the veterans health care crisis and Walter
Reed, the politicalization of the Justice Department and how wrong that
is and that needs to be cleaned up, the Hurricane Katrina response and
the things we are doing right now, passing legislation to truly get
people back up on their feet. Global warming and energy independence
was mentioned, and the fact is that we are getting down to the things
we need to do as Americans to deal with our energy needs and the fact
that there is an environmental impact. And, of course, upcoming
hearings of oversight on everything from Valerie Plame to oil and gas
royalties and National Guard and intelligence.
This is part of the mandate of the last election. I look forward to
working with our freshman class. We will be doing this every week. We
certainly want input from our constituents back home. Tell us what you
think we can be doing. We look forward to working with both Republicans
and Democrats to build on this theme of accountability and oversight.
____________________