Congressional Record, Volume 156 Issue 35 (Thursday, March 11, 2010)

[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 35 (Thursday, March 11, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H1329-H1337]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

IMPEACHING JUDGE G. THOMAS PORTEOUS, JR.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Conyers) is
recognized for 1 hour.

General Leave

Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
have 5 legislative days to revise and extend their remarks and include
therein extraneous material on the resolution under consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to my friend the
distinguished ranking member, the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Smith), and
ask unanimous consent that he be allowed to control the time on his
side for purposes of debate.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. CONYERS. I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Members of the House, it is a sad day that we must find that a
Federal judge has betrayed his office and should be impeached, and yet
that is our task today. It is assigned to us by the Constitution to
protect the institutions of government from those who show themselves
unfit to hold positions of public trust, and, of course, we take this
duty very seriously.
The judge in question is G. Thomas Porteous, who has cast a long
shadow on the administration of justice under his watch. Your House
Judiciary Committee has completed an independent investigation
conducted with thoroughness by a special task force on our committee
chaired by Adam Schiff, with much distinction. I also thank his co-
Chair, Bob Goodlatte, and Hank Johnson, the subcommittee Chair on
Judiciary from which this matter arose.
Members of the House, our investigation has demonstrated that Judge
Porteous has engaged in misconduct in various spheres of his public
life spanning decades. His misconduct is described in detail in the
report filed by our committee, which is available to any Member that
wishes a copy, and our committee has subsequently voted unanimously to
recommend four articles of impeachment. Our Chair of the Impeachment
Task Force, Adam Schiff, is going to expand on the details.
Since so many Members want time, I just want to make this opening
comment: The Department of Justice and the Judicial Conference have
determined that Judge Porteous had clearly committed serious misconduct
in various spheres of his personal and professional life. The Judicial
Conference referred the matter to the House for possible impeachment.
The Fifth Circuit suspended him from sitting on the bench.
This committee, through a specially appointed task force, has
thoroughly and independently investigated the facts, held detailed
factual hearings relating to the judge's misconduct in connection with
his relationships with lawyers, in connection with his personal
bankruptcy filing, and his relationship with bail bondsmen. Additional
hearings included testimony from experts on judicial ethics and on the
constitutional standards that surround impeachment.
So the four separate articles before us today are laid out in detail
and include a variety of offenses that we will go into shortly. The
misconduct, I am sorry to say, easily satisfies the constitutional
standard of being high crimes and misdemeanors, and clearly renders the
judge unfit to continue service.
I bring this resolution to the floor with regret that we are called
upon to take this action, but I have no doubt that we must take action.
The grounds for impeachment are overwhelmingly established, and,
therefore, I urge my colleagues' careful consideration in support of
the resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, we are here today to consider and vote on four articles
of impeachment against United States District Judge G. Thomas Porteous.
Thanks go to Congressman Schiff and Congressman Goodlatte for the way
they have worked together in overseeing the Impeachment Task Force's
very thorough inquiry into a number of serious allegations involving
Judge Porteous. They have set an outstanding example of how an inquiry
like this can in fact be conducted in a bipartisan manner.
The Constitution grants the House of Representatives the sole power
to impeach a sitting Federal judge. This is a very serious power which
Congress does not take lightly. Impeachment by the House constitutes
one of the few checks on the judiciary and is to be used only in
instances when a judge betrays his office or proves unfit to hold that
position of trust. In fact, only 14 Federal judges have been impeached
by the House in our entire Nation's history, with four of these
occurring in the past 24 years.
After an extensive investigation and a series of hearings by the
Impeachment Task Force, clear and convincing evidence has been
developed involving a number of different actions by Judge Porteous
that make him unfit to serve as a Federal judge. The report, which
accompanies the articles of impeachment, sets forth in detail the
various incidents of improper conduct by Judge Porteous.
Though judges rule on the law, they are not above the law. To
preserve equality and fairness in our constitutional democracy, we must
protect the integrity of the courts. It is clear that Judge Porteous'
actions are a violation of the American people's trust and a threat to
the integrity of the Federal bench. The American people deserve better
from their Federal judges.
I also hope our vote today sends a message of encouragement to the
great majority of judges who serve our Nation with distinction. We will
not let a few bad actors mar the reputation of others on the Federal
bench.
The time has come for the House of Representatives to conclude that
Judge Porteous' conduct has made him unworthy to serve on the Federal
bench.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may consume to the
gentleman from California, Adam Schiff, who was our task force chairman
and who had ample time over these many months to display his
legislative and judicial skills.
Mr. SCHIFF. I thank the gentleman, and want to commend the leadership
of Chairman Conyers in bringing this matter to conclusion here on the
House floor and for all your leadership on the committee, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Speaker, today we again find ourselves in the regrettable
circumstance where we must act to remove a Federal judge from the
bench.

[[Page H1330]]

The task before us is not one that we would welcome, however it is an
important responsibility entrusted to us by the Founders and one that
we cannot shrink from.
Unlike elected officials who may be removed periodically by the
voters or serve a term that comes to an end, the Founding Fathers
provided only one extraordinary method of removing a Federal judge,
that of impeachment, which has only been used 14 times in our Nation's
history. Regrettably, the matter before us today warrants its use once
again.
The House of Representatives directed the House Judiciary Committee
Task Force on Judicial Impeachment to inquire into whether Judge
Porteous of the Eastern District of Louisiana should be impeached. As
Chair of the task force, I would like to report on our work and provide
the Members of the House with a procedural history of the matter, as
well as an overview of the relevant facts.
I want to thank each of the members of the task force that worked on
the matter, and in particular the ranking member, Bob Goodlatte, for
his extraordinary work. Together we have tried to ensure that we
proceed in a fair, open, and deliberate manner, and this has been done
in a bipartisan, really nonpartisan, basis.
G. Thomas Porteous, Jr., was appointed to the Federal bench in 1994
and has served in the New Orleans Courthouse in the Eastern District of
Louisiana. After a multiyear FBI and Federal grand jury investigation,
the Department of Justice in May 2007 submitted a complaint referring
allegations of judicial misconduct.
The complaint noted that the department had determined not to seek
criminal charges for reasons including the statute of limitations and
other factors impacting prosecution, but the complaint stated that the
investigation uncovered evidence of pervasive misconduct and evidence
that Judge Porteous may have violated Federal and State criminal laws
controlling canons of judicial conduct, rules of professional
responsibility, and conducted himself in a manner antithetical to the
constitutional standard of good behavior required of all Federal
judges.
After an extensive disciplinary proceeding in the Fifth Circuit Court
of Appeals, at which Judge Porteous, representing himself, made
statements, cross-examined witnesses, and called witnesses on his own
behalf, the Judicial Conference of the United States voted unanimously
to refer this matter to the House of Representatives based on
substantial evidence of conduct that individually and collectively
brought disrepute to the Federal judiciary. The Fifth Circuit also
moved to take the maximum disciplinary action allowed by law against
Judge Porteous, suspending him for 2 years or until Congress takes
final action on the impeachment proceedings.
As a part our initial investigation, Impeachment Task Force staff
interviewed over 65 individuals, deposed about 25 witnesses under oath,
obtained documents from various sources, including from witnesses, the
24th Judicial Court in Jefferson Parish, and the Department of Justice.
After the initial investigatory phase, the task force held four
separate evidentiary hearings over 5 days in November and December of
2009 in order to determine whether Judge Porteous' conduct provides a
sufficient basis for impeachment and to develop a record upon which to
recommend whether to adopt articles of impeachment.

{time} 1100

Our first hearing focused on allegations of misconduct in relation to
Judge Porteous presiding over the case In re: Liljeberg Enterprises,
Inc. The record reflects that Judge Porteous was engaged in a corrupt
kickback scheme with the law firm of Amato & Creely, that he failed to
disclose his relationship with the firm, and that he denied a motion to
recuse himself from the case, despite the firm's representation of one
of the parties. The kickback scheme involved appointing Mr. Creely as a
curator in hundreds of cases, with fees amounting to approximately
$40,000 paid to the Amato & Creely firm, approximately half of which
was then paid back to Judge Porteous. Judge Porteous made intentionally
misleading statements at the recusal hearing intended to minimize the
extent of his personal relationship with the firm.
The record also reflects that Judge Porteous engaged in corrupt
conduct after the bench trial and while the case was under advisement
by soliciting and accepting things of values from attorneys at the
firm, including $2,000 in cash. This corrupt relationship and his
conduct as a Federal judge have brought his court into scandal and
disrepute and demonstrates that he is unfit for office. Our
investigation also uncovered evidence that his solicitation and
acceptance of things from Creely & Amato were not isolated events
limited to two attorneys, but a pattern of using his perch on the
Federal bench to extract and to receive things of value from attorneys
and parties in front of him.
Our second hearing focused on allegations that Judge Porteous
repeatedly made false and misleading statements, including the
concealment of debts, under oath and in disregard of a bankruptcy
court's orders. The record reflects that as a Federal judge he
knowingly and intentionally made material false statements and
representations under penalty of perjury and repeatedly violated a
court order in his case. This included using a false name and post
office box to conceal his identity as a debtor in the case; concealing
assets, preferential payments to certain creditors, and gambling losses
and debts; as well as incurring new debts while the case was pending,
all in violation of the court's order.
Our investigation also uncovered further evidence of his willful
efforts to conceal his financial situation and the extent of his
gambling over the years. Taken together, it is clear that his false
statements and the bankruptcy proceedings were not the result of an
oversight or mistake, but reflected instead an effort to conceal his
financial affairs and his gambling.
Our third hearing focused on allegations that Judge Porteous engaged
in a corrupt relationship with bail bondsman Louis Marcotte and his
sister Lori. The record reflects that as part of this corrupt
relationship, Judge Porteous solicited and received numerous things of
value, including meals, trips, home and car repairs, for his personal
use and benefit while at the same time taking official actions on
behalf of the Marcottes. This included setting, reducing, and splitting
bonds for the Marcottes while on the State bench, and improperly
setting aside or expunging felony convictions for two Marcotte
employees.
Judge Porteous used the power and prestige of his office to assist
the Marcottes in forming relationships with other State judicial
officers and others. Judge Porteous also knew and understood that Louis
Marcotte made false statements to the FBI in an effort to assist his
appointments to the Federal bench.
At our fourth and final hearing, we received testimony from a panel
of constitutional scholars on whether Judge Porteous' conduct renders
him unfit to hold office, and provided a sufficient basis for
impeachment. The record reflects that Judge Porteous knowingly made
false material statements about his past to both the U.S. Senate and
the FBI in connection with his nomination to the Federal bench in order
to conceal corrupt relationships.
In addition, Judge Porteous knew that another individual made false
statements to the FBI in an effort to assist his appointment to the
Federal bench. Judge Porteous' failure to disclose these corrupt
relationships deprived the U.S. Senate and the public of the
information that would have had a material impact on his confirmation.
Our panel of experts testified that such behavior clearly constitutes
impeachable conduct.
I'd like to note that the task force invited Judge Porteous to
testify, but he declined our offer. In addition, the task force
afforded the opportunity for Judge Porteous and his counsel to request
that the task force hear from a witness or witnesses that they wish to
call. Judge Porteous' counsel informed the task force that they did not
wish to avail themselves of that opportunity. The task force permitted
Judge Porteous' counsel to participate in our hearings on behalf of his
client, and he was permitted to question the witnesses. This was an
extraordinary prerogative that was granted to counsel.
Our proceeding today does not constitute a trial, as the
constitutional

[[Page H1331]]

power to try impeachment resides in the Senate. Rather, the House's
role is to inquire whether Judge Porteous' conduct provides a
sufficient basis for impeachment. According to leading commentators and
historical precedent on this issue, there are two broad categories of
conduct that have been recognized as justifying impeachment: serious
abuse of power, and conduct that demonstrates that an official is
``unworthy to fill'' the office that he or she holds.
After concluding that the full record establishes that Judge Porteous
should be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, the Impeachment
Task Force met in late January and unanimously voted in favor of
recommending four Articles of Impeachment for consideration by the
Judiciary Committee. On January 27, the House Judiciary Committee voted
unanimously in favor of each article and to favorably report H. Res.
1031 to the full House. A 147-page report has been filed detailing the
inquiry for Members of the House.
Mr. Speaker, Judge Porteous engaged in a pattern of conduct that is
incompatible with the trust and confidence placed in him as a Federal
judge. His longstanding pattern of corrupt conduct, so utterly lacking
in honesty or integrity, demonstrates his unfitness to serve as a U.S.
District Court judge. His material false statements about his past,
made knowingly to both the U.S. Senate and to the FBI in order to
obtain his Federal office, deprived the Senate and the public of
information that would have had a material impact on his confirmation.
Accordingly, I urge the House to approve the Articles of Impeachment
included in House Resolution 1031.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 7 minutes to the ranking
member of the Impeachment Task Force, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr.
Goodlatte.)
Mr. GOODLATTE. I want to thank our ranking member, the gentleman from
Texas, for yielding me time and for his active engagement in support of
moving this process forward.
Mr. Speaker, Article III of the Constitution provides that Federal
judges are appointed for life and that they ``shall hold their offices
during good behavior.'' Indeed, the Framers new that an independent
judiciary free of political motivations was necessary to the fair
resolution of disputes and the fair administration of our laws.
However, the Framers were also pragmatists and had the foresight to
include checks against the abuse of the independence and power that
comes with a judicial appointment.
Article 1, Section 2, Clause 5 of the Constitution grants the House
of Representatives the sole power of impeachment. This is a very
serious power that should not be undertaken lightly. Indeed, it is a
rare and solemn occasion when the House of Representative must vote on
Articles of Impeachment against a Federal judge. Today's vote will mark
only the second time in over 20 years that this has occurred. However,
when the evidence emerges that an individual is abusing his judicial
office for his own advantage, the integrity of the judicial system
becomes compromised, and the House of Representatives has the duty to
investigate the matter and take the appropriate actions to end the
abuse and restore confidence in the judicial system.
On June 17, 2008, the Judicial Conference of the United States
certified to the House of Representatives that ``consideration of
impeachment of U.S. District Judge G. Thomas Porteous may be
warranted.'' This certification was the culmination of an investigation
and formal complaint by the Department of Justice, an investigation and
final report by a special investigatory committee appointed by the
Fifth Judicial Circuit, and consideration and vote by the Judicial
Council of the Judicial Conference of the United States.
In September 2008, the House passed a resolution instructing the
Judiciary Committee to further investigate whether Judge Porteous
should be impeached. The Task Force on Judicial Impeachment was then
created by the House Judiciary Committee to further investigate the
matter. The task force conducted an exhaustive investigation, working
with law enforcement and judicial officials, conducting numerous
interviews, taking depositions from key witnesses, gathering evidence
and transcripts from previous investigations, and conducting
congressional hearings. Those efforts have uncovered a large amount of
information, including much new evidence that was not uncovered in
previous investigations.
The evidence shows that, among other instances of misconduct, while
on the Federal bench, Judge Porteous refused to recuse himself from a
Federal case when he had previously engaged in a corrupt kickback
scheme with the attorneys representing the defense; that he later took
thousands of dollars in cash from those same attorneys while the case
was still pending; that he took gifts from a bail bondsman in exchange
for granting favorable bond rates for him and then improperly expunged
the records of two of the bail bondsman's employees, one after Porteous
was confirmed by the Senate to be a Federal judge; that he used his
influence as a Federal judge to help the Marcottes establish beneficial
relationships with State court judges; that he lied to a bankruptcy
court when he filed for bankruptcy and then violated a bankruptcy court
order mandating that he not incur further debt; and that he made
materially false statements to the U.S. Senate and the FBI during his
confirmation process.
Based on the evidence gathered on January 21, 2010, I joined with
Chairman Conyers, Ranking Member Smith, and Task Force Chairman Schiff
to introduce House Resolution 1031, which contains four separate
Articles of Impeachment against Judge Porteous. The details of these
Articles have been discussed already today. It is important to note
that every member of the Task Force on Judicial Impeachment joined as
an original cosponsor of these articles. Furthermore, these Articles of
Impeachment were reported from the Judiciary Committee with a unanimous
vote of 24-0, a very rare occurrence. It is my strong recommendation
that the Members of the House now support these Articles of Impeachment
against Judge Porteous.
It is also important to note that during the task force investigation
Judge Porteous was invited to come testify, but declined this
invitation. His attorney was also invited to attend the hearings, was
given the privilege of asking questions of the witnesses at the
hearings, and was offered the opportunity to bring forth witnesses on
behalf of Judge Porteous.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank Adam Schiff, the
chairman of the Task Force on Judicial Impeachment, for his leadership
in this effort, along with all of the Members of the Task Force on both
sides of the aisle. As ranking member of the Impeachment Task Force, I
appreciate the fact that this effort was undertaken in a nonpartisan
fashion.
I would like to thank the task force staff on both sides of the aisle
and Branden Ritchie, legislative counsel in my office, for their
dedicated and invaluable work on this matter.
I would like to also thank Chairman Conyers and Ranking Member Smith
for their comprehensive, yet expeditious, consideration of these
Articles of Impeachment in the full Judiciary Committee. I'd also like
to extend additional thanks to the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr.
Sensenbrenner), who's the only Member who participated in the last
series of impeachment of Federal judges back in the 1980s. His
experience and knowledge has been invaluable as well.
I urge my colleagues in the House, not in a bipartisan manner, but in
a nonpartisan manner, to join in supporting all four of these Articles
of Impeachment and send this measure to the United States Senate for
trial.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, how much time remains on both sides?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan has 15 minutes.
The gentleman from Texas has 22 minutes.
Mr. CONYERS. I yield such time as she may consume to a member of the
committee, the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
(Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas asked and was given permission to revise
and extend her remarks.)
Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, this is indeed a sad day and a
solemn day. As indicated by my colleagues on the floor of the House,
however, it is an obligation of this body. I'd like to acknowledge the
chairman of the Impeachment Task Force, Congressman Schiff, for his
leadership,

[[Page H1332]]

but also for his balance and temperament in a very serious challenge
that we have in providing the guideposts and the moral guideposts for a
number of tough issues that deal with our Federal Judiciary and a
number of other instances where impeachment is in fact the authority of
this body and the Constitution. I'd like to acknowledge the ranking
member, Mr. Goodlatte; the chairman of the full committee, Mr. Conyers;
and the ranking member, Mr. Smith.
This is an instance where you would have hoped that we would have had
a different outcome. But as my colleagues have so articulately
expressed, there was a long pattern that many of us found very
disturbing. Judge Thomas Porteous seemingly began these actions without
reproof while he was a State district judge, soliciting and accepting
cash and other things of values from attorneys practicing before him,
and failing to recuse himself from a prominent case in which those
attorneys were involved.

{time} 1115

As a State judge, he repeatedly accepted things of value from bail
bondsmen in exchange for setting bonds at levels to increase profits
for the bail bondsmen and, after becoming a Federal judge, assisting
them in forming corrupt relationships with other State judges. The
pattern continued.
As a Federal judge, he fraudulently concealed his personal
bankruptcy, income, assets, gambling activities, gambling debts, and in
violation of court order, incurring additional gambling debt while his
bankruptcy proceeding was pending.
He fraudulently concealed, in his FBI background check and on his
Senate questionnaire, the corrupt relationships with attorneys and bail
bondsmen.
I think it is worth noting that Judge Porteous began his career as a
State court judge, but because of the concealment of these activities,
he was then nominated to the Federal bench. In the essence of being
nominated, let me be very clear, one could have personally taken one's
self out of the running for a bench as high and as sacred as a Federal
Judiciary. That is a lifetime appointment, but at no time during the
time that his nomination was put before the President of the United
States, the United States Senate, did Judge Porteous think that his
previous behavior did not warrant him ascending to the Federal bench.
That saddens me. Maybe we need to look more at counseling individuals
who are seeking or have the opportunity to be nominated to these high
offices. Maybe they need that to understand the flaws or failures in
their character or performance.
Again, fraudulently concealing in his FBI background check and on his
Senate questionnaire the corrupt relationships with the attorneys and
bail bondsmen, evidence that the committee was able to see when
questions were asked whether there was anything in your background that
would warrant you not being able to be appointed to the Federal bench,
this judge did not answer truthfully.
The Department of Justice attempted to reprimand, and their complaint
indicated that the instances of Judge Porteous' dishonesty in his own
sworn statements and court filings, his decade-long course of conduct
in soliciting and accepting streams of payments and gifts from
litigants and lawyers with matters before him, and his repeated failure
to disclose those dealings to interested parties and the court all
render him unfit as an Article III judge, that is, a Federal judge.
Although the Department did not seek criminal charges for reasons
that involve partly the statute of limitations, their complaint
indicated that his actions would render him unfit as an Article III
judge. The Fifth Circuit also moved to take the maximum disciplinary
action allowed by law against Judge Porteous, suspending him for 2
years or until Congress takes final action on the impeachment
proceedings.
Unfortunately and sadly, that day has come, and as we had asked,
through the task force, for the opportunity for Judge Porteous to have
due process, and that is to give him the opportunity to speak before
the task force and, the alternative, to allow witnesses to come on his
behalf, none of that was accepted. So today I rise on the floor of the
House to accept the findings of our task force and the vote of our
committee in full and ask this body to address the concern by sending
this to the United States Senate for hearings on impeachment. This is a
resolution to suggest that the Articles of Impeachment should be passed
to the United States Senate under our constitutional process.
Again, this is a sad day and a solemn day. But sadly, this indicates
that a behavior of an individual who has achieved one of the highest
offices in the land, that is, of the Article III courts, judge for life
on the Federal bench, deserves, if you will, to be recommended for
impeachment.
I ask for a vote of ``yes'' on the resolution.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H. Res 1031, a resolution setting
forth four Articles of Impeachment against G. Thomas Porteous, Jr.,
judge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana,
for high crimes and misdemeanors. I would like to thank our Judiciary
Chairman Conyers for shepherding this bill through the Judiciary
Committee so that justice can be served.
The Judiciary Committee was charged with determining whether federal
Judge Thomas Porteous should be impeached for the following: soliciting
and accepting cash and other things of value from attorneys practicing
before him and failing to recuse himself from a prominent case in which
those attorneys were involved; as a State judge, repeatedly accepting
things of value from bail bondsmen in exchange for setting bonds at
levels to increase profits for the bail bondsmen and, after becoming a
federal judge, assisting them in forming corrupt relationships with
other State judges; as a federal judge, fraudulently concealing, in his
personal bankruptcy, income, assets, gambling activities, and gambling
debts and, in violation of court order, incurring additional gambling
debt while his bankruptcy proceeding was pending; and fraudulently
concealing, in his FBI background check and on his Senate
questionnaire, the corrupt relationships with the attorneys and bail
bondsmen.
As a federal judge, Judge Thomas Porteous's number one responsibility
under the oath that he is sworn to is to ensure that the laws of the
land under the United States Constitution are protected and supported.
The Justice Department investigated whether or not Judge Porteous broke
his oath. In May 2007, the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation completed a multi-year criminal investigation of Judge
Porteous and submitted a formal complaint of judicial misconduct to the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Although the Department decided not to seek criminal charges for
reasons including statute of limitations issues and other factors
impacting prosecution, the complaint stated that the investigation
uncovered evidence that ``indicates that Judge Porteous may have
violated federal and state criminal laws, controlling canons of
judicial conduct, rules of professional responsibility, and conducted
himself in a manner antithetical to the constitutional standard of good
behavior required of all federal judges.'' The complaint concluded that
``the instances of Judge Porteous's dishonesty in his own sworn
statements and court filings, his decade-long course of conduct in
soliciting and accepting a stream of payments and gifts from litigants
and lawyers with matters before him, and his repeated failures to
disclose those dealings to interested parties and the Court all render
him unfit as an Article III judge.''
Mr. Speaker, there was also an investigation by the Fifth Circuit.
The Fifth Circuit appointed a Special Investigatory Committee to
investigate the allegations. Hearings were held at which Judge
Porteous, representing himself, made statements, cross-examined
witnesses, and called witnesses on his own behalf. Based on the Special
Committee's report concluding that Judge Porteous had engaged in
conduct which might constitute grounds for impeachment, the Judicial
Conference voted unanimously to certify the matter to the U.S. House of
Representatives, based on substantial evidence that Judge Porteous had
repeatedly committed perjury, willfully and systematically concealed
information from litigants and the public, violated several criminal
statutes and ethical canons, and made false representations with the
intent to defraud.
The Fifth Circuit also moved to take the maximum disciplinary action
allowed by law against Judge Porteous, suspending him for two years or
``until Congress takes final action on the impeachment proceedings.''
As Members of the House Judiciary Impeachment Task Force, my
colleagues were directed by the House to determine whether there was
sufficient evidence to impeach Judge Porteous for the alleged crimes
for which he was being charged. As part of the initial investigation,
our staff interviewed over 65 individuals, deposed approximately 25
witnesses under oath, and obtained documents

[[Page H1333]]

from various sources, including from witnesses, the 24th Judicial Court
in Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, and the Department of Justice.
After the initial investigatory phase, the task force held four
separate hearings over five days in November and December 2009 in order
to determine whether Judge Porteous's conduct provides a sufficient
basis for impeachment and to develop a record upon which to recommend
whether to adopt Articles of Impeachment.
The first task force hearing focused on allegations of misconduct in
relation to Judge Porteous presiding over the case In re: Liljeberg
Enterprises, Inc. The record reflects that Judge Porteous was engaged
in a corrupt kickback scheme with the law firm of Amato & Creely, that
he failed to disclose his relationship with the firm, and that he
denied a motion to recuse himself from the case despite the firm's
representation of one of the parties. The kickback scheme involved
appointing Mr. Creely as a curator in hundreds of cases, with fees
amounting to approximately $40,000 paid to the Amato & Creely firm,
approximately half of which was paid back to Judge Porteous. Judge
Porteous made intentionally misleading statements at the recusal
hearing, intended to minimize the extent of this personal relationship
with the firm. The record also reflects that Judge Porteous engaged in
corrupt conduct after the bench trial and while the case was under
advisement, by soliciting and accepting things of value from attorneys
at the firm, including $2,000 in cash. This corrupt relationship and
his conduct as a federal judge have brought his court into scandal and
disrepute and demonstrate that he is unfit for office.
The second task force hearing focused on allegations that Judge
Porteous repeatedly made false and misleading statements, including the
concealment of debts, under oath and in disregard of a bankruptcy
court's orders. The record reflects that as a federal judge, he
knowingly and intentionally made material false statements and
representations under penalty of perjury and repeatedly violated a
court order in his case. This included using a false name and post
office box to conceal his identity as a debtor in the case; concealing
assets, preferential payments to certain creditors, and gambling losses
and debts; and incurring new debts while the case was pending in
violation of the court's order.
The third task force hearing focused on allegations that Judge
Porteous engaged in a corrupt relationship with bail bondsman Louis
Marcotte and his sister Lori. The record reflects that as part of this
corrupt relationship, Judge Porteous solicited and accepted numerous
things of value, including meals, trips, and home and car repairs, for
his personal use and benefit, while at the same time taking official
actions to improperly benefit the Marcottes. This included setting,
reducing, and splitting bonds for the Marcottes while on the State
bench, and improperly setting aside or expunging felony convictions for
two Marcotte employees. Judge Porteous also used the power and prestige
of his office to assist the Marcottes in forming relationships with
State judicial officers and others. Judge Porteous also knew and
understood that Louis Marcotte made false statements to the FBI in an
effort to assist his appointment to the federal bench.

Fourth Hearing--False and Misleading Statements in Confirmation; Expert
Views

At the fourth hearing, the Task Force received testimony from a panel
of constitutional scholars on whether Judge Porteous's conduct renders
him unfit to hold office and provides a sufficient basis for
impeachment. The scholars considered not only allegations that were the
subject of the previous hearings, but also the record reflecting that
Judge Porteous had knowingly made material false statements about his
past to both the U.S. Senate and to the FBI in connection with his
nomination to the federal bench in order to conceal corrupt
relationships. In addition, Judge Porteous knew that another individual
made false statements to the FBI in an effort to assist his appointment
to the federal bench. Judge Porteous's failure to disclose these
corrupt relationships deprived the U.S. Senate and the public of
information that would have had a material impact on his confirmation.
The panel of experts testified that making these materially false
statements. clearly constituted impeachable conduct, as did the conduct
established in the previous task force hearings.

The task force invited Judge Porteous to testify, but he declined the
offer. In addition, the task force afforded the opportunity for Judge
Porteous and his counsel to request that the task force hear from a
witness or witnesses that they wish to call. Judge Porteous's counsel
informed the task force that they did not wish to avail themselves of
that opportunity. The task force permitted Judge Porteous's counsel to
participate in the hearings on behalf of his client and to question the
witnesses. This was an extraordinary prerogative that was granted to
counsel.
After the task force concluded that the full record established that
Judge Porteous should be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, we
met on January 21st and unanimously voted in favor of recommending four
Articles of Impeachment for consideration by the House Judiciary
Committee. These Articles were subsequently introduced in the House in
the form of H. Res. 1031. On January 27th, the House Judiciary
Committee individually approved each Article unanimously and ordered H.
Res. 1031 favorably reported by a rollcall vote of 24-0.
Mr. Speaker, today we must determine whether we fulfill our duty to
uphold the laws of the Constitution and allow justice to be served or
whether we will condone what has been determined by my colleagues on
the judiciary committee as impeachable actions. As a member of the
Impeachment Task Force, I had an opportunity to see firsthand the
evidence that was presented in this case and believe that Judge
Porteous should be impeached for his actions.
Mr. Speaker, I strongly support H. Res. 1031 and urge my colleagues
to join me in upholding the laws of our great nation.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman
from Wisconsin (Mr. Sensenbrenner), former chairman of the Judiciary
Committee.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Before I begin, I demand a division of the
question for a separate vote on each of the four Articles of
Impeachment.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is divisible and will be
divided for the vote by article.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, both the Task Force on Judicial
Impeachment and the full Judiciary Committee unanimously adopted and
reported out House Resolution 1031. The overwhelming support for this
resolution is indicative of the weight of evidence supporting the four
Articles of Impeachment against Judge G. Thomas Porteous.
Impeaching a Federal judge is not something that the House of
Representatives takes lightly, and impeachment proceedings are not
something that we consider too often around here. By my count, this is
only the 20th time that the House of Representatives will impeach a
civil officer under the Constitution, and these tasks are not pleasant.
When we need to do them from time to time, it is our responsibility, as
Members of the House of Representatives. I have been involved in a
number of impeachment proceedings over the years, but never before have
I seen the overwhelming and blatant corruption we have before us here
today. Judge Porteous is one of a kind, and it is time for him to
receive his comeuppance.
The FBI and Justice Department have spent years investigating the
wrongdoings by this judge. After their investigation, the Judicial
Conference of the United States unanimously voted to refer this matter
to the United States House of Representatives. In addition to the
Justice Department's investigation, the staff of our Impeachment Task
Force conducted a systematic investigation. This investigation resulted
in four evidentiary hearings over the course of 5 days late last year,
and it culminated in the full Judiciary Committee unanimously voting to
approve four Articles of Impeachment against Judge Porteous.
The Impeachment Task Force hearings laid out overwhelming corruption
orchestrated by Judge Porteous. My colleagues on the task force have
detailed the specific actions taken by Judge Porteous, but I think it
is worthwhile to focus on a few of them.
Judge Porteous was engaged in a crooked kickback scheme with his
buddies at the law firm of Amato & Creely. The firm received tens of
thousands of dollars in curator fees, and they kicked back about half
of it to the judge. The kickback scheme wasn't the only shady dealing
Judge Porteous engaged in with Amato & Creely. He was so emboldened
that he would solicit gifts and cash while sitting on the bench.
Sometimes he accepted trips. Other days, it was an expensive lunch or
dinner. On another occasion, Creely helped pay for the judge's son's
bachelor party in Las Vegas.
He didn't just solicit from Amato & Creely but also from others with
business before his court. With this information alone, there should be
no question about his blatant ethical lapses, rendering him unfit to
serve on the Federal bench, but there's more.

[[Page H1334]]

Judge Porteous made false and misleading statements under the penalty
of perjury with regard to his debts and bankruptcy proceedings. He
misrepresented his name on court filings and used a post office box to
conceal his identity. He also attempted to conceal assets and violated
court rules.
While it's sad to say these actions almost seemed innocuous compared
to his other actions and corrupt relationships, our task force spent a
day focusing our attention on Judge Porteous' relationship with a bail
bondsman named Louis Marcotte and his sister Lori. This hearing
included testimony about the judge soliciting meals and trips like he
did with the lawyers but also other things of value, such as auto and
home repairs. In return, Judge Porteous assisted the Marcottes.
Judge Porteous had the opportunity to testify before the task force,
but he chose not to participate in the proceedings. The entirety of the
record by the task force plainly shows a pattern of unethical conduct
that is not worthy of a Federal judge. The evidence demonstrates that
he clearly abused his office and had complete disregard for the laws
that he took an oath to uphold.
Soon, the onus will fall on the Senate to hold a trial. The clock is
ticking, and it's important this trial take place promptly. Judge
Porteous' suspension is set to expire in September, making him eligible
to return to the bench. It is imperative that the Senate act
expeditiously to ensure that this corrupt judge does not resume his
perch on the Federal bench and preside again.
I urge my colleagues to join me in voting to impeach Judge G. Thomas
Porteous on each of the four Articles of Impeachment.
Mr. CONYERS. I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman
from Louisiana (Mr. Scalise), a Member of Congress who has taken an
active interest in this case.
Mr. SCALISE. I thank the gentleman from Texas for yielding.
I rise in support of the resolution to impeach U.S. District Judge
Thomas Porteous, who is a judge representing the Eastern District of
Louisiana. I want to thank Representatives Schiff of California,
Goodlatte of Virginia, Chairman Conyers of Michigan, Ranking Member
Smith of Texas, and the entire Judiciary Committee and task force for
their diligent investigation and for keeping this a priority in your
committee.
After I read through all four Articles of Impeachment, it is clear
that the task force's findings warrant Judge Porteous' removal from the
Federal bench. In order to remove the cloud that exists, we need to
pass this resolution so the Eastern District of Louisiana can once
again provide the citizens a justice system free from corruption.
It is important that we pass this resolution today and that the
Senate takes this up in a time frame that doesn't allow Judge Porteous
to return to the bench, as would be the case in September if no further
action is taken. Passing this resolution will be yet another shot
across the bow and a strong reminder to everyone in public office that
we will not tolerate corruption and that we will maintain a zero
tolerance policy against public corruption at every level of
government.
Since Katrina, we've been vigilant against corruption at all levels
of government in south Louisiana. From Members of Congress to our local
levee boards, Louisiana is rebuilding the way our government works, and
we have made a commitment to upholding a zero tolerance policy against
public corruption at every level. This resolution reiterates that our
commitment is not just in word but in tough action.
Following Hurricane Katrina, those of us who vowed to rebuild the New
Orleans region both structurally and politically didn't just want to
simply rebuild the same old broken system that existed before the
storm. In fact, we committed to rebuild better. Part of that better New
Orleans includes reforming the old, corrupt system of the past.
Corruption might be a part of Louisiana's past, but it's no longer
acceptable behavior for our future.
I urge my colleagues to pass this resolution and also urge the Senate
to move swiftly in carrying out justice. A number of times I have urged
Judge Porteous to resign from the bench, and I would still encourage
him to do that. But short of that, Senate action in a swift timeframe
is necessary. Help us usher in a new day in Louisiana.
Mr. CONYERS. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman
from North Carolina (Mr. Coble), a distinguished and senior member of
the Judiciary Committee.
Mr. COBLE. Mr. Speaker, I thank my friend, the distinguished
gentleman from Texas, for yielding.
It has been said time and again today, Mr. Speaker, and I reiterate
it, it is, indeed, a sad day today. Hopefully, none of us takes great
glee in another's misfortune, but it appears, regarding the case at
hand, we have little or no choice.
The issue of ethics has become a prominent issue, and the American
citizenry justifiably insists as well as demands that high
officeholders practice high ethical values. In this case, it appears
clear that the judge did, indeed, violate the oath of his office. He
violated the trust that the public extended to him. I know of no
greater office than that of a United States Federal judge. People
clamor for it. They fight for it, to get on that bench. And once on the
bench, I think we are justified in insisting that they comply
ethically, accordingly.
The House Judiciary Committee, as you know, is the committee of
jurisdiction on impeachment matters. Nothing's happy about it.
Nothing's gleeful about it, but we discharge our duties.
I thank everyone on the floor for having spoken on this resolution,
and I urge its passage.
Mr. CONYERS. I continue to reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, today's vote on the Articles of Impeachment against
Judge Porteous is necessary to ensure justice is applied to a corrupt
Federal judge. When a judge is given a lifetime appointment, it is a
tremendous honor and responsibility. They serve the ideals of justice.
But when a judge abuses this authority, they must be held accountable
for any violation of those same principles of justice. Congress has an
obligation to put an end to Judge Porteous' abuse of authority and
remove him from the bench.
I urge my colleagues to vote in favor of each of the four Articles of
Impeachment being considered today and to help restore integrity to the
Federal bench. I also hope the Senate will act quickly to conduct the
trial of Judge Porteous.
Mr. JOHNSON of Georgia. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to support H. Res.
1031. As Chairman of the Subcommittee on Courts and Competition Policy
and a member of the Impeachment Task Force which heard evidence of the
unacceptable conduct of Judge Porteous, I continue to feel strongly
that the integrity of our judiciary is of the utmost importance. Based
on the evidence provided to the Task Force, Judge Porteous violated his
responsibility to uphold the honesty of our judiciary. Congress must
vote in favor of this resolution to demonstrate that such conduct
cannot and will not be tolerated from our judiciary.

{time} 1130

Mr. SMITH of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend my colleagues on both
sides of the aisle for the very thoughtful discussion that has gone on
around this matter.
I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. All time having been yielded back, the Chair
will divide the question for voting among the four articles of
impeachment.
The question is on resolving the first article of impeachment.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.
Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 and clause 9 of rule
XX, this 15-minute vote on resolving the first article of impeachment
will be followed by 5-minute votes, if ordered, on resolving each of
the three succeeding articles, and motions to suspend the rules with
regard to House Resolution 1107 and House Resolution 1047, if ordered.

[[Page H1335]]

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--yeas 412,
nays 0, not voting 18, as follows:

[Roll No. 102]

YEAS--412

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Griffith
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--18

Bilirakis
Boehner
Brown (SC)
Buyer
Davis (AL)
Davis (CA)
Deal (GA)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Hoekstra
Jackson Lee (TX)
Larson (CT)
Lowey
McCarthy (NY)
Richardson
Schakowsky
Tonko
Towns
Young (FL)

{time} 1157

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Two minutes remain in this
vote.
So the first article of impeachment was adopted.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Ms. SCHAKOWSKY. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 102, had I been present,
I would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. TONKO. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 102, I was detained with
legislative business. Had I been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 102, had I
been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 102, had I been present,
I would have voted ``yea.''
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 102, had I
been present, I would have voted ``yea.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on resolving the second
article of impeachment.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This will be a 5-minute vote.
The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 410,
noes 0, not voting 20, as follows:

[Roll No. 103]

AYES--410

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown, Corrine
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon

[[Page H1336]]

McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--20

Baldwin
Bilbray
Brown (SC)
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Butterfield
Buyer
Davis (AL)
Deal (GA)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Diaz-Balart, M.
Griffith
Hoekstra
Hunter
Larson (CT)
Miller, George
Ros-Lehtinen
Shuster
Towns
Woolsey
Young (FL)

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Two minutes remain in this
vote.

{time} 1204

So the second article of impeachment was adopted.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut, Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 103, had I
been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
Mr. MARIO DIAZ-BALART of Florida. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 103, I
was unavoidably detained. Had I been present, I would have voted
``aye.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on resolving the third
article of impeachment.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

[Roll No. 104]

AYES--416

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E. B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--14

Bishop (UT)
Brown (SC)
Buyer
Davis (AL)
Deal (GA)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Griffith
Hoekstra
Larson (CT)
Miller, George
Rangel
Speier
Woolsey
Young (FL)

Announcement by the Speaker Pro Tempore

The SPEAKER pro tempore (during the vote). Two minutes remain in this
vote.

{time} 1211

So the third article of impeachment was adopted.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
Stated for:
Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Mr. Speaker, on rollcall No. 104, had I
been present, I would have voted ``aye.''
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on resolving the fourth
article of impeachment.
The question was taken; and the Speaker pro tempore announced that
the ayes appeared to have it.

Recorded Vote

Mr. SENSENBRENNER. Mr. Speaker, I demand a recorded vote.
A recorded vote was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. This is a 5-minute vote.

[[Page H1337]]

The vote was taken by electronic device, and there were--ayes 423,
noes 0, not voting 7, as follows:

[Roll No. 105]

AYES--423

Ackerman
Aderholt
Adler (NJ)
Akin
Alexander
Altmire
Andrews
Arcuri
Austria
Baca
Bachmann
Bachus
Baird
Baldwin
Barrett (SC)
Barrow
Bartlett
Barton (TX)
Bean
Becerra
Berkley
Berman
Berry
Biggert
Bilbray
Bilirakis
Bishop (GA)
Bishop (NY)
Bishop (UT)
Blackburn
Blumenauer
Blunt
Boccieri
Boehner
Bonner
Bono Mack
Boozman
Boren
Boswell
Boucher
Boustany
Boyd
Brady (PA)
Brady (TX)
Braley (IA)
Bright
Broun (GA)
Brown (SC)
Brown, Corrine
Brown-Waite, Ginny
Buchanan
Burgess
Burton (IN)
Butterfield
Calvert
Camp
Campbell
Cantor
Cao
Capito
Capps
Capuano
Cardoza
Carnahan
Carney
Carson (IN)
Carter
Cassidy
Castle
Castor (FL)
Chaffetz
Chandler
Childers
Chu
Clarke
Clay
Cleaver
Clyburn
Coble
Coffman (CO)
Cohen
Cole
Conaway
Connolly (VA)
Conyers
Cooper
Costa
Costello
Courtney
Crenshaw
Crowley
Cuellar
Culberson
Cummings
Dahlkemper
Davis (CA)
Davis (IL)
Davis (KY)
Davis (TN)
DeFazio
DeGette
Delahunt
DeLauro
Dent
Diaz-Balart, M.
Dicks
Dingell
Doggett
Donnelly (IN)
Doyle
Dreier
Driehaus
Duncan
Edwards (MD)
Edwards (TX)
Ehlers
Ellison
Ellsworth
Emerson
Engel
Eshoo
Etheridge
Fallin
Farr
Fattah
Filner
Flake
Fleming
Forbes
Fortenberry
Foster
Foxx
Frank (MA)
Franks (AZ)
Frelinghuysen
Fudge
Gallegly
Garamendi
Garrett (NJ)
Gerlach
Giffords
Gingrey (GA)
Gohmert
Gonzalez
Goodlatte
Gordon (TN)
Granger
Graves
Grayson
Green, Al
Green, Gene
Grijalva
Guthrie
Gutierrez
Hall (NY)
Hall (TX)
Halvorson
Hare
Harman
Harper
Hastings (FL)
Hastings (WA)
Heinrich
Heller
Hensarling
Herger
Herseth Sandlin
Higgins
Hill
Himes
Hinchey
Hinojosa
Hirono
Hodes
Holden
Holt
Honda
Hoyer
Hunter
Inglis
Inslee
Israel
Issa
Jackson (IL)
Jackson Lee (TX)
Jenkins
Johnson (GA)
Johnson (IL)
Johnson, E.B.
Johnson, Sam
Jones
Jordan (OH)
Kagen
Kanjorski
Kaptur
Kennedy
Kildee
Kilpatrick (MI)
Kilroy
Kind
King (IA)
King (NY)
Kingston
Kirk
Kirkpatrick (AZ)
Kissell
Klein (FL)
Kline (MN)
Kosmas
Kratovil
Kucinich
Lamborn
Lance
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Latham
LaTourette
Latta
Lee (CA)
Lee (NY)
Levin
Lewis (CA)
Lewis (GA)
Linder
Lipinski
LoBiondo
Loebsack
Lofgren, Zoe
Lowey
Lucas
Luetkemeyer
Lujan
Lummis
Lungren, Daniel E.
Lynch
Mack
Maffei
Maloney
Manzullo
Marchant
Markey (CO)
Markey (MA)
Marshall
Matheson
Matsui
McCarthy (CA)
McCarthy (NY)
McCaul
McClintock
McCollum
McCotter
McDermott
McGovern
McHenry
McIntyre
McKeon
McMahon
McMorris Rodgers
McNerney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Melancon
Mica
Michaud
Miller (FL)
Miller (MI)
Miller (NC)
Miller, Gary
Miller, George
Minnick
Mitchell
Mollohan
Moore (KS)
Moore (WI)
Moran (KS)
Moran (VA)
Murphy (CT)
Murphy (NY)
Murphy, Patrick
Murphy, Tim
Myrick
Nadler (NY)
Napolitano
Neal (MA)
Neugebauer
Nunes
Nye
Oberstar
Obey
Olson
Olver
Ortiz
Owens
Pallone
Pascrell
Pastor (AZ)
Paul
Paulsen
Payne
Pence
Perlmutter
Perriello
Peters
Peterson
Petri
Pingree (ME)
Pitts
Platts
Poe (TX)
Polis (CO)
Pomeroy
Posey
Price (GA)
Price (NC)
Putnam
Quigley
Radanovich
Rahall
Rangel
Rehberg
Reichert
Reyes
Richardson
Rodriguez
Roe (TN)
Rogers (AL)
Rogers (KY)
Rogers (MI)
Rohrabacher
Rooney
Ros-Lehtinen
Roskam
Ross
Rothman (NJ)
Roybal-Allard
Royce
Ruppersberger
Rush
Ryan (OH)
Ryan (WI)
Salazar
Sanchez, Linda T.
Sanchez, Loretta
Sarbanes
Scalise
Schakowsky
Schauer
Schiff
Schmidt
Schock
Schrader
Schwartz
Scott (GA)
Scott (VA)
Sensenbrenner
Serrano
Sessions
Sestak
Shadegg
Shea-Porter
Sherman
Shimkus
Shuler
Shuster
Simpson
Sires
Skelton
Slaughter
Smith (NE)
Smith (NJ)
Smith (TX)
Smith (WA)
Snyder
Souder
Space
Speier
Spratt
Stark
Stearns
Stupak
Sullivan
Sutton
Tanner
Taylor
Teague
Terry
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Thompson (PA)
Thornberry
Tiahrt
Tiberi
Tierney
Titus
Tonko
Towns
Tsongas
Turner
Upton
Van Hollen
Velazquez
Visclosky
Walden
Walz
Wamp
Wasserman Schultz
Waters
Watson
Watt
Waxman
Weiner
Welch
Westmoreland
Whitfield
Wilson (OH)
Wilson (SC)
Wittman
Wolf
Woolsey
Wu
Yarmuth
Young (AK)

NOT VOTING--7

Buyer
Davis (AL)
Deal (GA)
Diaz-Balart, L.
Griffith
Hoekstra
Young (FL)

{time} 1244

So the fourth article of impeachment was adopted.
The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

____________________