[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 153 (Wednesday, October 30, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H6931-H6935]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
BENGHAZI
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Williams). Under the Speaker's announced
policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Wolf) is
recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
Mr. WOLF. Mr. Speaker, last week, a new national poll was released by
a respected pollster, Patrick Caddell, a Democrat, and John McLaughlin,
a Republican, making clear that the American people still don't feel
they know the truth about what happened in Benghazi nearly 14 months
ago.
According to the poll commissioned by Secure America Now, 63 percent
of Americans ``think the Obama administration is covering up the facts
about Benghazi''; and only 29 percent of registered voters say the
Obama administration has been honest about Benghazi. Think about that
for a moment. A supermajority of Americans believe they have been
misled by their government about what happened in Benghazi. This is
remarkable.
The American people know how significant it is that Ambassador
Stevens, the President's personal envoy to Libya, was the first
Ambassador killed in the line of duty in four decades on September 11,
11 years to the day that nearly 3,000 people were killed by al Qaeda
terrorists.
The American people intuitively understand that a plot of this scale
was not spontaneously inspired, as claimed by the administration's now
infamous talking points. The American people also know that it is
remarkable that no effort was made by Washington to rescue the
Americans in Benghazi or dispatch a hostage rescue team after the
Ambassador went missing that night.
I think the American people also wonder just what the CIA was doing
in Benghazi. Was it involved in the collection and transfer of weapons
to foreign countries? Possibly to support the Syrian rebels? And could
some of those weapons have fallen into the wrong hands, like the Syrian
jihadists?
It is too easy to say that this is ``classified information'' and
expect the American people to look away. Four Americans were killed
that night, several were wounded, and no one came to help them.
{time} 1500
Was it because the CIA was conducting a covert operation and if
something went wrong, that was just the price of doing business? Were
the CIA activities in Benghazi part of the reason the consulate and
annex were targeted?
These are legitimate questions the American people are asking that
deserve clear answers.
The McLaughlin-Cadell poll also found that 62 percent of the American
people support creating a ``special bipartisan committee with broad
powers to get to the truth about the attacks in Benghazi.''
Eighty percent of Republicans and 58 percent of independents support
the idea. Notably, nearly half of Democrats said it was important to
create a bipartisan committee to learn the truth.
The bottom line is Americans from across the political spectrum
recognize that not only are they not being told the truth, but they
feel Congress needs to change its approach to the investigation by
creating a special committee.
Why is it that, despite more than a year of investigations in five
separate committees, the American people feel they still don't know the
truth about what happened?
Perhaps it is because, despite more than a year of investigations by
five committees, most of the questions raised about that night remain
unanswered.
Perhaps it is because, despite more than a year of investigations by
five committees, hardly any of the key witnesses responsible for the
government's response that night--or lack thereof--have publicly
testified.
Perhaps it is because, despite more than a year of investigations,
none of the survivors that could help answer key questions have
publicly testified before Congress.
Perhaps it is because, despite more than a year of investigations, so
few committee hearings have been held publicly.
Or perhaps it is because, despite more than a year of investigations,
what little the American people have learned has come from news reports
from CNN, CBS, FOX, and other news organizations and not from
congressional hearings or testimony.
I think all these factors have contributed to the sense among the
American people that Congress has failed in its oversight
responsibility.
The American people know they haven't been told the full story about
what happened that night, and they believe they have been intentionally
misled by the administration.
I have come to the floor today to once again call on my leadership to
create a House select committee on Benghazi.
I am often asked what is holding up the creation of this select
committee. The simple answer is because the Speaker has not agreed to
it. I like the Speaker. He has a tough job, and he may have good
reasons for not wanting to establish a select committee, but I don't
know what it is. And more importantly, I don't think the American
people know what it is.
Let me be clear: my criticism is not with the chairmen of committees
that are looking into this. They are all good men. They have worked
very hard. Their hands are tied. They are required, though, to stay
within their jurisdictional lanes, examining only what they are allowed
to investigate according to their committee charter.
What happened in Benghazi is interrelated. The ``lanes'' crisscross.
The White House, the State Department, the CIA, and the Defense
Department were all involved, resulting in overlapping, but
uncoordinated, investigations.
Benghazi was a terrorist attack. We need a team effort to find out
what happened, why it happened, and how we are going to bring the
perpetrators to justice. Any of these chairmen would be capable of
leading the select committee, and other members of their committees
would be very good to serve as well. They would do a good job. I have
confidence in them.
And let me be clear: I have no intention of chairing or serving on
the select committee. I will not serve on the select committee. I just
want to learn the truth, just like the American people.
There is a history in Congress that when things overlap between
committees and transcend jurisdictions, select committees were
established. Two well-known examples are Watergate and Iran Contra. And
I will submit a list of the past select committees over the past 50
years at the end of my statement.
A select committee would take members from each committee with their
individual expertise--and many of the members from these various
committees have tremendous expertise--and have them work on this
investigation
[[Page H6932]]
day in and day out, with no other distractions. It would also prevent
the administration from saying one thing to one committee of
jurisdiction and something else to another.
I am reminded of the poem ``Blind Men and the Elephant,'' which is
said to originate in India. In the poem, six blind men touch a part of
an elephant and each has a different description of what the elephant
must look like. They argue at great length among themselves. The poem
ends by saying that while each is partly right, they are all wrong.
The moral of the poem is that, independently, people may think their
understanding of the situation is correct; yet they don't know the
truth until the full picture comes into focus.
Each of the five committees may not be seeing the entire picture of
what happened that night. Regular order has limited the committees from
going beyond their jurisdictions. One group ought to have the
responsibility to get to the bottom of all parts of this tragedy. One
group needs to lay out a roadmap to obtaining and reporting that
information to the American people so we can restore confidence that
Congress has a serious oversight plan on Benghazi.
Remember, the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. We need to
see the whole of this tragedy.
My bill to create a select committee, H. Res. 36, now has 178
cosponsors--more than three-quarters of the Republican Conference and
more than a supermajority of the majority.
Nearly three-quarters of the Republican members who serve on the
committees already investigating Benghazi now support a select
committee. That means a plurality of the members who have been directly
involved in committee investigations believe a select committee would
be a more effective approach.
The bill has been endorsed by the American Legion, representing so
many vets who have sacrificed and given their time and effort to serve
this country; the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association, which
represents the diplomatic security agents that were present in
Benghazi--the people who represent them and who were present in
Benghazi support the select committee; groups representing the highly
respected Special Ops community, who serve this Nation so well; and the
editorial page of The Wall Street Journal.
Perhaps, most important, it is being endorsed by some of the family
members of the Benghazi victims, like Sean Smith's mother and Ty Woods'
father, who want to know the truth about what happened to the children
that night and why their country fell short in its response.
Nothing will bring their children back, but we can at least provide
them with the clear answers and assign accountability for those
responsible for intelligence failures and the inept response that
night.
The best way to do this is to break down the stovepipes between the
five committees, hold public hearings, and issue subpoenas to all the
survivors from Benghazi, those who were in Tripoli, and those who were
in Washington responding that night.
We need a public hearing with the principals involved in the
decisionmaking process in Washington on September 11, 2012, including
former Secretary Panetta, former Secretary of State Clinton, former CIA
Director Petraeus, former White House adviser and current CIA Director
John Brennan, and former AFRICOM Commander General Ham, as well as the
White House.
We also need a similar hearing with each of their deputies and others
who were witness to the calls for help and the decisions surrounding
the response not to help.
Unless we hear from these people publicly, the American people will
never learn the truth about whether there were warnings prior to the
attack, what calls for help were made that night, whether the CIA
security team was in fact delayed in leaving to respond to the initial
attack at the consulate, and what the response was from Washington,
among many other questions.
Also, the American people should know of the bravery of the men who
were there in Benghazi.
Until these key individuals are sitting side by side at the witness
table answering questions under oath in public, we will never get a
clear picture of who made the decisions that night and why.
Again, the hearings must be in public. The American people can handle
the truth. Failure to get these answers means there will never be any
accountability, which further erodes public confidence in government.
Absent a select committee, the Congress will fail to learn the truth
about what happened that night because the administration will continue
to use the jurisdictional barriers between each committee to continue
to slow-walk or deny information.
There are a number of new developments in recent weeks that make a
select committee more timely than ever.
First, our colleague, Mike Rogers, chairman of the Intelligence
Committee, confirmed earlier reports, telling Fox News that the plot
against the consulate and the CIA annex in Benghazi appears to have
been weeks, if not months, in the making and that at least two of the
plot's leaders had close connections to senior al Qaeda leadership.
Nearly a year ago, I circulated a memo to all members prepared by
respected terrorist analyst Thomas Joscelyn detailing the apparent
connections and likely coordination between al Qaeda affiliates in
Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, and Yemen that resulted in threats and attacks
on U.S. diplomatic facilities in those countries the week of September
11, 2012. Unfortunately, the committees have not held public hearings
looking at the connection between these threats.
Last week, Fox News' Catherine Herridge first reported that:
At least two of the key suspects in the Benghazi terror
attacks were at one point working with al Qaeda senior
leadership, the sources familiar with the investigation tell
Fox News. The sources said one of the suspects was believed
to be a courier for the al Qaeda network and the other a
bodyguard in Afghanistan prior to the 2001 terror attacks.
Catherine Herridge went on and said:
The direct ties to the al Qaeda senior leadership undercut
earlier characterizations by the Obama administration that
the attackers in Benghazi were isolated extremists--not al
Qaeda terrorists--with no organizational structure or
affiliation.
And then, on Sunday, CBS' ``60 Minutes'' aired a segment by Lara
Logan, further explaining what happened that night and the increasingly
clear connection to al Qaeda. And I am very grateful for ``60 Minutes''
covering this story.
Logan reported:
Just a few weeks ago, Abu Anas al-Libi was captured for his
role in the Africa bombings and the U.S. is still
investigating what part he may have played in Benghazi. We've
learned that this man, Sufian bin Qumu, a former Guantanamo
Bay detainee and a longtime al Qaeda operative, was one of
the lead planners, along with Furaj al-Chalabi, whose ties to
Osama bin Laden go back more than 15 years. He is believed to
have carried documents from the compound to the head of al
Qaeda in Pakistan.
It is particularly notable how al-Chalabi reportedly delivered
documents from U.S. facilities in Benghazi to the head of the al Qaeda
in Pakistan, establishing a direct link between the Benghazi attacks
and the most senior leadership of al Qaeda.
Among the other revelations in the ``60 Minutes'' segment was that al
Qaeda stated its intent to attack Americans in Benghazi, along with the
Red Cross and the British mission, well in advance of September 11.
Lieutenant Colonel Andy Wood, the top American security official in
Libya in the months leading up to the attack, told CBS that both the
State Department and the Defense Department were well aware of the
threat and the attacks on the Red Cross and British missions. He said
it was obvious to the Americans in Libya that it was only a matter of
time until an attack on the U.S. facilities.
{time} 1515
When the terrorists stormed the consulate property they said, ``We're
here to kill Americans, not Libyans,'' and they spared the lives of
Libyan guards.
Confirmation of that information I detailed on the House floor in
July, noting:
A quick reaction force from the CIA annex ignored orders to
wait, and raced to the compound, at times running and
shooting their way through the streets just to get there.
The Americans faced a ``professional enemy'' as they encountered
waves of
[[Page H6933]]
intense fighting on the CIA annex in Benghazi during the early morning
of September 12. Mortars fired during the final wave of the assault hit
the roof of the annex three times in the dark. Lieutenant Colonel Wood
described hitting a target like that as ``getting the basketball
through the hoop over your shoulder'' and that it took ``coordination,
planning, training, and experienced personnel'' to pull off such a
``well-executed attack.''
Two Delta Force operators who fought at the CIA annex, apparently as
part of the impromptu team that flew in from Tripoli with Glen Doherty
during the attack without permission from Washington, have ``been
awarded the Distinguished Service Cross and the Navy Cross--two of the
military's highest honors.'' We owe them a debt of gratitude.
The U.S. already knew that senior al Qaeda leader Abu Anas al Libi
was in Libya and was ``tasked by the head of al Qaeda to establish a
clandestine terrorist network inside the country; al Libi was already
wanted for his role in bombing two U.S. Embassies in Africa'' where
constituents from my congressional district were killed. Notably, the
administration made no mention of his connection to the Benghazi
attacks in its announcement of his capture last month.
Some of the key questions that remain unanswered are why the CIA
security team was ordered not to respond to the attack at the consulate
and ``why no larger military response ever crossed the border into
Libya--something U.S. Deputy Chief of Mission Greg Hicks realized
wasn't going to happen just an hour into the attack.''
It is particularly noteworthy that Logan addressed the pressure on
witnesses she encountered during her investigation, saying:
An extraordinary amount of pressure on the people involved
not to talk and an extraordinary amount of pressure on anyone
in the government--the military side, the political side--not
to say anything out of official channels.
This is consistent with the concerns I have repeatedly raised on the
House floor about efforts by this administration to silence survivors
and witnesses to the Benghazi attacks and response.
What are they afraid of these witnesses sharing with the American
people, and how can the Congress stand by and allow this to happen
knowing full well it is taking place?
CNN in July reported:
Since January, some CIA operatives involved in the Agency's
mission in Libya have been subjected to frequent--even
monthly--polygraph examinations, according to a source with
deep inside knowledge of the Agency's workings. The goal of
the questioning, according to sources, is to find out if
anyone has been talking to the media or to Congress.
That was reported by CNN in July.
In a separate piece in July, FOX News reported:
At least five CIA employees were forced to sign additional
nondisclosure agreements this past spring in the wake of the
Benghazi attack.
That is what FOX News said in July of this year.
As someone who represents thousands of Federal employees and
contractors, including many who work for the CIA, the FBI, the State
Department, and the Defense Department, I know from years of firsthand
experience how agencies can sometimes use various forms of pressure and
intimidation to keep employees from sharing information of concern with
Congress.
I know the Benghazi survivors and other witnesses that night from
those agencies need the protection of a ``friendly subpoena'' to compel
their testimony before Congress, particularly on matters as sensitive
as this, in order to protect them. So far, the committees have failed
to provide this protection to allow survivors and other witnesses to
share their stories publicly so the American people can hear them.
Based on disclosures in recent news reports, I now believe that the
Benghazi plot represents a significant intelligence failure by the
United States at several levels. Understanding these failures, as well
as the government's inexplicable response during and after the attack,
is critical to preventing future attacks.
I want to outline a number of the apparent intelligence failures
leading up to the attack, which I believe a select committee
investigation would confirm:
First: The State Department and CIA failed in their assessments of
the militia groups working for the Americans in Benghazi, including the
February 17 Martyrs Brigade, responsible for guarding the consulate
property which abandoned the Americans and may have even facilitated
access to the compound for the terrorists;
According to a May 21 article by Eli Lake at the Daily Beast:
CIA officers were responsible for vetting the February 17
Martyrs Brigade, the militia that was supposed to be the
first responders on the night of the attack, but melted away
when the diplomatic mission was attacked;
Second: The State Department, the Defense Department, and the CIA
apparently failed to adjust their security postures to support the
Americans in Benghazi based on the growing number of attacks on Western
targets in Benghazi during the summer of 2012;
To date, no one has explained or been held accountable for why the
U.S. submission was so poorly secured despite pleas for assistance by
the Embassy staff in Tripoli to Washington;
No one has adequately explained why the Defense Department's
emergency response team was on a routine training mission in Croatia
during the week of September 11 when it should have been on alert to
respond, especially given the threats to the U.S. Embassies in Cairo
and Egypt earlier in the day before the Benghazi attack. So the
emergency response team was on a training mission in Croatia at the
very time and on the very date that everyone knows, September 11. Given
the threats to the Embassy, it is shocking that this is the case;
Third: The intelligence community apparently failed to understand the
size and scope of the attack brewing in Benghazi in the months leading
up to September 11;
As Chairman Rogers acknowledged to FOX News' Catherine Herridge last
week, this was a well-coordinated attack that was many weeks, if not
months, in the making;
Earlier this year, CNN reported on the number of foreign fighters who
arrived in Benghazi to participate in the attack in the days leading up
to September 11. A witness in the ``60 Minutes'' report noted how black
al Qaeda flags were openly flying in the months before the attack, and
he also noted the announced threat against U.S., British, and Red Cross
facilities;
How did the government miss these warnings or were they just simply
ignored?
Fourth: The intelligence community seems to have more broadly failed
to understand and anticipate how al Qaeda was metastasizing in North
Africa;
This administration has been quick to take credit for the raid that
killed Osama bin Laden in May 2011, and declared throughout the 2012
Presidential campaign that as a result of its efforts that ``core al
Qaeda'' has been decimated. However, the facts don't support the
administration's narrative;
In a CNN report on Monday:
Terrorist attacks hit a record high in 2012, and ``more
than 8,500 terrorist attacks killed more than 15,500 people
last year as violence tore through Africa, Asia, and the
Middle East.'' Increasingly, this includes North African
countries likely Libya;
CNN also said:
``Despite the death of Osama bin Laden and the capture of
other key al Qaeda leaders, the group has exported its brand
of terrorism to other militant Muslims.'' These groups
include affiliates like Ansar al Sharia in Libya;
Additionally, following a report on Benghazi, CBS' Lara Logan noted
earlier this week:
It became evident to us during the course of our research--
this is what she said--that very little is known publicly
about the true nature of al Qaeda's network in Libya, and
that has consequences beyond Benghazi and beyond Libya. It
has consequences that speak to the national security
interests of the United States of America;
Most of these affiliate terrorist groups have sworn an allegiance to
al Qaeda and appear to closely coordinate their activities and plots
with the core al Qaeda leadership, including Ayman al-Zawahiri, bin
Laden's successor.
To dismiss or minimize the relationship with al Qaeda's senior
leadership is misguided and, I believe, dangerous as we have seen over
the last several years. I fear that this administration's insistence in
treating core al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan differently
[[Page H6934]]
than groups like Ansar al Sharia in Libya has led to a dangerous
mischaracterization of the threat and that it has apparently resulted
in the failure to anticipate attacks like the one that was carried out
in Benghazi;
Fifth: It appears that documents were taken from the consulate and
CIA annex in Benghazi in the wake of the attacks;
As I said earlier, ``60 Minutes'' reported that terrorist Faraj al
Chalabi, whose ties to bin Laden go back nearly two decades, is
``believed to have carried documents from the compound to the head of
al Qaeda in Pakistan.''
What was taken from the consulate and annex and given to al Qaeda's
leadership? We don't know;
Additionally, as Lara Logan noted following the report:
We did not expect that we would find the U.S. compound in
the state that we found it. There was still debris and
ammunition boxes and a whiteboard that had the day's
assignments for the security personnel at the compound as of
September 11, 2012;
Clearly, in the chaos of the fighting and evacuation that night,
information was left behind at the facilities that may have
consequences for Americans operating in the region.
I also believe the administration's response to the Benghazi attack
over the last year has been nothing short of shameful and that it also
merits a full investigation by a select committee.
From the first hours of the attack, when it became apparent that no
help was coming to assist those under attack--either from U.S. forces
or from our allies in the region--to the failure of the FBI to gain
access to key suspects in Tunisia and Egypt over the last year, this
administration has sent a signal to terrorists that the U.S. will not
strongly respond to an attack on Americans abroad.
The failure to either arrest or kill any of the scores of terrorists
responsible for the attacks more than a year later is inexcusable and
reflects an unwillingness by this administration to bring diplomatic
pressure to bear on countries harboring these terrorists.
I am increasingly convinced that this administration is more
comfortable in using the ongoing FBI investigation as an excuse not to
answer questions than it is in bringing these terrorists to justice.
As I said on the House floor in July of last year, Tunisia detained
the first suspect in the Benghazi terrorist attacks, Ali Harzi, after
he was deported from Turkey in the weeks following the attacks.
Tunisia, despite being a beneficiary of more than $300 million of
U.S. foreign aid--American taxpayer money of over $300 million goes to
Tunisia--refused to allow the FBI access to this suspect for nearly 5
weeks.
{time} 1530
It was only after congressional threats to cut off the aid that the
government of Tunisia reconsidered its position.
Ultimately, the FBI interrogation team returned to Tunisia and was
allowed just 3 hours to interview Harzi with his lawyer and a Tunisian
judge present.
Not long after the FBI interview, Harzi was inexplicably released by
Tunisian authorities, and his release was celebrated by Ansar al Sharia
terrorists.
Last month, it was confirmed that Harzi has been involved in at least
one assassination of a Tunisian political leader.
In another equally concerning case in Egypt, the FBI has been denied
access to Muhammed Jamal, an al Qaeda-connected terrorist who ran
training camps in Egypt and eastern Libya prior to the Benghazi attack.
Several of Jamal's associates are believed to have participated in
the Benghazi plot, and terrorism analysts believe that Jamal may have
communicated directly with Zawahiri and al Qaeda leadership about this
and other terrorist attacks.
Although Jamal has been in Egyptian custody for more than a year on
other terrorism-related charges, the U.S. has never been provided
access to him under both the Morsi government and now the current
military government.
I personally delivered a letter to former Ambassador Patterson in
Cairo asking then-President Morsi to provide the FBI access to Jamal
and his documents. I don't believe the Ambassador ever delivered the
letter, and if she did, she never told me. That in itself is very, very
troubling.
Jamal's connection to the Benghazi attack is particularly noteworthy
given that both the U.S. and the United Nations formally, both the U.S.
and the United Nations, formally designated him as a terrorist earlier
this month.
However, in another example of this administration's aversion to
discussing terrorist connections to the Benghazi attack, the U.N.
designation clearly notes Jamal's connection to the Benghazi attack,
whereas the State Department designation omits it. So the U.N.
designation clearly notes Jamal's connection to the Benghazi attack;
the State Department omits it. The UN says, and our State Department
omits it?
I believe there has been pressure from the administration to omit
this type of information from U.S. intelligence products, sending
conflicting signals to both our allies and to countries that may have
Benghazi suspects of interest to the FBI. I have a lot of confidence in
the FBI if they are just allowed to do their job.
But if we are unwilling to identify their involvement in the attacks,
it further erodes U.S. credibility in asking for access to these
individuals. This willful blindness is disingenuous and, I believe,
ultimately dangerous.
In early January, when I offered an amendment to create a select
committee to the House rules package for the 113th Congress, Speaker
Boehner told the Republican Conference that he didn't believe that we
had ``reached the threshold'' for a select committee. He suggested that
we might get to the threshold, but the committees of jurisdiction just
needed more time.
That may have been the case in January, but nearly 11 months later, I
think the broad support that has built up over the last year makes it
clear we have more than passed the threshold for a select committee
now.
I believe, and I believe the American people believe, that the
threshold has clearly been reached in terms of cosponsors,
endorsements, and new revelations from the press reports, and a deep
concern the American people have for this issue.
I was particularly struck by the comments made by Ambassador Stevens'
deputy, Greg Hicks, in the 60 Minutes segment on Sunday:
For us, for the people that go out onto the edge to
represent our country, we believe that if we get in trouble,
they are coming to get us, that our back is covered. To hear
that it is not, it is a terrible, terrible experience.
It is not enough for the administration to just say there is nothing
more that could have been done, especially given that evidence
indicates that they didn't try much at all to assist the Americans
under fire in Benghazi.
Mr. Speaker, it is time for a unified, bipartisan select committee.
Let's get to the truth once and for all so we can find out what
happened and restore the American people's confidence in congressional
oversight and confidence in government.
I yield back the balance of my time.
HOUSE SELECT AND SPECIAL COMMITTEES (1963-PRESENT)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Select and Special Committees Date of creation
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Select Committee on Government Research.. September 11, 1963
Select Committee to Study the Factors September 30, 1964
Relating to the General Welfare and
Education of Congressional Pages.
Select Committee on Standards and Conduct April 3, 1967
Select Committee on the Seating of Adam January 10, 1967
Clayton Powell in the 90th Congress.
Select Committee on the House Beauty Shop December 6, 1967
Select Committee to Regulate Parking on March 13, 1969
the House Side of the Capitol.
Select Committee on Crime................ July 1, 1968
Select Committee on the House Restaurant. July 10, 1969
Select Committee to Investigate All June 8, 1970
Aspects of United States Military
Involvement in Southeast Asia.
Select Committee on Committees I January 31, 1973
(Bolling).
Permanent Select Committee on Aging...... October 2, 1974
Select Committee on Intelligence (Nedzi February 19, 1975
and Pike).
Permanent Select Committee on July 14, 1977
Intelligence.
Select Committee on the Outer Continental January 11, 1977
Shelf (Ad Hoc).
Select Committee to Study the Problem of September 11, 1975
United States Servicemen Missing in
Action in Southeast Asia.
Select Committee on Professional Sports.. May 18, 1976
Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and July 29, 1976
Control.
Select Committee on Assassinations....... September 17, 1976
Select Committee on Ethics............... March 9, 1977
Select Committee on Congressional March 28, 1977
Operations.
Select Committee on Energy (Ad Hoc)...... April 21, 1977
Select Committee on Population........... September 28, 1977
Select Committee on Committees II March 20, 1979
(Patterson).
Select Committee on Children, Youth, and September 29, 1982
Families.
Select Committee on Hunger............... February 22, 1984
Select Committee to Investigate Covert January 7, 1987
Arms Transactions with Iran.
Select Committee to Investigate Fire May 10, 1988
Safety in the Capitol and House Office
Building.
Select Committee on U.S. National June 18, 1998
Security and Military/Commercial
Concerns with the People's Republic of
China.
Select Bipartisan Committee to September 15, 2005
Investigate the Preparation for and
Response to Hurricane Katrina.
[[Page H6935]]
Select Committee on Energy Independence March 8, 2007
and Global Warming.
Select Committee to Investigate the August 2, 2007
Voting Irregularities.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Source: Committees in the US. Congress 1947-1992 by Garrison Nelson;
Committees in the US. Congress 1993-2010 by Garrison Nelson.
____________________