[Congressional Record Volume 166, Number 103 (Wednesday, June 3, 2020)]
[Senate]
[Pages S2668-S2669]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                       Nomination of Michael Pack

  Mr. MERKLEY. Mr. President, this week our majority leader is asking 
the Senate to vote on the nomination of Michael Pack to serve as Chief 
Executive of the U.S. Agency for Global Media.
  Mr. Pack's nomination should trouble all of us in this Chamber. It 
raises the question of whether the U.S. Senate is committed to being 
the check and balance on the qualifications of those potentially vested 
with substantial responsibility into positions in our executive branch.
  His nomination draws into question the challenge we have, the 
responsibility we have to ensure that only individuals of talent, 
experience, and of integrity serve America in the executive branch. 
Hamilton commented on this in the Federalist Papers. He said:

       To what purpose then require the co-operation of the 
     Senate? I answer, that the necessity of [the Senate's] 
     concurrence would have a powerful though, in general, silent 
     operation. It would be an excellent check upon the spirit of 
     favoritism in the President, and tend greatly to prevent the 
     appointment of unfit characters.

  Those words should resonate in this Chamber now. The individual who 
will come before us, Michael Pack, set up a nonprofit called Public 
Media Lab, or PML, apparently for the sole purpose to channel contracts 
to his for-profit operation known as Manifold Productions. Over a 
period exceeding a decade, he channeled $4 million from the nonprofit 
to the for-profit. Not a single contract went anywhere else--no other 
contracts.
  Utilizing a nonprofit to launder for-profit contracts, in the process 
of which providing tax subsidies to your customers and advantage over 
your competitors, raises both ethical and legal issues. The legal 
issues, including potential criminal conduct, have not been resolved. 
Mr. Pack is, at this moment, under investigation by the attorney 
general of the District of Columbia.
  Mr. Pack, in tax filings to the IRS in 2011 through 2018, did not 
accurately disclose a relationship between his nonprofit and his for-
profit. When he was asked if, in fact, there were common officers 
between the two, he answered no when the answer was clearly yes. He did 
not disclose that his for-profit benefited from the setup of the 
nonprofit.
  Mr. Pack did admit to the Committee on Foreign Relations that he made 
oversights; that is the term he used--``oversights.'' But he has 
refused to correct his tax filings.
  Mr. Pack, when he was renominated in 2020, inaccurately stated in the 
records to the committee that his tax returns were complete and 
accurate. He has refused to provide critical documents to the committee 
and, in that sense, to the Senate to examine these significant issues. 
He has refused to provide the agreements between PML and Manifold, his 
nonprofit and his for-profit, to examine the propriety of the 
relationship. He has said simply that those documents are confidential 
and proprietary.
  But we should realize that serving in the executive branch is a 
privilege. We asked for information so that we can exercise our 
constitutional responsibility. When an individual confronted with 
substantial ethical and legal issues simply says ``I will not provide 
them'' and if the Senate committee says ``That is OK,'' then we are 
failing in our constitutional responsibility to examine the 
qualifications of the individual. This is no light responsibility we 
bear in this Chamber. This is a very significant check and balance of 
the U.S. Constitution, which each and every one of us swore to uphold 
when we took our oath of office.
  Mr. Pack, when he was president of the Claremont Institute, directed 
significant funds to his for-profit company for fundraising. His 
company is not a fundraising company; his company is a film company. So 
we have asked him to provide the details and documents related to that 
work to see if there was an inappropriate transfer of funds from a 
position of responsibility to the personal profit of Michael Pack. But 
Mr. Pack has refused to provide details. He has refused to provide 
documents related to that work.
  In addition, he prematurely resigned from his role at the Claremont 
Institute, and it is shrouded in mystery. We do not know if the board 
found ethical issues. We do not know if they found criminal conduct 
because he has not responded to our request for documents related to 
his premature resignation.
  Given the gravity of these issues, it makes sense, when he was 
renominated, that he would reappear before the committee to help clear 
up these concerns and these issues. Well, we have not had such a 
hearing.
  To summarize, when an individual makes false statements to the IRS 
and refuses to correct them, when they make false statements to the 
committee, not in the first time before the committee but the second 
time before the committee, when they refuse to provide relevant 
documents to provide significant issues of ethical conduct or potential 
criminal conduct, when there is an active investigation into that 
potentially criminal conduct, then we should simply say to the 
President: Send us a different name.
  This man may be well qualified, but he does not wish to provide the 
information necessary for the Senate to do its responsibility as a 
check and balance on potentially unfit individuals. To exercise advice 
and consent in accordance with responsibilities charged to us, we must 
insist on upholding the standards for records and documents and 
truthfulness to the committee. We must insist that outstanding 
investigations be completed when they involve potentially criminal 
conduct. We must insist that verifiably false statements be corrected. 
These are not high or exceptional standards; these are fundamental, 
basic, elementary responsibilities that we carry.
  That is why I have written a resolution declaring that the Senate 
should not vote on a nominee who has made verifiably false statements 
to Congress or the executive branch and who refuses to correct those 
statements. Until those statements to both the Foreign Relations 
Committee and to the IRS are corrected, Michael Pack's nomination 
should be set aside. We should simply tell the President and exercise 
our responsibility, for which we have taken an oath of office, to send 
us someone else. This individual is not prepared to provide the 
information necessary for the Senate to proceed with his nomination. 
That is what we should be saying, and we should still be

[[Page S2669]]

saying it at this late date. I urge my colleagues to do the right thing 
by supporting this resolution