[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 7390-7396]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




        FRESHMEN DEMOCRATS PROMOTE ACCOUNTABILITY AND OVERSIGHT

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of 
January 18, 2007, the gentleman from Florida (Mr. Klein) is recognized 
for 60 minutes as the designee of the majority leader.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am Ron Klein, and I represent 
Florida's 22nd Congressional District in Congress, which is southeast 
Florida, Fort Lauderdale to West Palm Beach area, and I have the 
privilege of anchoring tonight's freshmen's Special Order. We decided 
as a group of freshman, and there was a large group of us that were 
elected this year, to meet on a regular basis and to discuss policy, 
those of us who had contested races, those of us who did not have 
contested races, but all of us new with this process coming in with a 
fresh perspective and the belief that hopefully we could influence the 
process in a way that would move things along, which is, I think, the 
loud message we heard from the people that elected all of us, both 
Democrats and Republicans this year.
  Tonight our Special Order is going to focus on the importance of 
accountability and oversight within our Nation's government. There is 
no question that the ability to exercise accountability and oversight 
among the executive and legislative branches, that is our branch and 
the President's branch, is vital to making sure that our government is 
operating and governing within the highest ethical and moral standards, 
and makes sense. It is also important to make sure our government is 
doing the right thing for our people.
  It seems that every time we are turning on the news lately or pick up 
the newspaper, there seems to be some story about where there is no 
accountability. And the oversight and lack of accountability seems to 
be the prime topic of conversation back home in our districts, in our 
offices, in our supermarkets, in our churches and synagogues. If you 
just think about the most recent one, the United States attorney 
scandal, where a number of U.S. attorneys were fired; and, of course, 
there is a question about for what purpose they were fired and whether 
there is a reason, and now there is a question of getting all the 
information out on the table.
  The ongoing concerns over Valerie Plame and the outing of Valerie 
Plame. And, of course, I think most of us as Americans understand, when 
someone works for this country as a member of our intelligence 
services, we owe that person the highest degree of respect and 
integrity and make sure that their position is held confidential. And 
certainly anybody who is responsible for outing that person should be 
held accountable and punished.
  Conditions at Walter Reed Hospital. And we are going to talk about 
that a little more tonight, and, unfortunately, other veterans 
hospitals. And I am happy to say that in my area and in many other 
parts of the country that there are some very good things going on in 
our veterans hospitals and our veterans outpatient clinics, but many 
times it is a matter of having the resources to have enough doctors in 
place. And I know I have heard from time to time about long waiting 
lines. But there are places like Walter Reed and other places that have 
now been identified where you had mold and you had ceilings falling in 
and lack of care, and people that were working there that were 
overworked and unfortunately not providing the type of treatment that 
should be awarded. The highest level of respect should be awarded to 
our men and women who are our heroes in this country.
  And, of course, the no-bid government contracts being awarded to 
companies doing business in Iraq to the tune of billions of dollars of 
waste, and certainly not accomplishing the major goals. One of the 
goals we went in there with, of course, was to take out Saddam Hussein, 
but I think everybody understood very quickly that if we were going to 
be successful in changing the hearts and minds, that some of the 
rebuilding activities, getting electricity on, getting hospitals up, 
creating jobs, those kinds of things would be very, very important to 
making the people of Iraq feel that this was a worthy cause to set up 
their own government. Unfortunately, we have spent billions of our 
money over there, and, unfortunately, the condition is in many ways 
worse today than it was with the fall of Saddam Hussein.
  The news on these subjects is everywhere. So tonight we are going to 
talk about accountability and oversight, and my colleagues who are 
going to join me tonight as freshman Members recently elected are going 
to be talking about how we are working to restore those features of 
accountability and oversight to Washington and our government.
  A couple things I just want to touch on before I turn over to my 
colleague Congressman Hodes. On November 7, which was last year's 
election, we believe that the American people, I know we all heard this 
as we walked door to door and heard from the American people, they 
wanted change. It wasn't necessarily Democrat or Republican; they 
wanted people to come together, find common ground, and move forward. 
And fortunately for this country, this House has, in fact, started that 
process. There were six items very quickly that were passed in the 
beginning called the 100 Hours, the Six for '06, everything from fixing 
the Medicare prescription drug program, which I know many of our 
seniors are concerned about making it easier to use, less costly to the 
taxpayers; minimum wage, making the minimum wage higher, of course, is 
a key issue; lower student loan rates; and a number of other issues 
like energy policy. These are the things that we came to work on and 
that were done.
  We also passed the lobbying reform bill and a full disclosure bill 
which has already significantly reduced the influence that lobbyists 
have on this legislative process. We need to do more, but we certainly 
took a lot of the right steps by not allowing lobbyists to take Members 
of Congress out to lunch. We had that in Florida, we changed that, and 
I am glad we changed that here, too.
  And, of course, the earmark process. And for those of you who don't 
know what earmark is, that is this idea: In the past, Congressmen, 
Members of the Senate and House, would go behind closed doors and add 
millions and tens of millions of dollars, even hundreds of millions in 
some cases, of special projects in the dark of night to the budget 
without any consideration by all the Members of Congress. And that 
needs to change, and I am very happy to say that with new earmark 
reforms in place, that will change.
  The way it is changing is very clear: Anything that is presented 
needs to be presented in the light of day. It needs to be publicly 
disclosed and laid out for the Members of the Congress so that a

[[Page 7391]]

legitimate project in Alaska should be a legitimate project in Florida. 
Even though it may benefit one State, we all represent this country, 
but it has got to be done the right way.
  This week we passed important legislation which curbs waste in 
Federal contracting; strengthens protection for whistleblowers, and 
those are, of course, people that discover and come forward when there 
is waste and corruption in government; and also provides long overdue 
of the veterans health care crisis and other Federal issues. We are 
going to talk about accountability of tax dollars. We are going to talk 
about a number of other things.
  I am joined by some colleagues here, and I would like to introduce 
them. We have got Congressman Ellison, who is going to join us and talk 
to us a minute; Congressman Hodes. Congressman Welch is going to join 
us for a few minutes.
  You look like you are poised and ready to go, Congressman Hodes, so 
why don't you kick off and give us a little oversight on what you are 
going to talk about on oversight and accountability.
  Mr. HODES. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for being here with 
us tonight. I am delighted to be a new Member in the House of 
Representatives, the people's House, sent by my constituents to help 
restore the fabric of our democracy, which, during the past 6 years, 
has really been torn and undermined by a rubber-stamp Congress which 
refused to ask questions of an administration conducting its policies 
largely in secret, taking the American people down a path with 
counterfeit leadership, a leadership that used fear and intimidation to 
lead, instead of real leadership which helps people face reality, come 
together and seek common ground and solutions.
  And for many people, when they think of the United States House of 
Representatives, they think of Congress as a body which raises revenue 
and figures out how to spend it. It sets taxes and sets a budget. And 
that is how a lot of folks think about Congress, and sure we spend a 
lot of our time doing that.

                              {time}  2000

  But there is another very important function of the United States 
Congress in our constitutional scheme, and it is completely independent 
of what party is in the White House, what party is in the majority in 
Congress, what party is in the majority in the Senate. It is the way 
that, in the wisdom of the Founding Fathers, they set up this great 
government of ours so that there would be checks and balances, there 
would be controls. And the accountability and oversight function of 
Congress is what we have restored with this Democratic majority.
  There have been great leaders who have recognized that important 
feature and that important job of Congress. And I have got a chart 
here, a little board and a quote that is really important and talks a 
lot about what it means for Congress to exercise its function of 
accountability.
  President Woodrow Wilson said, ``It is the proper duty of a 
representative body to look diligently into every affair of government 
and to talk much about what it sees. It is meant to be the eyes and the 
voice and to embody the wisdom and will of its constituents. The 
informing function of Congress should be preferred, even to its 
legislative function.''
  So here is President Wilson, some years ago, recognizing that the 
oversight and accountability function of Congress is perhaps even more 
important than the legislative function.
  So for this Congress, while the last Congress might have been called 
``the rubber-stamp Congress'' or the last Congress might have been 
called ``the Katrina Congress'' because they presided over such a 
disaster for us, I bet that this Congress, under Democratic majority, 
is going to be ``the accountability Congress.''
  Now, one thing that is interesting, I want to take us back for a 
moment as we sort of set the tone for tonight to talk about something 
that happened in ancient times. It has been said that the ancient 
Romans had a tradition. Whenever one of their engineers constructed an 
arch, at the capstone was hoisted into place, the engineer assumed 
accountability for his work in the most profound way possible, he stood 
under the arch. In the President's war on terror, the capstone he chose 
is Iraq, but it is everyday Americans, and especially our veterans, 
returning soldiers who are wounded and our veterans who stood under the 
arch as it crumbled.
  Over the past few weeks, we have sustained blow after blow as the 
President's plan fell apart. But it is not the President who will pay 
the billions necessary to stabilize Iraq, it is not the President who 
slept in molding infested rooms at Walter Reed Hospital, it is not the 
President who lost his job because of a political decision. But maybe 
it ought to be.
  The confluence of events of recent weeks, the Valerie Plame scandal, 
the Walter Reed scandal, the politically motivated firing of U.S. 
Attorneys, is the result of an administration that went too far for too 
long without any meaningful oversight, without any meaningful 
accountability, without a Congress to hold it accountable. It has been 
said that absolute power corrupts absolutely. And for years, absolute 
power is what our Republican colleagues, who were in control until 
November of 2006, gave to this administration.
  Tonight, I come to the floor with my colleagues to talk about 
restoring accountability to government because the arch has fallen on 
us, and we are going to repair it.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Hodes. I think you laid it out 
very well.
  I think the average American believes very strongly in accountability 
and oversight because they understand, that's how they live their 
lives. If you have a business, you can't do anything without keeping 
track of your books, keeping track of you inventory, keeping track of 
your personnel, your employees, and knowing that there is an end-point. 
And you will make money or not make money by running it efficiently 
with oversight. And I think that nobody is asking for any more than 
that in government. And, unfortunately, as you have pointed out very 
eloquently, that is exactly what has gone on without anybody looking 
after it. And many of the committees were either not operating or were 
abolished in the last number of years, and that just doesn't make any 
sense.
  So I think you pointed out very appropriately that we are glad I 
think in a way that the Democrats are leading, but I think the 
Republicans are now joining us. And, again, this is a bipartisan 
approach to fixing this.
  Mr. Ellison, I know that you have been leading and talking about this 
as well, so give us some of your thoughts, please.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, let me thank my colleagues, the gentlemen 
from Florida and New Hampshire, both for their eloquent remarks. I am 
looking to my colleague, Congressman Welch and his remarks, but I would 
like to say that the bedrock idea behind accountability in government 
is trust in government. If somebody is not accountable, if they are not 
answerable, if they don't have to tell you whatever you want to know, 
if they can tell you to take a hike, take a walk and they don't have to 
listen to you and they are not answerable to you and not accountable to 
you, as the public, then what you cannot have is trust.
  Trust goes away when accountability goes away. Trust leaves the room 
when there is no one to answer the question about what happened. Trust 
leaves the room when you cannot have a public official look you in the 
eye and say here is what happened, the good, the bad and the ugly.
  Accountability is not about perfection because when you have a human 
endeavor, there is no such thing. But accountability is about being 
able to say, you know what, those folks up there on Capitol Hill, I 
believe that they are doing the best they can because when I asked my 
question, they gave me an answer. When I came forward with my concerns, 
they gave me a reply. They had the documents. They were able to say, 
here is what is going on.

[[Page 7392]]

  But when government, Madam Speaker, will not answer, we have 
problems, we have a lack of trust, and unfortunately sometimes people 
disengage. But this Congress is here to turn that around. This Congress 
is here to say, no, there will be accountability. You can trust your 
government. You can expect that your government is going to be 
operating on your behalf.
  Let me turn to an example. One example is that for the last several 
years we have had prosecutors, United States Attorneys, trying to do 
the best they could in many instances at ferreting out corruption in 
government. We saw prosecutions go on, former Congressman Cunningham 
and others, and we saw prosecutors who were appointed by a Republican 
administration to essentially do their job. As you know, Madam Speaker, 
prosecutors are not like other attorneys. Their job is to seek justice, 
find the truth. They are ministers of justice, whereas other attorneys, 
very correctly, have, within the rules, no other obligation than to 
zealously represent their client. But prosecutors have a higher calling 
than that, and that is because it is their job to protect the public.
  But what we found out recently is that eight of them have been fired, 
and it appears very clearly that the reasons were entirely political. 
Eight of them have been fired, and the evidence that has been unearthed 
so far in only 3 months of this ``accountability Congress,'' as the 
distinguished gentleman from New Hampshire is calling the phrase, in 
this accountability Congress, the first 3 months we have seen getting 
to the bottom of this question of justice being undermined.
  The Democrats have brought back accountability. And what we have seen 
that is unfolding right now is that the Justice Department has released 
thousands of pages of e-mails based on the demands of the 
accountability Congress, and internal documents as well, related to 
this U.S. Attorney scandal. These documents would not be in the public 
domain. They wouldn't be in front of the people. They wouldn't be 
available for questions to get to be asked and answered but for this 
accountability Congress.
  I am so proud to be associated with this accountability Congress 
because what it means is that the U.S. Attorneys, whether they be U.S. 
Attorneys or food inspectors or people who work at the hospitals taking 
care of our veterans, they now can know that there is not going to be 
an intolerable condition that exists for too long before some inquiring 
person in Congress says, what is going on over there. Thank heavens for 
it.
  And I just want to point out, and I will get back to this in a little 
while, I just want to point out that even Patrick Fitzgerald, who was a 
prosecutor in a recent case that you may have heard of, the Scooter 
Libby trial, in which he obtained four convictions out of five counts, 
he himself was rated as ``not distinguished.'' He was not distinguished 
in the eyes of the Bush administration officials. And I can see why 
they would find such a gentleman as ``not distinguished,'' because he 
did not evidence enough loyalty and obedience to the administration, 
but he certainly did bring forth some real accountability in 
government.
  I am going to yield back now, but I am going to be sticking around 
because I have more to say about this. I am going to yield back now; 
but before I do, I just want to say that accountability breeds trust in 
government and trust in government promotes an active, engaged 
citizenry which is fundamental to democracy.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Ellison.
  I think that, again, the example you gave is something that is on our 
front pages. We are hearing about it and we are listening.
  Some people have said, well, what is the difference if someone is 
coming forward or if they are coming forward under oath. Well, I like 
to see, when someone comes forward, that they put their hand up and 
say, I swear to tell the whole truth. I can't imagine somebody wouldn't 
want to do that and what are they hiding if they are not prepared to do 
that. That seems to be a little battle going on between the Congress 
and its investigative authority and the President. But, again, I think 
you put your hand up, we are expecting the truth anyway, and I think 
that is an appropriate thing to do.
  Mr. Welch, our representative from Vermont in our class, why don't 
you share with us some of your thoughts on this.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. You know, it is very elemental: you get what 
you pay for, you account for what you buy, you are responsible to the 
people that hire you, you are responsible to the voters.
  The opportunity that I have had about addressing some of these issues 
of accountability, maybe I can just tell a few stories about some of 
the hearings we have had, because it is worse than I expected. I come 
from Vermont, where we don't know how to waste things. We do it over 
recycle, reuse, do all of those things. But, you know, I am on the 
Oversight and Government Operations Committee, and we have had a number 
of hearings. And let me just tell a few stories, because I think rather 
than have me give some conclusions, let people just hear what some of 
the facts are.
  We had some hearings on Iraq expenditures, Iraq relief money. And the 
Government Accountability Office has come up with an audit that 
suggests that a minimum of $10 billion was wasted. But a couple of 
graphic examples came forward that just stunned me, frankly. One was 
that our Federal Reserve, at the orders of the government, sent $12 
billion in taxpayer money, in cash, loaded in skids, shrink wrapped in 
plastic cellophane over to Iraq. Now, why did that happen? It wasn't 
accounted for, but it was sent over there to pay salaries for people 
who were working in Iraqi ministries. And of course it happened at a 
time when there was a desperate effort on the part of the 
administration to show some progress in Iraq. And one of the ways of 
trying to show progress is that we have these ministries up and running 
and we have employees who are working and doing the basic jobs of 
providing electricity, of dealing with pensions, and the things that 
are the functions of government.
  Most of that money went missing because it turned out that some of it 
was literally handed out from the back of pick-up trucks in Baghdad, 
and it went to employees who were ghost employees. There were these 
various ministers in the Iraq Government who had a position of 
influence and saw an opportunity and they took it and made millions and 
millions of dollars of taxpayer money.
  Now, you know, there is no Republican, there is no Democrat, there is 
no Independent who can fathom the idea of literally loading 347 tons of 
100-dollar bills on C-147 transports and sending it to a foreign 
country to be handed out on street corners. At home, when I go to 
Vermont and I tell this story, I almost pinch myself because it is so 
astonishing that I am wondering whether it is true. Unfortunately, it 
is true. That is something that is happening with taxpayer dollars.
  Another example: $57 million was spent, Madam Speaker, awarded a 
contract to a Falls Church company that was going to construct housing 
in Baghdad, I think it was outside of the airport, it was going to be 
for, Congressman Hodes is on that committee, so if I get some of these 
details wrong, you can correct me. But basically it was a housing 
contract that was going to provide housing for trainees of the Baghdad 
police. Not a bad idea. One problem: the housing was never built. The 
only residue of the $57 million are hundreds of mobile homes that are 
now parked, unoccupied, on a tract of land outside the Baghdad Airport.
  Now, even our government got embarrassed at this. And someone in the 
State Department suggested that what we should do, since we had all 
these homeless people in Baghdad but they couldn't live there, we 
didn't have housing units set up, we just had these facilities, the 
suggestion was why don't we donate these mobile homes to the victims of 
Katrina. And I had the opportunity to ask the question everybody else 
would ask, was it their plan to move the folks in New Orleans to

[[Page 7393]]

Baghdad or was it their plan to move the mobile homes from Baghdad to 
New Orleans? That actually happened, all right.
  A third example: this isn't so much about wasting taxpayer dollars; 
it is about violating basic rules of political integrity really.

                              {time}  2015

  This whole question of global warming that people now recognize is 
real, it is urgent, and it is immediate. And I believe it is becoming a 
bipartisan consensus. We are not arguing whether it is true.
  Well, we were arguing whether it was true. In our committee we had 
before us a press person that worked for the administration, and his 
job was to edit reports. Editing apparently included taking scientific 
conclusions that were reached by scientists doing a scientific method, 
experimentation, drawing conclusions, maintaining academic integrity, 
and then putting them through what was an edit that was a political 
filter that actually changed the outcome of the scientific conclusions. 
And it was all intended to meet the political agenda of the 
administration that wanted to resist the conclusion that global warming 
was real, urgent, and immediate.
  There are certain lines you can't cross, and that is one of them. The 
people of this country, obviously, are entitled to the benefit of 
honest science. Then we have to make a decision, all of us, about what 
to do with it, what policies should we pursue. But, bottom line, we 
have to have that integrity.
  So these are just a few examples that I was exposed to as a Member of 
Congress serving on committees. And I think it reinforces the point 
that you are making because every American wants and is entitled to 
accountability, honesty in whatever element of the government we are 
working in, with our finances, with the services of scientists, and 
every other sector.
  So my friend, Mr. Klein, those are a few of the experiences I have 
had serving on a committee here.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. The examples obviously go right back to what I 
think we all believe in strongly as Americans: common sense. Use common 
sense when you do anything. When you make decisions, use common sense. 
When you follow up, use common sense. I mean, the examples that you 
have cited are so extraordinary, they defy common sense.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. It is really true. And it is not a partisan 
thing. I am trying to figure this out because all these things did 
happen on the Republican watch. And it is a Congress that I think 
turned its back on its responsibility. But I sometimes wonder whether 
that concentration of all power and a reliance on ideology meant that 
if you had an ideology and you had a set of facts and if they didn't 
fit, you would throw the facts out and stick with the ideology. But it 
is not a productive and winning strategy. So I have been mystified by 
it.
  And, Ron, you and I come out of State legislatures that are smaller, 
where Republicans and Democrats tend to work together. You have this 
close relationship and a lot of this stuff just doesn't happen there. 
So it is mystifying to me how it happens here. But I think it is a lot 
less likely to happen now that there is a cop on the beat and that our 
committees are just checking under the covers to see what is going on.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. I am glad to see, Mr. Welch, some of the 
legislation coming forward. Mr. Waxman and others have proposed 
eliminating or limiting no-bid contracts and putting all this out 
there. And I think this is a bipartisan issue. Nobody seems to have any 
problem with it. But I think, as you said, it is long overdue.
  Madam Speaker, we are joined by another Member of our freshmen group, 
and it is Mr. Perlmutter from Colorado. We are now geographically 
dispersed from the Southeast to the East to the Midwest and the West.
  So why don't you give us some of your thoughts from the Colorado 
perspective.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Good evening to my friends from the freshmen class. 
And I just want to say I listened to my friend from Minnesota as well 
as my friend from Vermont, and the reason we are here, the reason Mr. 
Ellison is here, the reason Mr. Welch is here, Mr. Klein is here, Mr. 
Hodes is here is because this Nation wanted checks and balances, and 
checks and balances means accountability.
  There has been no accountability in Washington for the last 6 years; 
and as a result, we have had a variety of problems that have continued 
to arise again and again and again and again. And we can start with the 
no-bid contracts in Iraq, and the fact that there is some $10 billion 
that has evaporated into the ether. That is the kind of thing that we 
have to stop, and that is the kind of thing that the people of America 
voted to bring a Democratic Congress into being so that there were 
checks and balances to these no-bid contracts; checks and balances to a 
loss, a complete loss, of $10 billion, the whereabouts of which we are 
going to try to find, as the Congress of the United States of America 
is supposed to do, so that we act as a counterbalance to the executive 
branch. We aren't just here as a rubber stamp.
  So start with Iraq. Let us talk about Katrina and the response that 
was just a horrible failure by this administration to a massive 
disaster in the United States of America, and the response after the 
disaster occurred has also been a disaster. As a member of the 
Financial Services Committee, it is clear that now we are 19 months 
after the hurricane which basically decimated New Orleans and many 
cities along the gulf coast, and yet we have not reconstructed, 
renovated, rebuilt much of the housing that was completely obliterated 
in that storm. So not only was the initial response a poor one, but 
after that the response has been very minimal and has to be improved. 
That is what checks and balances are about.
  Checks and balances are when an administration, for whatever reason, 
releases the name of a CIA agent to punish her, to punish her husband, 
to whatever. It is completely wrong and needs to be stopped. And that 
is why people expect accountability in our government and they like 
checks and balances.
  We have had revelations, Mr. Klein, over the past 2 or 3 weeks as to 
some of the conditions, particularly at Walter Reed but other veteran 
hospitals. Again, checks and balances and accountability would rein in 
excesses or neglect, one or the other. We have seen far too much of it. 
And we, as part of this freshmen class, are bringing those checks and 
balances back.
  Now, obviously the other side doesn't like it. My friends on the 
Republican side, today they have been complaining with no end as to the 
approach we are taking to bring benchmarks to this war in Iraq. And 
they are complaining and complaining and complaining. But, finally, 
there are going to be checks and balances on this President and the way 
he has conducted the war in Iraq.
  We are supporting our troops. We are supporting the veterans, and we 
are bringing conditions and accountability to the administration and 
accountability to the Iraqi people, as it is time for them to pick up 
what we have been carrying now for the last 4 years.
  The American people understand checks and balances. They were tired 
of one-party government that led to excesses and neglect. We are here 
to provide accountability. That is exactly what we are doing. The 
administration doesn't like it. My friends across the aisle don't like 
it. But that is what the people sent us here to do, and that is 
precisely what we are doing.
  And with that, Mr. Klein, my friend from Florida, I would like to 
yield back to you or to any of our other friends who are on the floor 
with us tonight to talk about why we are here.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Perlmutter. And I think we have 
heard from some of our friends and we have a lot of others within the 
Democratic side of the freshmen class. There are 41 of us. It is a big 
class this year, along with the rest of them, Republicans as well. And 
I think the message is pretty clear, the things you are talking about, 
the checks and balances. And, by the way, we have our checks and 
balances with the President. There

[[Page 7394]]

are also checks and balances with all the agencies. And those are some 
of the things we are talking about tonight, to be sure things are 
operating the way they should. A big budget. A lot of money. It has to 
be spent properly. We feel very committed to that.
  Mr. Hodes, I know you want to add another thought here.
  Mr. HODES. Madam Speaker, I was thinking about what our colleague Mr. 
Welch talked about in terms of the investigation into the way in which 
the administration may have interfered for political purposes with the 
administration of justice by the United States Attorneys, causing the 
firing of United States Attorneys for political purposes. And it is 
interesting to me.
  I come from New Hampshire, a small State. And probably many of the 
folks who may be listening tonight and many people in this Chamber, 
although there aren't too many, have heard of the name Daniel Webster. 
And Daniel Webster said a very important thing. He said: ``There is 
nothing so powerful as the truth.'' And, really, that is what we are 
talking about.
  Our colleague Mr. Ellison talked about trust, and what we are really 
talking about is bringing truth to government, bringing integrity to 
government, bringing openness, bringing transparency, authentic honesty 
back into the Halls of Congress and wherever oversight and 
accountability take us. And in terms of what is happening with the 
United States Attorney scandal, if we have learned one thing about this 
administration, it is how it responds to its critics. When someone says 
something they don't like, they get rid of them. The current U.S. 
Attorney scandal is really just the latest example.
  And now folks are probably seeing that there is a conflict. The White 
House doesn't want people from the White House to come to Capitol Hill 
in the open light of day under oath to tell the truth to committees in 
Congress and committees in the Senate. And the question you have got to 
ask is, what is there to hide? Why not come, take an oath, tell the 
truth, and deal with the issues?
  I started my legal career in New Hampshire as a prosecutor. I was 
hired by a good Republican, a man named David Souter, who is now 
sitting on the United States Supreme Court. And what I learned as a 
prosecutor from David Souter was that the critical thing about the 
prosecutor's role was that the prosecutor serves the people. My job was 
to stand up and serve the people of my State. The job of the U.S. 
Attorney is to stand up and represent the people of the United States. 
U.S. Attorneys don't represent the President. They don't represent any 
particular politician. They represent all of the people. And so their 
judgment has to be independent judgment in order to see that justice is 
done because what we are after is justice, not political retribution.
  So you can imagine what happens in our great system of justice if 
instead of thinking about truth and justice, the United States Attorney 
is motivated by political influence. It perverts the system of justice. 
It means no justice can be had. So the investigations that are going on 
now, the accountability and oversight over the administration having 
the folks come down and talk to our committees is absolutely critical. 
It is fundamental to the preservation of the democratic fabric of this 
country, because if an administration, if White House officials can 
exert pressure on the United States Attorneys and remove their 
independence, then the people can't depend upon our system of justice.
  So this may be one of the most important of the investigations and 
the new accountability that we are seeing in Congress. And, frankly, 
what I have said to folks back home is we are not going to let this go 
by without getting the answers. So when folks see the battle over the 
subpoenas, when they see the White House resisting having its people 
come down, folks are asking why. What are you afraid of? Let the truth 
come out. Let's find out what happened. Now, that is accountability. 
That is oversight, and that is why the American people sent us here.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Well said. I know that Mr. Ellison wanted to 
add something to that also.
  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  I would like to see if the gentleman from New Hampshire would yield 
to a question.
  Mr. HODES. Absolutely.
  Mr. ELLISON. Are you familiar with the terminology ``a chilling 
effect''?
  Mr. HODES. Absolutely, sir.
  Mr. ELLISON. If a prosecutor, a minister of justice, is required to 
make sure he doesn't step on any toes of the administration or a 
particular political power or to make sure that he is not supposed to 
offend a particular party and if such a prosecutor were to do so, they 
might lose their job, could that have a chilling effect on the zealous 
prosecution of anybody who might violate the law?
  Mr. HODES. Mr. Ellison, that is called a Siberian express. That is 
not just a chilling effect. That is ice cubes in your shoes. That puts 
the fear in the prosecutor. Now, prosecutors are brave people, and 
these U.S. Attorneys were brave people standing up to do their job. But 
it has to have a chilling effect, and it is exactly what we are talking 
about. The independence of our United States Attorneys is the hallmark, 
the foundation of the Federal system of justice, and it has to be 
preserved. And that is why it doesn't matter whether the White House is 
Republican or Democrat. If this was a Democratic administration that 
was doing this, we would be doing the same thing if we were following 
Woodrow Wilson's advice and doing our job here in the Congress.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Mr. Perlmutter is about to jump through the 
microphone.

                              {time}  2030

  Mr. PERLMUTTER. Madam Speaker, I do have a point that I want to make. 
The power of the Federal Government is awesome, and if anybody is on 
the receiving end of the power of the Federal Government, you have a 
tough hill to climb. So the reason the people expect their U.S. 
attorneys and their government to operate in truth and honesty and in 
justice is because that power is so great, and when it is abused, the 
trust of the people goes right out the door, and without the trust of 
the people, we don't have much of a government here.
  The people, in their unbelievable wisdom, maybe that is a little over 
the top, but the people in their wisdom chose to elect a Democratic 
Congress and a Democratic Senate because they know checks and balances 
can stop that kind of abuse. And we are seeing it now.
  It is a shame that we see that U.S. attorneys, who could have been 
fired for any reason except for reasons that might ultimately be 
unethical, were being let go and were being threatened. That is just 
wrong, because the administration wanted to see the power of the 
Federal Government come down on somebody they didn't like.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Madam Speaker, we have one of our senior 
Members present, you can tell because the rest of us freshmen have dark 
hair, one of the senior Members who is a mentor to all of us. Mr. 
Larson of Connecticut is one of the people that truly all of us look up 
to. Please join us.
  Mr. LARSON of Connecticut. Madam Speaker, I thank the gentleman for 
pointing out my age, but I am here primarily to salute you for 
continuing to do this kind of work.
  I think, as Mr. Perlmutter pointed out, that the American public, who 
is always further ahead than the Congress is, found its voice in the 
November election, and you have given voice to the American people here 
in the people's Chamber, especially in the area of accountability. 
Because, quite frankly, as we debate today and throughout the remainder 
of this year, what we hear from our colleagues on the other side, and I 
don't question their patriotism or their love of country, and hopefully 
they don't question ours, but I do question their judgment.
  Prior to you getting here, there has been a surrender of judgment on 
issues of oversight and review. So you are a breath of fresh air. You 
are the sunshine that needs to shine into every

[[Page 7395]]

corner of this great institution of ours, because the people you are 
sworn to serve and who you have come here to represent, we are clearly 
proud in the leadership, of the efforts of this majority-making class 
that has set a new direction and a new course for this great country of 
ours.
  I thank each and every one of you. Thank you for the opportunity to 
speak here.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. We appreciate your guidance and counsel. As we 
are listening to many of the things, we are glad to add a new energy to 
the process here. You can see it here tonight.
  I want to bring Mr. Ellison back in. He was really making a 
passionate statement.
  Mr. ELLISON. I also want to add my voice to great things to our 
leadership, which includes Mr. Larson from the great State of 
Connecticut. He is an able and well-qualified leader, and it is just 
great to see him setting the proper tone for our class.
  My question was this. We have several Members of the bar who are now 
in Congress, and I just wanted to throw a question out.
  The President has offered to make a deal, and the deal is that the 
Democrats could interview, not under oath, not on the record, certain 
White House aides about this scandal regarding the firing of the U.S. 
attorneys who have been, it appears, perhaps fired for prosecutions 
they did do and for prosecutions that in their discretion they did not 
do that could somehow benefit somebody who was running on the other 
side.
  My question is, how does this deal stand in the light of this new 
spirit of accountability? This deal that would say, yes, White House 
aides can come in, no going on the record, no under oath, no 
transcript, behind closed doors, how does that deal stand in the light 
of this new spirit of accountability?
  Mr. HODES. You know, I can give you a perspective on that. I won't 
take too long to do that.
  My experience, and I had many years as a prosecutor and also many 
years as an attorney in court, is that the oath that you take to tell 
the truth is a powerful thing. It is a meaningful thing, and it is an 
important thing, because when a person swears to tell the truth, it has 
the effect of opening one's eyes to the importance and the majesty of 
the process that is involved in coming before a body, whatever body 
that is, and holding up your right hand and swearing to tell the truth.
  What happens then is, frankly, the person who is going to tell the 
truth and swears to tell the truth is subjected to a host of 
requirements and possible penalties if they don't tell the truth. That 
also turns out to be a powerful motivator.
  In this country we have trial by jury where witnesses come to tell 
the truth. We have investigations by Congress where witnesses come to 
tell the truth. And that really has proven to be the best, clearest, 
most open way in an open, transparent democratic government, like the 
one that we want to have and want to preserve, to get to the truth.
  That is all we are asking. We are not intending to ask folks to say 
or do anything they didn't do or to tell us something that isn't so. We 
just want to get to the truth.
  So a deal that has people behind closed doors without a transcript of 
the proceedings, with no way to review what has been said and no 
ability to do anything if they don't tell the truth, just doesn't cut 
it.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Obviously there are so many things to talk 
about in terms of the oversight and accountability. One of the things 
that I think really hit hard for a lot of the people, particularly if 
you served in the military, was the Walter Reed Hospital revelation.
  Many of us have not served in the military. We may have some family 
members that receive veterans benefits and things like that. We think 
of people we ask to serve our country or may have served in the past. 
They are American heroes on so many levels, and they deserve the 
highest level of care. So it was shocking, and then shocking even more 
so when we found out this has been going on for a while.
  I think this oversight we have been talking about, the 
accountability, the proper funding, the proper level of care, doctors, 
nurses, things like that, so many people in the system are doing good 
jobs, but there are clearly deficiencies.
  Mr. Welch, you have some thoughts on that.
  Mr. WELCH of Vermont. Yes, I do. Every American is appalled at what 
was revealed, the degrading circumstances for our troops at Walter 
Reed. There were many things that were obviously disturbing about it, 
the vermin, the rodents, the peeling paint, the unsanitary conditions.
  But that is the tip of the iceberg. What was really heartbreaking 
when you met the veterans was that they were completely lost and 
abandoned. We had people with head injuries that had very severe 
cognitive problems who were in an administrative morass and nightmare. 
They were abandoned really for 4 months before anyone knew that they 
were there.
  We had amputees who were a mile away from where they needed to be 
without prosthetics and were supposed to somehow find a way to walk to 
where their doctors' appointments were. The administrative breakdown 
was enormous, and it really reflected a culture of disregard.
  One of the things that came out as we started investigating this 
situation out at Walter Reed was that the breakdown of services was 
very predictable because there was a substantial reduction in the 
number of personnel that were needed to provide the services.
  Step one, you know that if you are having significant increased 
military activity in Iraq and Afghanistan, you have to anticipate you 
will have an increasing need for services to treat injured soldiers.
  Two, in response to that, the government, the Bush administration, 
following its ideological hard line about privatization, put to bid 
certain services that were being offered at Walter Reed. It turned out 
that the government workers who were government workers had an 
opportunity to bid on that. They had the lowest bid. Mysteriously, and 
we still haven't gotten to the bottom of this, Madam Speaker, their bid 
was adjusted upward $7 million, not by them, but by the reviewer of 
bids. They then came in second, and the contract was awarded to a 
private company, IAP Worldwide Services.
  Now, we don't know what the bottom-line connection is. What we do 
know is the following: Number one, what had been personnel of 300 went 
to 50. Now, it is cheaper to have 50 people on the payroll than it is 
to have 300, but you also don't get the job done, especially when the 
number of wounded soldiers is increasing. So that is shocking right 
away.
  Number two, this company, IAP, had all kinds of problems, even though 
it received millions and millions of dollars doing Katrina relief.
  Number three, the head of the IAP Company is a former very high 
executive in Halliburton, a company that I just have to say has ripped 
off the American taxpayer and made billions of dollars on this war in 
Iraq.
  Now, how is it that there is a disposition that is so powerful that 
you put privatization and ideology ahead of a bottom line, the 
nonnegotiable bottom line that you are going to provide the services 
that our men and women in the service returning from Afghanistan, 
returning from Iraq need? It is absolutely and completely unacceptable. 
That shouldn't be a bipartisan thing. We ought to be doing whatever it 
takes to make certain that our men and women do get the services that 
they need.
  Lack of accountability makes people lax. They are not looking over 
their shoulder knowing that somebody is going to be checking to find 
out if they are getting the job done, if they are ripping off 
taxpayers, if they are performing up to standards.
  That is a major responsibility. We are candid with one another. We 
know that people are pretty fed up with government. The reason, there 
are a lot of reasons for it, but one of them is they don't have 
confidence that we are taking care of their taxpayer dollars. That

[[Page 7396]]

gets so embedded in people's sense that they lose faith that the 
government will be there when there is a Katrina, when our soldiers are 
coming home from Iraq. Our job, together, is to restore that confidence 
by performance, not by talk; by accountability.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. I agree with that.
  Mr. Perlmutter, I think you wanted to add something to that as well.
  Mr. PERLMUTTER. I think I was elected to bring change to this Nation, 
a new direction to the Nation and positive things to this Nation, 
whether it is energy independence or assist with a whole variety of 
things concerning change in the direction in Iraq. I did not come 
looking to go on a witch hunt and to continue to do that.
  The people obviously wanted checks and balances. They wanted 
oversight and accountability. Something like Walter Reed or something 
like we have just had with the Justice Department, those are things 
that just appeared now. These are not us going back and trying to 
dredge up old issues. These are things that have happened because of 
the neglect of the administration. These are things that appear, and we 
need to deal with them now.
  I think the question is judgment. Before there wasn't good judgment. 
There wasn't oversight. There wasn't accountability. There weren't 
checks and balances. The people expect this from its Congress and from 
its Senate with respect to the White House.
  Walter Reed is a shame. It is a shame. It is supposed to be one of 
our finest medical institutions anywhere in America or the world. It is 
there for our bravest men and women who have served us valiantly and 
have been harmed and hurt in a variety of ways, psychologically, 
physically, and we need to make sure that a place like Walter Reed 
really does provide the care and the service and the best quality of 
medical services that we can provide, and not what has occurred.
  The Congress today is something that gives Americans a chance for 
accountability, gives us a chance to deal with this administration on a 
straight-up basis, and the fact we are here, we are going to see 
improvements, just the fact that we are here, because it isn't just a 
rubber stamp anymore. There really is oversight.

                              {time}  2045

  Mr. ELLISON. Madam Speaker, let me say in these final few moments 
tonight, I want to say there have been over 91 hearings on Iraq alone. 
But we have also had oversight hearings on Hurricane Katrina. Several 
of them, in fact. Subcommittee Chair Waters went down to New Orleans to 
get the real story from people who are living it.
  On the Committee on Financial Services, we are going to be talking 
about predatory lending. Today we talked about executive pay and 
shining some light on that issue.
  On the Judiciary Committee, Subcommittee Chairman Nadler held a 
hearing on civil rights enforcement, what is the Attorney General's 
civil rights division doing in the area of civil rights enforcement.
  I have participated in hearings on the increase in immigration fees 
and how those fees are going up in a precipitous manner and questions 
were asked and officials were made to answer.
  So as I said before, this is a time of accountability. We are slowly 
trying to restore the public's faith in government. They have a right 
to believe that their government is honest, fair dealing, accountable 
and transparent. I couldn't have been prouder in the committee hearings 
I personally have been a part of on issues from the National Security 
Letters and the FBI executive pay, civil rights enforcement, 
immigration; there has been a whole range.
  I think the story is not necessarily one thing like the Valerie Plame 
incident or Walter Reed or the U.S. Attorneys; but there is a 
prevailing, systematic reexamination of how government does business. I 
am proud to be associated with it.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. Thank you, Mr. Ellison. Mr. Hodes.
  Mr. HODES. Thank you, Mr. Klein. It has been a pleasure to be with 
you here tonight and have this conversation with the people of this 
country about what oversight and accountability brings to government.
  I started my remarks this evening with a quotation from former 
President Woodrow Wilson. And I want to go back further in time to end 
my remarks with a quote from John Stuart Mill who said: ``The proper 
office of a representative assembly is to watch and control the 
government, to throw the light of publicity of its acts, to compel a 
full exposition and justification of all of them which anyone considers 
questionable.''
  And it is that light of publicity, the light that we shine with 
accountability that helps preserve this government and leads to an open 
and transparent government. I am privileged to serve on the Information 
Subcommittee of the Government Oversight and Reform Committee. One of 
the things that we did which is essential in terms of the 
accountability of government, we brought to the floor and passed in 
this Congress in a bipartisan way much-needed reforms to the Freedom of 
Information Act. It is an act which every citizen can take advantage of 
to gain information about the government, to hold the government 
accountable, find documents and information that is the citizens' right 
to have.
  What we did was we restored the Freedom of Information Act to its 
rightful place where there is now once again a presumption in this 
government that the government should be open and disclose to its 
citizens what is going on, what it has for information and documents 
unless those documents fit into certain narrow exemptions. This has 
been a critical thing that we have done in this Congress.
  I am proud to be a new Member and working hard for accountability. 
And when the American people see that they truly have an accountability 
Congress working for them to eliminate waste, fraud, abuse and 
corruption, to save taxpayer money, they will once again regain trust 
in their elected officials and in the people's House.
  Mr. KLEIN of Florida. I thank you, Mr. Hodes, for being part of our 
freshman class and our working group that is going to be here every 
week. The 110th Congress is strengthening oversight, and the proof is 
in the pudding.
  People can say, I have lost confidence in Congress, but look at what 
we are doing. We have had dozens of hearings in the Foreign Affairs 
Committee just on the ability of working with our diplomatic efforts 
and all of the strategies in dealing with Iraq on the nonmilitary side. 
In the past, there have not been enough opportunities to do that.
  We've had hearings on the veterans health care crisis and Walter 
Reed, the politicalization of the Justice Department and how wrong that 
is and that needs to be cleaned up, the Hurricane Katrina response and 
the things we are doing right now, passing legislation to truly get 
people back up on their feet. Global warming and energy independence 
was mentioned, and the fact is that we are getting down to the things 
we need to do as Americans to deal with our energy needs and the fact 
that there is an environmental impact. And, of course, upcoming 
hearings of oversight on everything from Valerie Plame to oil and gas 
royalties and National Guard and intelligence.
  This is part of the mandate of the last election. I look forward to 
working with our freshman class. We will be doing this every week. We 
certainly want input from our constituents back home. Tell us what you 
think we can be doing. We look forward to working with both Republicans 
and Democrats to build on this theme of accountability and oversight.

                          ____________________