[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 159 (2013), Part 5]
[House]
[Pages 7090-7091]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                         SCANDALS IN WASHINGTON

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Meadows). Under the Speaker's announced 
policy of January 3, 2013, the gentleman from Nebraska (Mr. 
Fortenberry) is recognized for 60 minutes as the designee of the 
majority leader.
  Mr. FORTENBERRY. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.
  In the past few weeks, it seems as if you can't turn on the news 
without hearing of another drama, of another crisis in Washington 
undermining confidence in our government, whether it's Benghazi, the 
IRS, the Department of Justice, or the Department of Health and Human 
Services. It's hard to know what may be next.
  Mr. Speaker, there is an age-old expression that goes like this: be 
careful to whom you give a gun and a badge.
  Authority is a very delicate matter. A well-functioning government 
must ensure that those who are in positions of influence are committed 
to serving the public with impartiality and fairness. Recent 
revelations have done much to undermine the public trust.
  Mr. Speaker, 8 months ago, our Ambassador to Libya was killed along 
with three other Americans. Not only is this an affront to America 
because we lost our Ambassador; it is also an attack on our Nation, and 
it undermines the international rule of law. The process by which we 
have tried to unpack the details of this attack has been careening all 
over the place. Even after several committee hearings on Benghazi, 
including a Foreign Affairs Committee hearing in which I participated 
last December, a core question remains unanswered:
  Who said ``stand down'' when reinforcements were called for?
  Now, there may be legitimate military and diplomatic reasoning here, 
but we simply need to know the answer to that question; or this could 
have been a very serious mistake with the gravest of consequences.
  In the past week, we've learned of discrimination against specific 
groups by the Internal Revenue Service. These reports are causing a 
firestorm across our country. Our sensitivities are rightly heightened 
when it comes to the collection of taxes. No one wants to pay taxes, 
but we must have a revenue-collecting agency in order to have a 
functioning Federal Government. It is unconscionable, though, that this 
agency targeted citizens because of their political or religious 
beliefs.
  The IRS, of all agencies, must be held to the highest of high 
standards of fairness and impartiality. The reported actions seriously 
undermine the foundation of trust necessary between citizens and their 
government. That's why, this week, the Taxpayer Nondiscrimination and 
Protection Act was introduced with my support. The legislation puts 
meaningful penalties in place when this foundation of trust is 
violated, penalties that could include prison time.
  Perhaps it's also time for the IRS to implement a new policy. 
Everyone they are auditing, or perhaps have audited in the past 3 
years, must be provided with a fuller explanation as to why they're 
going through this process so as to ensure that there is no improper 
targeting of American citizens based upon their religious or political 
beliefs. Just this morning, a friend of mine texted me, and another one 
called me just yesterday, worried that the audits that were undertaken 
against them were due to their own political leanings and engagements.
  Mr. Speaker, the real issue is this: Just how deep and wide is the 
mind-set that pervaded the IRS that did target Americans based upon 
their religious or political leanings?
  On another issue, we are learning that the Department of Justice 
seized phone records of Associated Press reporters, including records 
of their personal phone lines. Now, the ability to wiretap and probe 
needs to be in place in narrow circumstances, but the wide-ranging 
nature of what happened raises a number of questions, questions that 
beg us to ask: How do we protect the freedom of the press?
  Another problem that hasn't been widely discussed is that the 
Department of Health and Human Services, in effect, is also targeting 
people based upon their beliefs. The Department is forcing Americans to 
pay for drugs and procedures that many find to be inconsistent with 
their deeply held, reasonable beliefs or their religious traditions. 
When the President introduced his health care plan, he told Americans 
that if they liked their health insurance, they could keep it. Now we 
are finding in some cases that you cannot keep your doctor, that you 
cannot keep your own health care plan, and now

[[Page 7091]]

you may not even be able to keep your own faith tradition. This is a 
form of coercion that sets up a false choice and is un-American.
  All of these events are converging to erode confidence in Washington. 
Now, thankfully, many of these concerns actually cross the political 
aisle. There is bipartisan concern. These are American issues, and 
these events underscore why we actually do have a balance of power in 
Washington. There is an executive branch that enforces the law, and 
there is a legislative branch that writes the law. The legislative 
branch also has the duty to provide oversight over the executive 
branch, which is a duty that Congress now is rightly embracing.
  It is important that in each instance here the truth is uncovered and 
that swift and appropriate actions are taken to help restore confidence 
in the impartiality, fairness, and competence of the Federal 
Government.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

                          ____________________