[House Report 114-838]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
114th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 114-838
======================================================================
PROVIDING AMOUNTS FOR FURTHER EXPENSES OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND
COMMERCE IN THE ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS
_______
November 29, 2016.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be
printed
_______
Mrs. Miller of Michigan, from the Committee on House Administration,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany H. Res. 933]
The Committee on House Administration, having had under
consideration an original resolution relating to providing
amounts for further expenses of the Committee on Energy and
Commerce in the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress, report the
same to the House with the recommendation that the resolution
be agreed to.
BACKGROUND AND NEED FOR THE RESOLUTION
On October 7, 2015 Congress passed H. Res. 461 by a
recorded vote of 242 yeas and 184 nays establishing a Select
Investigative Panel of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. H.
Res. 461 requires the Select Investigative Panel to investigate
and report on:
1. medical procedures and business practices used by
entities involved in fetal tissue procurement;
2. any other relevant matters with respect to such
procurement;
3. federal funding and support for abortion
providers;
4. the practices of providers of second and third
trimester abortions, including partial birth abortion
and procedures that may lead to a child born alive as a
result of an attempted abortion;
5. medical procedures for the care of a child born
alive as a result of an attempted abortion; and
6. any changes in law or regulation necessary
resulting from such findings.
The need for this funding arises because the Select
Investigative Panel was considered and adopted subsequent to
the primary expense resolution, H. Res. 132, passed by voice
vote on March 19, 2015.
GENERAL DISCUSSION
Since its creation, the Select Investigative Panel has
issued dozens of subpoenas and has requested numerous
transcribed interviews and depositions of individuals with
knowledge of the abortion and procurement practices under
investigation. While some progress has been made, many
individuals and companies in receipt of congressional subpoenas
have responded by heavily redacting critical information. Many
have simply refused to comply at all. Currently, the Select
Investigative Panel is undertaking initiatives to gain
compliance with its subpoenas. In July 2015, the Select
Investigative Panel produced an interim update describing the
substantive work the Select Investigative Panel has already
completed, despite obstruction from those under investigation,
the minority staff, and the Ranking Member of the Select
Investigative Panel. The Select Investigative Panel has been
tasked with producing a final and definitive report and
requires the funding necessary to complete these tasks.
SUMMARY OF THE RESOLUTION
The amount for the Committee contained in the resolution is
as follows:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Committee on Energy and Commerce........................... $800,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
INTRODUCTION AND REFERRAL
On November 16, 2016, Representative Candice S. Miller of
Michigan introduced a matter of original jurisdiction.
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
On November 16, 2016, the Committee on House Administration
met to consider a matter of original jurisdiction. The
Committee ordered the bill reported favorably to the House
without amendment by voice vote with a quorum present.
COMMITTEE RECORD VOTES
In compliance with House rule XIII, clause 3(b), with
respect to each record vote on an amendment or motion to
report, together with the names of those voting for and
against, the Committee reports that there were no recorded
votes.
COMMITTEE OVERSIGHT FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In compliance with House rule XIII, clause 3(c)(1), the
Committee states that the findings and recommendations of the
Committee, based on oversight activities under House rule X,
clause 2(b)(1), are incorporated into the general discussion
section of this report.
STATEMENT OF BUDGET AUTHORITY AND RELATED ITEMS
The resolution does not provide new budget authority, new
spending authority, new credit authority, or an increase or
decrease in revenues or tax expenditures and a statement under
House rule XIII, clause 3(c)(2), and section 308(a)(1) of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974 is not required.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
In compliance with House rule XIII, clause 3(c)(3), the
Committee states, with respect to this matter of original
jurisdiction, that the Director of the Congressional Budget
Office did not submit a cost estimate and comparison under
section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
PERFORMANCE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
In compliance with House rule XIII, clause 3(c)(4), the
Committee states that the general performance goals and
objectives for this matter of original jurisdiction are to
authorize appropriate and additional funding for the Committee
on Energy and Commerce.
DUPLICATION OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS
In compliance with Sec. 3(g)(2) of H. Res. 5 (114th
Congress), the Committee states that no provision of this
matter establishes or reauthorizes: (1) a program of the
Federal Government known to be duplicative of another Federal
program; (2) a program included in any report from the
Government Accountability Office to Congress pursuant to
section 21 of Public Law 111-139; or (3) a program related to a
program identified in the most recent Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance, published pursuant to the Federal Program
Information Act (Pub. L. No. 95-220, as amended by Pub. L. No.
98-169).
DISCLOSURE OF DIRECTED RULE MAKINGS
In compliance with Sec. 3(i) of H. Res. 5 (114th Congress),
the following statement is made concerning directed rule
makings: The Committee estimates that this matter requires no
directed rule makings within the meaning of such section.
INFORMATION RELATING TO UNFUNDED MANDATES
This information is provided in accordance with section 423
of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (Pub. L. No. 104-
4). The Committee has determined that this matter contains no
unfunded mandate on the private sector, nor does it impose a
Federal intergovernmental mandate on State, local, or tribal
governments.
ADVISORY ON EARMARKS
In accordance with House rule XXI, clause 9, the Committee
states that this matter does not contain any congressional
earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as
defined in clause 9(e), 9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI.
EXPENSE RESOLUTION SUBSEQUENT TO THE PRIMARY EXPENSE RESOLUTION
In accordance with House rule X, clause 6(b)(2), the
Committee states that this matter of original jurisdiction is
necessary because the Select Investigative Panel was created
subsequent to the consideration and adoption of the primary
expense resolution. The purpose of these additional funds is to
provide appropriate funding for the Committee on Energy and
Commerce. The supplemental expense resolution provides
$800,000.
MINORITY VIEWS
The Democratic Members of the Committee on House
Administration strongly oppose additional funding for the
Select Investigative Panel, as we have throughout its
existence.
On October 7, 2015, the House Majority passed H. Res. 461
to create the Select Panel to investigate inflammatory videos
created by David Daleiden and the Center for Medical Progress
(CMP), anti-abortion activists who spent more than two years
secretly recording Planned Parenthood and other reproductive
health services. After Daleiden and CMP released deceptively-
edited video footage in July 2015, three Republican-led House
committees immediately launched investigations into Planned
Parenthood and others.
Despite the fact that none of these three Committees
uncovered any evidence of wrongdoing by Planned Parenthood or
other providers, the House Majority nonetheless created the
Select Panel to satisfy extremists in their conference who were
threatening to shut down the government if Planned Parenthood
were not defunded.
The resolution authorizing the Select Panel set no time
limit, target date for completion, or budget for the Select
Panel's work. It also placed no requirement on the Select Panel
to establish an investigative plan or rules to govern its work
and, despite repeated request by the Select Panel's Democratic
Members, Chair Marsha Blackburn has refused to discuss or adopt
rules or a plan. As a result, Panel Republicans have conducted
a viciously partisan investigation that has excluded Democrats
at every turn, and resulted in an abuse of congressional
authority that has put health care providers, researchers, and
their life-saving work at risk.
The method for funding the Select Panel--through polls of
the House Administration Committee--has allowed the Select
Panel to operate without the transparency and accountability
that the House budget process usually provides. For example, in
November 2015, Republicans used a closed-door process to
transfer $300,000 for use by the Select Panel through the end
of that year. The Democratic Members of the Committee on House
Administration opposed the transfer of funds as ``wasteful''
and ``unnecessary'' and called for a public meeting to ``ensure
the opportunity for amendments and thorough debate.'' The
request was not granted and the money was transferred for use
by the Select Panel.
On June 16, 2016, Republicans repeated this closed-door
process to transfer an additional $490,000 to the Select Panel.
The Democratic members of the Committee on House Administration
requested a special meeting of the Committee to consider the
Majority's proposal. The request was not granted and the money
was transferred for use by the Select Panel without any public
debate or accountability.
To date, the Select Panel has spent more than $790,000 and
is on track to spend well over $1.5 million dollars by the end
of 2016 all without a set budget, as well as public debate over
that budget to ensure that Congress is accountable to the
taxpayers and avoids waste and abuse.
House Administration Democrats offered an amendment that
would restrict the use of supplemental funds to costs
associated with terminating the Select Panel and would require
the Select Panel to file weekly reports with House
Administration. The amendment further required the Chair of the
Select Panel to consult with the Ranking Minority Member before
the issuance of any subpoenas as unilateral actions by the
Select Panel's Majority have become a troubling norm. The
amendment was defeated on voice vote along party lines.
Robert A. Brady.
Zoe Lofgren.
Juan Vargas.
[all]