[Deschler's Precedents, Volume 2, Chapters 7 - 9]
[Chapter 8.  Elections and Election Campaigns]
[C. Campaign Practices]
[Â§ 14. Investigations by Select Committees]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]


[Page 936-945]
 
                               CHAPTER 8
 
                    Elections and Election Campaigns
 
                         C. CAMPAIGN PRACTICES
 
Sec. 14. Investigations by Select Committees

    In recent Congresses (until the 93d Congress), a select committee 
to investigate campaign expenditures had been created by one Congress 
to study and review certain pending matters and to forward its findings 
to the next Congress for appropriate action and use.(16) 
Such findings have been used by the Committee on House Administration 
in judging and investigating election contests and the validity of 
certain elections.(17) In the 93d Congress, the House 
granted the Committee on House Administration subpena power to conduct 
investigations into election contests and practices, thereby enabling 
the committee to assume the functions and duties of the select 
committee,(18) and effective Jan. 3, 1975, the Committee on 
House Administration as well as all other standing committees was given 
subpena power, under Rule XI, clause 2(m), whether or not the House is 
in session.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. See Sec. Sec. 14.1-14.3, infra, for creation and funding of such 
        select committees.
            Select committees, their creation, powers and procedures, 
        see Ch. 17, infra.
            Investigations and inquiries generally, see Ch. 15, infra.
17. See Sec. Sec. 14.4 et seq., infra. For a discussion of the 
        jurisdictional overlap between the select committee and the 
        Committee on House Administration, see Sec. 14.6, infra.
18. See H. Res. 737, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The former Select Committee on Standards of Official Conduct 
hadauthority to investigate improper conduct by Members, including 
campaign activities.(19)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. See Sec. 14.9, infra.
            The Senate Select Committee on Standards of Official 
        Conduct recommended the censure of a Senator, who was then 
        censured by the Senate, for improper use and conversion of 
        campaign funds, in the 90th Congress (see Sec. 12.3, supra).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Senate has established select committees to investigate 
improper campaign activities.(20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
20. 20. See Sec. Sec. 14.10-14.12, 
        infra.                          -------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Creation of Select Committee to Investigate Campaign Expenditures

Sec. 14.1 In the 91st Congress, the House agreed to a privileged 
    resolution, reported by the Committee on Rules, estab

[[Page 937]]

    lishing a select committee to investigate and report on campaign 
    expenditures and practices by candidates for the House.

    On Aug. 4, 1970,(1) Mr. Thomas P. O'Neill, Jr., of 
Massachusetts, called up and the House adopted the following 
resolution, reported as privileged by the Committee on Rules:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 116 Cong. Rec. 27125, 27126, 91st Cong. 2d Sess. As indicated by 
        the note to Sec. 10.10, supra, the creation of such a select 
        committee is no longer necessary.
            For similar select committees created by resolution, see H. 
        Res. 929, 89th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 11, 1966, and H. Res. 1239, 
        90th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 1, 1968.
            See also H. Res. 131, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., Jan. 15, 1973, 
        continuing and funding a special committee on campaign 
        expenditures. The resolution extended the special committee 
        created in the 92d Congress, in order to enable it to assist 
        the Clerk in investigating new allegations of violations of 
        federal election laws.
            H. Res. 279, 93d Cong. 1st Sess., authorized joint 
        investigations by the select committee and the Clerk, so that 
        the subpena power of the committee could be used by the Clerk 
        in carrying out his functions under the Federal Elections 
        Campaign Act of 1971.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                H. Res. 1062

        Resolved, That a special committee of five Members be appointed 
    by the Speaker of the House of Representatives to investigate and 
    report to the House not later than January 11, 1971, with respect 
    to the following matters:
        (1) The extent and nature of expenditures made by all 
    candidates for the House of Representatives in connection with 
    their campaign for nomination and election to such office.
        (2) The amount subscribed, contributed, or expended, and the 
    value of services rendered, and facilities made available 
    (including personal services, use of advertising space, radio and 
    television time, office space, moving picture films, and automobile 
    and any other transportation facilities) by any individual, 
    individuals, or group of individuals, committee, partnership, 
    corporation, or labor union, to or on behalf of each such candidate 
    in connection with any such campaign or for the purpose of 
    influencing the votes cast or to be cast at any convention or 
    election held in 1970 to which a candidate for the House of 
    Representatives is to be nominated or elected.

        (3) The use of any other means or influence (including the 
    promise or use of patronage) for the purpose of aiding or 
    influencing the nomination or election of any such candidates.
        (4) The amounts, if any, raised, contributed, and expended by 
    any individual, individuals, or group of individuals, committee, 
    partnership, corporation, or labor union, including any political 
    committee thereof, in connection with any such election, and the 
    amounts received by any political committee from any corporation, 
    labor union, individual, individuals, or group of individuals, 
    committee, or partnership.

[[Page 938]]

        (5) The violations, if any, of the following statutes of the 
    United States:
        (a) The Federal Corrupt Practices Act.
        (b) The Act of August 2, 1939, as amended, relating to 
    pernicious political activities, commonly referred to as the Hatch 
    Act.
        (c) The provisions of section 304, chapter 120, Public Law 101, 
    Eightieth Congress, first session, referred to as the Labor-
    Management Relations Act, 1947.
        (d) Any statute or legislative Act of the United States or of 
    the State within which a candidate is seeking nomination or 
    reelection to the House of Representatives, the violation of which 
    Federal or State statute, or statutes, would affect the 
    qualification of a Member of the House of Representatives within 
    the meaning of article I, section 5, of the Constitution of the 
    United States.
        (6) Such other matters relating to the election of Members of 
    the House of Representatives in 1970, and the campaigns of 
    candidates in connection therewith, as the committee deems to be of 
    public interest, and which, in its opinion, will aid the House of 
    Representatives in enacting remedial legislation, or in deciding 
    contests that may be instituted involving the right to a seat in 
    the House of Representatives.
        (7) The committee is authorized to act upon its own motion and 
    upon such information as in its judgment may be reasonable or 
    reliable. Upon complaint being made to the committee under oath, by 
    any person, candidate or political committee, setting forth 
    allegations as to facts which, under this resolution, it would be 
    the duty of said committee to investigate, the committee shall 
    investigate such charges as fully as though it were acting upon its 
    own motion, unless, after a hearing upon such complaint, the 
    committee shall find that the allegations in such complaint are 
    immaterial or untrue. All hearings before the committee, and before 
    any duly authorized subcommittee thereof, shall be public, and all 
    orders and decisions of the committee, and of any such 
    subcommittee, shall be public.
        For the purpose of this resolution, the committee or any duly 
    authorized subcommittee thereof, is authorized to hold such public 
    hearings, to sit and act at such times and places during the 
    sessions, recesses, and adjourned periods of the Ninety-first 
    Congress, to employ such attorneys, experts, clerical, and other 
    assistants, to require by subpena or otherwise the attendance of 
    such witnesses and the production of such correspondence, books, 
    papers, and documents, to administer such oaths, and to take such 
    testimony as it deems advisable. Subpenas may be issued under the 
    signature of the chairman of the committee or any subcommittee, or 
    by any member designated by such chairman, and may be served by any 
    person designated by any such chairman or member.
        (8) The committee is authorized and directed to report promptly 
    any and all violations of any Federal or State statutes in 
    connection with the matters and things mentioned herein to the 
    Attorney General of the United States in order that he may take 
    such official action as may be proper.
        (9) Every person who, having been summoned as a witness by 
    authority of said committee or any subcommittee

[[Page 939]]

    thereof, willfully makes default, or who, having appeared, refuses 
    to answer any question pertinent to the investigation heretofore 
    authorized, shall be held to the penalties prescribed by law.
        That said committee is authorized and directed to file interim 
    reports whenever in the judgment of the majority of the committee, 
    or of the subcommittee conducting portions of said investigation, 
    the public interest will be best served by the filing of said 
    interim reports, and in no event shall the final report of said 
    committee be filed later than January 11, 1971, as hereinabove 
    provided.

Sec. 14.2 A resolution creating a special committee to investigate and 
    report on campaign expenditures of all Members is called up as 
    privileged.

    On Aug. 10, 1966, there was reported by the Committee on Rules 
House Resolution 929, authorizing the Speaker to appoint a special 
committee to investigate and report on campaign expenditures of 
candidates for the House of Representatives. The resolution was called 
up as privileged on Aug. 11 and agreed to by the House.(2)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 112 Cong. Rec. 18775, 19080, 19081, 89th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Similarly, on Aug. 1, 1968,(3) the Committee on Rules 
offered House Resolution 1239 authorizing the Speaker to appoint a 
special committee to investigate and report on campaign expenditures of 
candidates for the House. The resolution was called up as privileged 
and was agreed to. On Aug. 2, 1968, Speaker John W. McCormack, of 
Massachusetts, appointed members to the special committee pursuant to 
the resolution.(4)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 3. 114 Cong. Rec. 24770, 24771, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
 4. 114 Cong. Rec. 25064, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
            The Committee on Rules reports as privileged a report on a 
        resolution creating a select committee. See, for example, 108 
        Cong. Rec. 16000, 87th Cong. 2d Sess., Aug. 9, 1962. Generally, 
        see Ch. 17. infra.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 14.3 Funds for a special committee to investigate campaign 
    expenditures are authorized by House resolution and paid from the 
    contingent fund.

    On Aug. 2, 1968,(5) the House passed a resolution 
authorizing the payment of expenses for an investigation to be 
conducted by the special committee to investigate campaign 
expenditures, established by House Resolution 1239. The resolution 
provided for payment from the contingent fund for staff members and for 
other expenditures of the committee.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 5. 114 Cong. Rec. 25065, 90th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Since the resolution was not reported from the Committee on

[[Page 940]]

House Administration, the resolution was not called up as privileged:

        Mr. [Samuel N.] Friedel [of Maryland]: Mr. Speaker, I ask 
    unanimous consent for the immediate consideration of House 
    Resolution 1281.
        The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

                                  H. Res. 1281

            Resolved, That the expenses of conducting the investigation 
        authorized by H. Res. 1239, Ninetieth Congress, incurred by the 
        Special Committee To Investigate Campaign Expenditures, 1968, 
        acting as a whole or by subcommittee, not to exceed $50,000, 
        including expenditures for employment of experts, special 
        counsel, and clerical, stenographic, and other assistants, 
        shall be paid out of the contingent fund of the House on 
        vouchers authorized by said committee, signed by the chairman 
        of the committee, and approved by the Committee on House 
        Administration.
            Sec. 2. The official stenographers to committees may be 
        used at all hearings held in the District of Columbia if not 
        otherwise engaged.

        The Speaker: (6) Is there objection to the request 
    of the gentleman from Maryland?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 6. John W. McCormack (Mass.).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        There was no objection.
        The resolution was agreed to.
        A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

Use of Select Committee Findings to Judge Elections

Sec. 14.4 The findings of a special committee to investigate campaign 
    expenditures, established by the House in the preceding Congress, 
    may be transmitted to the Committee on House Administration and 
    used where applicable by parties to election 
    contests.(7)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 7. See H. Rept. No. 1599 and H. Res. 580 in the contested election 
        case of Macy v Greenwood, First Congressional District of New 
        York, reported Mar. 19, 1952. 98 Cong. Rec. 2545, 82d Cong. 2d 
        Sess.
            For a resolution adopted in the 93d Congress granting the 
        Committee on House Administration subpena power in conducting 
        investigations, thereby enabling it to assume the functions of 
        the select committee, see H. Res. 737, 93d Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 14.5 A special committee to study campaign expenditures of the 
    Members in the preceding Congress has recommended that the 
    Committee on House Administration investigate and report to the 
    House by a certain date.(8)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 8. See H. Rept. No. 2482 and H. Res. 676 in the election contest of 
        Oliver v Hale, for the First Congressional District of Maine, 
        reported Aug. 6, 1958, 104 Cong. Rec. 16481, 85th Cong. 2d 
        Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 14.6 Where the Select Committee to Investigate Campaign 
    Expenditures of the

[[Page 941]]

    89th Congress investigated the election of a Member-elect and 
    recommended that his right to his seat be reserved for decision, he 
    was sworn in, but his final right to a seat was referred to the 
    Committee on House Administration.

    On Jan. 10, 1967,(9) the House passed a resolution 
authorizing the administration of the oath to Member-elect Benjamin B. 
Blackburn, of Georgia, but directing that his final right to a seat be 
referred to the Committee on House Administration. The determination of 
his right to a seat was reserved for later decision pursuant to the 
recommendation of the Select Committee to Investigate Campaign 
Expenditures appointed in the 89th Congress.(10)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 9. 113 Cong. Rec. 27, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
10. See H. Rept. No. 2348, 89th Cong. 2d Sess., Jan. 3, 1967.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The right of Mr. Blackburn to his seat was then treated as a 
contested election case, and the Committee on House Administration 
recommended that Mr. Blackburn be declared entitled to his seat after 
the investigation.(11)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
11. 113 Cong. Rec. 15848, 15849, 90th Cong. 1st Sess., June 14, 1967.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On July 11, 1967,(12) the House adopted House Resolution 
542, reported by the committee, affirming the right of Mr. Blackburn to 
his seat. The resolution was offered by Mr. Robert T. Ashmore, of South 
Carolina. He discussed the basis for the investigation, including the 
dispute concerning the accuracy of computers used to count the ballots.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
12. 113 Cong. Rec. 18291, 18292, 90th Cong. 1st Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Mr. Charles E. Goodell, of New York, remarked in debate on the 
function of the Select Committee on Campaign Expenditures and the 
conflict in jurisdiction between that committee and the Subcommittee on 
Elections of the Committee on House Administration.

        Mr. Goodell: Mr. Speaker, I also join in the committee decision 
    in this instance to dismiss the contest brought by Mr. Mackay 
    against the incumbent contestee, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. 
    Blackburn]. It should be emphasized that at this stage Mr. Mackay 
    has requested the withdrawal of his contest, so there is really no 
    issue left to argue about.
        I think there is one point, however, that should be made in 
    this debate which affects all of us in the possibility of election 
    contests in our own districts in the future. We must move to 
    clarify the whole procedure of election contests in the interim 
    between the election date and the opening of a new Congress. In 
    that period the jurisdiction lies to a degree in the Special 
    Committee on Campaign Expenditures. As a practical matter, the 
    ultimate decision for investigating and deter

[[Page 942]]

    mining election contests rests with the new Congress and with the 
    Subcommittee on Elections of the Committee on House Administration. 
    We have had in the past confusion in election contest cases. The 
    contester in some instances has felt he had complied with the law 
    by giving notice of contest to the Special Committee on Campaign 
    Expenditures and failed to give notice under the law to the Clerk 
    of the House and the Subcommittee on Elections of the Committee on 
    House Administration.
        In addition, Mr. Speaker, it seems unnecessary that we have two 
    such subcommittees operating with overlapping jurisdiction.

        We have moved to a degree to provide that the membership of the 
    Special Committee on Campaign Expenditures will be the same as the 
    membership of the House Subcommittee on Elections.
        Perhaps this would be a solution. In any event I believe this 
    Congress should move to try to eliminate the overlapping and 
    confusion that exists in the present law between the jurisdictions 
    of these two committees. It caused some difficulty in this 
    instance. The Special Committee on Campaign Expenditures spent 
    considerable time debating its proper jurisdiction, and the special 
    committee ultimately, by a divided vote, recommended that the 
    gentleman from Georgia [Mr. Blackburn] not be seated on opening 
    day. There was considerable difference of opinion as to the proper 
    jurisdiction of the Elections Subcommittee as distinguished from 
    the Campaign Expenditures Special Committee in this situation.
        Mr. Speaker, I would hope that we could move to eliminate any 
    possibility of this type of confusion in the future.

Sec. 14.7 Both candidates for a congressional seat filed petitions with 
    the special campaign expenditures committee of the preceding 
    Congress, which committee investigated only one petition filed 
    therewith.

    On June 13, 1961,(13) the Committee on House 
Administration reported on the Roush-Chambers election contest for the 
Fifth Congressional District of Indiana. As indicated by the report (H. 
Rept. No. 513) and by the debate in the House on House Resolution 339, 
on June 14, 1961, declaring Mr. J. Edward Roush entitled to the seat, 
both candidates had filed petitions with the special campaign 
expenditures committee created in the 86th Congress. The dispute was 
resolved in favor of Mr. Roush, although the committee had prepared 
findings on and had investigated only one of the petitions filed 
therewith.(14)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
13. 107 Cong. Rec. 10186, 87th Cong. 1st Sess.
14. For debate on the resolution, see 107 Cong. Rec. 10377-91, 87th 
        Cong. 1st Sess. For minority views criticizing the action of 
        the special committee and the action of the Committee on House 
        Administration, see id. at p. 10381.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 14.8 The Committee on House Administration took

[[Page 943]]

    ``judicial notice'' of complaints filed with a special committee to 
    investigate campaign expenditures of the preceding Congress, 
    although the special committee had failed to make recommendations 
    thereon.

    On Apr. 22, 1958,(15) the Committee on House 
Administration reported on the contested election case of Carter v 
LeCompte for the Fourth Congressional District of Iowa, and recommended 
that the contestee be declared entitled to his seat. In its report, 
House Report No. 1626, the committee took judicial notice of complaints 
filed by the contestant with the special committee to investigate 
campaign expenditures which had been created and appointed in the 84th 
Congress. The special committee had not taken any action on those 
complaints.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
15. 104 Cong. Rec. 6939, 85th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    On June 17, 1958, the House debated and adopted House Resolution 
533 declaring the contestee entitled to the seat.(16)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
16. 104 Cong. Rec. 11512-17, 85th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Former Select Committee on Standards and Conduct

Sec. 14.9 In the 89th Congress, the House established a Select 
    Committee on Standards and Conduct, with authority to investigate 
    allegations of improper conduct by Members.

    On Oct. 19, 1966,(17) a resolution establishing a Select 
Committee on Standards and Conduct, offered by the Committee on Rules, 
was called up as privileged (H. Res. 1013). The function of the 
proposed committee was to investigate allegations of improper conduct 
by Members, to recommend disciplinary action to the House, and to 
transmit recommendations as to any necessary legislation. The House 
passed the resolution, as amended, on the same day.(18)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
17. 112 Cong. Rec. 27713-29, 89th Cong. 2d Sess.
18. Expenditures by the Select Committee on Standards and Conduct were 
        authorized to be paid out of the contingent fund of the House. 
        112 Cong. Rec. 27730, 89th Cong. 2d Sess., Oct. 19, 1966. The 
        Speaker [John W. McCormack (Mass.)] announced his appointments 
        to the select committee on Oct. 20, 1966, 112 Cong. Rec. 28112, 
        89th Cong. 2d Sess.
            A standing Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, with 
        jurisdiction over campaign contributions, was established in 
        the 90th Congress (see Ch. 17, infra).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Senate Select Committee on Campaign Practices

Sec. 14.10 A special Senate committee established in the 71st

[[Page 944]]

    Congress to investigate campaign practices and violations of the 
    Corrupt Practices Act held extensive hearings and proposed 
    legislation intended to remedy certain defects in the act.

    On Apr. 10, 1930, the Senate passed Senate Resolution 215, 
establishing a special committee to investigate the elections of 1930, 
with respect to campaign expenditures, election primaries, election 
contests, campaign practices, and alleged violations of the Federal 
Corrupt Practices Act of 1925.
    The committee conducted extensive hearings and submitted reports on 
the effectiveness of the act (19) and on alleged violations 
thereof.(20)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
19. S. Rept. No. 20, 72d Cong. 1st Sess., submitted pursuant to S. Res. 
        215, printed in 75 Cong. Rec. 977-79, 72d Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 
        21, 1931.
20. S. Rept. No. 24, pursuant to S. Res. 403, 72d Cong. 1st Sess., Dec. 
        21, 1931.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sec. 14.11 The Vice President was authorized to appoint a special 
    committee for an investigation of alleged attempts to improperly 
    influence the Senate through campaign contributions.

    On Feb. 22, 1956,(1) the Senate adopted Senate 
Resolution 219, authorizing an investigation by a special committee of 
lobbying activities. (The Senate had previously authorized an 
investigation into an alleged effort to influence a Senator, by 
contributing to his campaign, in relation to the natural gas bill, S. 
1853.) In his veto message on the gas bill, President Eisenhower stated 
that accumulated evidence of questionable activities in relation to the 
bill indicated a substantial threat to the integrity of the 
governmental process.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 1. 102 Cong. Rec. 3116, 84th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Senate Resolution 219, as agreed to, provided in part:

        Resolved, That there is hereby established a special committee 
    which is authorized and directed to investigate the subject of 
    attempts to influence improperly or illegally the Senate or any 
    Member thereof, or any candidate therefor, or any officer or 
    employee of the executive branch of the Government, through 
    campaign contributions, political activities, lobbying, or any and 
    all other activities or practices. . . .
        . . . The special committee shall consist of 8 members to be 
    appointed by the Vice President. . . .
        . . . The special committee shall report to the Senate by 
    January 31, 1957, and shall include in its report specific 
    recommendations (1) to improve and modernize the Federal election 
    laws; (2) to improve and strengthen the Federal Corrupt Practices 
    Act, the Hatch Act, and the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act, and 
    related laws; and (3) to insure appropriate ad

[[Page 945]]

    ministrative action in connection with all persons, organizations, 
    associations, or corporations believed to be guilty of wrongdoing 
    punishable by law.

Sec. 14.12 In the 84th Congress, the Senate by resolution created a 
    select committee to investigate an attempt by a campaign 
    contributor to influence the vote of a Senator.

    On Feb. 7, 1956,(2) there was laid before the Senate a 
resolution (S. Res. 205) establishing a select committee to investigate 
allegedly improper attempts through political contributions to 
influence the vote of a Senator. The Senate adopted the resolution:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
 2. 102 Cong. Rec. 2167, 84th Cong. 2d Sess.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

        Resolved, That there is hereby established a select committee 
    to investigate the circumstances involving an alleged improper 
    attempt through political contributions to influence the vote of 
    the junior Senator from South Dakota [Mr. Case] in connection with 
    the Senate's consideration of the bill S. 1853, the natural gas 
    bill.

    Parliamentarian's Note: During the consideration of S. 1853, the 
gas bill, Senator Francis H. Case announced that an attempt had been 
made to influence his vote on the measure by tendering him a campaign 
contribution.