Steny Hoyer

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. The gentleman is welcome. The pain of accountability is evident. What this resolution says, and I am pleased that the gentleman from California is going to vote for it, is that the American people are going to have confidence that when a criminal act is committed by a Member, whatever that act, that the Ethics Committee will look at it. I said earlier in the course of this debate that I have full confidence that the Ethics Committee will dismiss summarily, summarily, the examples that the gentleman from California raises. That's not what the American public are concerned about. Yes, perhaps it's politicized. But when Duke Cunningham takes $2.5 million of bribes to put earmarks in bills and calls the Defense Department and says, give Mr. Wade a contract, the American people knows that's something they want looked at. They want action taken. That Member was not expelled until conviction. When Mr. Abramoff takes trips with a lot of people to Scotland for free, the American people knows that's not a traffic ticket. It's not demonstrating in front of the Embassy of Sudan to say stop the genocide in Darfur. The American public knows the difference. When a gentleman gets $5,000 in chips to put in his pocket and pay his bills with, they know that's not a traffic ticket, particularly when legislative action is taken shortly thereafter on this floor. They know the difference. I would hope that every Member would vote for this, because I believe that every Member in this House wants an ethical House, Republican and Democrat. Why? Because unethical conduct, yes, criminal conduct, reflects on every one of us, because the American public too readily assumes, well, if one does it, all do it. That is not the case. I believe that I am privileged to serve with those of you on the Republican side and those on the Democratic side with some very ethical members of our society who have been chosen by your neighbors to represent them in this body. All we are saying in this resolution is that, ladies and gentlemen of America, we are going to hold accountable each and every one of us if we do not act in accordance with your justifiably high expectations. I hope every Member of this body votes for this resolution and says to our constituents, this body will be an ethical, honest body representing your interest. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to the resolution (H. Res. 451) directing the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to respond to the indictment of, or the filing of charges of criminal conduct in a court of the United States or any State against, any Member of the House of Representatives by empaneling an investigative subcommittee to review the allegations not later than 30 days after the date the Member is indicted or the charges are filed.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, the minority leader, in closing on the resolution that will be voted on in a short time, correctly observed that every Member of the House needs to be held accountable for conduct which undermines the faith, respect and confidence that the American public has in this institution. We agree with that. In fact, we have been saying that for years and we have acted to effect that objective. This resolution, we believe, furthers that effort. Essentially, Mr. Speaker, what this resolution says, it directs the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct to respond to an indictment of or the filing of charges of criminal conduct in a court of the United States of any State against any Member of the House by empaneling an investigative subcommittee to review the allegations not later than 30 days after the date the Member is indicted or charges are filed. As I said in my statement with reference to the previous resolution, this will be a general process of the House so that every Member knows that this process will be employed, not on a partisan basis, but on the basis of conduct and on the basis of actions that have been taken. It also says, however, to the committee that if they find that such an investigative committee, under the circumstances that the bipartisan committee reviews, do not feel that going forward is appropriate, they can report that back. That, I think, responds to the concerns properly raised by the gentleman from California. This resolution under this suspension is the general of what the other resolution is on the specifics. Mr. Speaker, I said that Nancy Boyda from the State of Kansas came here and offered legislation which essentially said that if Members were found guilty of a crime that adversely affected their service in the Congress of the United States, that their pensions would be at risk. That legislation was overwhelmingly adopted. I congratulate the gentlelady from Kansas for her focus on ensuring the ethics of this body and that the public is not subsidizing criminal or unethical behavior which subjects a Member to removal. Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to yield such time as she may consume in support of the suspension to the gentlewoman from Kansas (Mrs. Boyda).

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Space), who comes to the Congress replacing Mr. Ney because the people wanted honest representation.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman for his question. What the resolution anticipates is applying generally that which the resolution offered by the minority leader raises specifically because we believe that the Ethics Committee ought to ensure for the American public that ethical conduct which does not call in question the House of Representatives' standards of official conduct is being pursued. But I will tell the gentleman further that I have great confidence in this Ethics Committee, led by a former member of the judiciary, I might add, who knows the law and who knows process. And I have full confidence that she and the Members of the Ethics Committee on both sides, and, as the gentleman knows, it is five Republicans and five Democrats, would summarily have a form available to them that would say if someone gets a traffic ticket that is not subject to further action. You and I would agree with that without hesitation.

Mr. HOYER. I wanted to fully answer the gentleman's question in this committee hearing we are having.

Mr. HOYER. If the gentleman would yield for a very specific response to that.

Mr. HOYER. First of all, a traffic ticket is a charge, not a conviction. It is a de minimus charge that I think the committee would summarily deal with.

Mr. HOYER. I would say to the gentleman, the intent of the resolution I think is clear. And that is to say when charges are made, and the gentleman tries to bring up de minimus charges that no American would think violates the ethics of the House of Representatives or essentially major transgressions. I think the Ethics Committee, if that was brought before them pursuant to this resolution, would deal with them summarily as not being worthy of consideration as you and I would deem them not worth of consideration.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds. Mr. Speaker, clearly what the gentleman is trying to do in a debating framework is trying to say we didn't mention every specific instance, whether very serious, moderately serious, or extraordinarily serious. The gentleman is correct. I have responded to the gentleman that the Ethics Committee clearly, we believe, can make those judgments; and we believe and are confident that the committee will make such judgments and will not treat de minimus assertions as seriously calling for investigative subcommittees or further action by the committee. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from California (Mr. McNerney).

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOYER. The gentleman from Maryland has many people who are very interested in speaking on this issue, and I will have to yield to them and use the time to do so. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Carney).

Mr. HOYER. I thank the gentleman. He will observe that our speakers have all been from districts where this was a compelling issue in the November election, and that is why they are so interested in speaking about it. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Colorado (Mr. Perlmutter).

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, as a young man I worked on Capitol Hill for a United States Senator, along with the Speaker, Senator Daniel Brewster. From time to time, Clarence Mitchell, Jr., one of the giants of American history in civil rights in America, would visit Senator Brewster; and I would have an opportunity to meet him. I was honored and awed to meet him. Many called him the 101st United States Senator. Clarence Mitchell, Jr., was the brother of Parren James Mitchell. Shortly after I graduated from law school, I was honored by the citizens of my district who elected me to the State Senate. I went to the State Senate as a young man, but there was a young man 6 months younger than I. His name was Clarence Mitchell, III, Clarence Junior's son. We served together. Over the years, I got to know very well Juanita Mitchell, an extraordinary family, an extraordinary family whose matriarch, Ms. Jackson, was an extraordinary leader in her own right. Parren J. Mitchell was my friend. In 1981, many years after I met the Mitchell family for the first time, I ran for Congress. Juanita Mitchell and Parren Mitchell and Clarence Mitchell, III, were very helpful to me in that campaign. I represented a large African American population. They have always been very supportive of me and I of them. Parren Mitchell did a radio ad for me during the course of that campaign urging all in Prince George's County to elect me. That was a significant help, in my opinion, to my election. He has been succeeded when he decided voluntarily to leave the Congress by two extraordinary representatives. One was Kweisi Mfume, who spoke at the funeral today; and the other was my colleague and my friend, the immediate past chairman of the Congressional Black Caucus which was founded by Parren J. Mitchell with Lou Stokes and others. Elijah Cummings spoke. He spoke powerfully and eloquently about the relationship that he throughout his life had with the Mitchell family and the impact that they made on him as an individual. The Mitchell family and Parren J. Mitchell in particular were extraordinary servants of the people, of our democracy, of our country. When Parren J. Mitchell was sworn in as the first African American to represent the people of Maryland in Congress, he joined this institution at a landmark moment for equality in America. It was 1971. The Voting Rights Act of 1963 and the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and 1968 had already been signed into law. African Americans were making strides that once seem unimaginable; and the assassinations of leaders like Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Malcolm X and Robert Kennedy raised questions as to what the future of the civil rights movement would be. Parren Mitchell. Parren Mitchell, a man who took it upon himself to not only protect the legacy of the civil rights pioneers who had come before but to build upon the progress that made it possible for him to come to Washington in the first place. Rather than be satisfied with how far the struggle for freedom and equality had come in recent years, Parren took responsibility for moving America even further, dedicating his life to ensuring that American society reflected the values and the principles for which this great country stands. Parren was a founding member, as I have said, of the Congressional Black Caucus, a body that has transformed the way we approach issues of social and economic justice through an understanding that unity is the key to lasting change here in the United States. Parren fought for fairness in American workplaces and institutions of higher learning as a staunch advocate of affirmative action programs that opened the doors of opportunity to thousands of minorities. As the Speaker said today in her remarks, he was not only committed to equality but understood that equity, particularly ownership in our society, a piece of the pie, was absolutely essential as well. Parren helped to enhance the fortunes of America's minority business community by introducing legislation ensuring that minority owned business enterprises have a fair shot at Federal contracts, a provision we see mirrored in local and State government contracting practices all over our Nation today because of the leadership and commitment of Parren Mitchell. Parren's life was one of historic firsts, from the first African American congressman from Maryland to the first African American to receive a degree from my alma mater, the University of Maryland. His life was also one of service, serving his country proudly and honorably as an officer in the 92nd Infantry Division during World War II and serving the people of Baltimore and our Nation as a man who would never give up fighting for what he knew to be right and just. Coretta Scott King once said that struggle is a never-ending process, and freedom never really won; you earn it and win it in every generation. We are all profoundly fortunate that a leader like Parren Mitchell was here to carry the torch of human progress that was passed down to his generation, and we all are profoundly grateful for his contribution to expanding the reach of civil rights and equal opportunity in America. Mr. Speaker, as we commemorate the life of Parren J. Mitchell, I would like to offer my sincere condolences to his family and loved ones and many friends, to express my deep gratitude for his years of service to this House, the State of Maryland and this great country. Parren J. Mitchell was short in stature, but he was a giant of a man. He stood tall. He stood with courage, he stood with commitment, and he stood with conviction for the rights of all Americans, not just those who were African Americans but of all Americans, irrespective of who they are, what they were, where they came from, how they worshipped. He knew that equality for one was absolutely essential if there was to be equality for all. America was blessed by the service of Parren J. Mitchell. Today we heard of the love, the respect, and the honor with which he was held by his community. I am proud to join Speaker Pelosi from his beloved city of Baltimore; Elijah Cummings who represents that city so well today and that district that Parren represented. He would be so proud, Elijah, of the representation you give to the 7th Congressional District. And to John Sarbanes whose father served shoulder to shoulder with Parren Mitchell in this House from 1971 to 1976. He would be so proud of you, John, and the role you play in representing that great city. I was blessed, Mr. Speaker, to serve with Parren Mitchell for the time that he served and I served together. I learned from him. I am better because of him, and I miss him deeply.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, forty years ago this week, America's Israeli allies triumphed over the greatest threat to their nation's survival since it was founded in 1948. By emerging from the Six-Day War victorious, Israel demonstrated that a country devoted to liberty, equality and democracy could not only exist, but flourish, in one of the most volatile regions in the world. In the weeks leading up to June of 1967, Israel's Arab neighbors amassed an immense force along their shared borders with the Jewish state. Their goal--as Egyptian President Gamel Abdel Nasser then put it--was ``the destruction of Israel,'' and they assembled 465,000 troops, 2,800 tanks, and 800 aircraft on Israel's doorstep to achieve this malicious goal. In the armed conflict that followed, Israel defended itself honorably, courageously, and effectively--winning the war in just six days and taking control of lands previously held by the invading nations. And in an unprecedented act of compromise, Israel offered to give back the captured lands in return for nothing more than a promise that Israel's neighbors would join them in pursuit of peaceful co- existence. Furthermore, Israel stated that the City of Jerusalem, which was placed under Israel's control as a result of the war, would once again be open to peoples of all faiths and nationalities--a provision that allowed Jews, Christians and Muslims alike to freely worship in the holy city. These actions in defense of peace and equality--undertaken by Israel just weeks after being attacked--help to demonstrate why the U.S.- Israeli relationship remains so strong to this day. The Israeli people have always worked hard to find common ground with their neighbors, even while facing profound threats to their safety and sovereignty. And just as Israel has never turned its back on the principles and values that all free nations share, America will never turn its back on her. It gives me great pride to support H. Con. Res. 152, commemorating the 40th anniversary of the reunification of Jerusalem and recognizing the preceding struggle--and I look forward to many more years of fruitful partnership between the United States and Israel.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and agree to H. Res. 451.

Mr. HOYER

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Mr. Speaker, I intend to support this resolution, and I agree with the minority leader. The allegations that have been made are extraordinarily serious. They, if proven true, should lead to the expulsion of the Member in question. They, of course, have not been proved true. They are allegations. Having said that, I also intend to and have called for a resolution to be considered tonight under suspension. That resolution speaks not only to the Jefferson case, to which the gentleman from Ohio limits his privileged resolution, but also speaks to any allegations of serious criminal conduct that may be made either through indictment or other charging documents; and it calls for action by the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in any and all of those cases. We appreciate the sensitivity of the minority leader to this issue at this time. It is, frankly, the first time I recall such a resolution being offered by the minority. For over a year, the Ethics Committee essentially didn't act, didn't operate. In fact, when it did and it held the former majority leader as having adversely affected the ethics of the House, the chairman was summarily removed from the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct; and, in fact, two of the members that had the temerity to vote to have a consequence for actions that reflected on the House were removed from that committee. But I welcome the minority leader and the minority party's interest in pursuing this matter. I presume that the gentleman's resolution will pass unanimously. I also hope that the suspension resolution will also pass unanimously because there are, of course, unfortunately, a number of allegations being made publicly about Members of this House; and irrespective of what party they may fall into or be members of, it is critically important for us to hold accountable those Members and to assure the American public that the Ethics Committee is looking at those allegations, investigating those allegations, and making reports not only to the House of Representatives but to the people. We swear an oath to not only defend the Constitution, but to uphold the laws of our land. As Members of this House, we have an absolute obligation to conduct ourselves in a way that does not violate the standards of official conduct or bring into disrepute the House of Representatives. Hopefully, we will agree on that proposition. So I say to my Republican friends, we welcome them to this focus on holding accountable Members who violate the trust of the American public. We certainly intend to support it. I hope they will support the subsequently offered resolution, which says that in every case we will pursue this focus. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. I can do it shorter than that. I just wanted to make one point, because I checked. The important issue is going forward. We agree with that. We can argue about what happened in the past, we certainly have our perspective. Your panel was named last month, not at the beginning of the session, not in January or February or March or April, but last month. So we need to move forward on this, and we are going to. We are going to support this resolution. I welcome your support of the suspension resolution, which will ensure that in these kinds of cases, that we go forward in every instance as we are going forward today.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. Chutzpah is a wonderful word. Chutzpah is the position of a person who has been involving themselves in activities for a long period of time and then accusing somebody else of doing the same and being sanctimonious in the process. That aside, Mr. Speaker, this House was told in November of last year by the people of this country, clean up your House, get rid of the culture of corruption. That's what they said in 2006, on November 7; and that's what we're doing. We adopted one of the strongest rules packages dealing with ethics in the history of this House, eliminating all meals and gifts from lobbyists. Arm's-length transactions. No travel. We just passed a lobbying disclosure bill 2 weeks ago, which most of us voted for because we want to be in on the effort of cleaning up this House. My young friend from Florida apparently forgets that in January we passed a pension bill which says that if you're convicted and expelled, you won't get your pension. That was the Boyda bill, Nancy Boyda from Kansas, who came to Congress on a pledge to clean up the Congress. And she was elected to do just that. Earmarks. Earmarks were quadrupled over the last 14 years. We have now adopted a rule that says they're going to be transparent. You're going to know who made the request for earmarks, that there is going to be some check on those earmarks. Now, my young friend from Florida says that our resolution, which will be on suspension, was just seen. I will tell him, and there is no way he would know this, I saw the leader's resolution just minutes ago. But that is not the issue, Mr. Speaker. The issue is the American public did indeed send us here to act ethically, honestly and openly and do the people's business, not the special interests'. And that's why they made a change in this House in November of 2006, that's why we unanimously on our side are going to support this resolution, and that's why we're going to support the suspension bill. Because not only do we believe it ought to be done in this instance, but there are a lot of Members publicly under investigation in this House whose homes have been raided by Federal officials, but they're not in this resolution. They have not been indicted. Mr. Speaker, we need to act. The public needs to know we're acting, and we need to hold accountable those who fail to meet their public duty and trust to the American people. This leadership is committed to making sure that we do just that. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. Well, I don't have a specific answer for that. But let me say this. You gave your list last month. We have given our list this month. The minority leader is correct on that time frame. We heard about this indictment. We determined to take specific action. The minority leader also determined to take specific action. We believe they complement one another, but the real issue is that we need to take decisive action and we intend to do so.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I don't know when Mr. Cunningham was indicted and convicted, but ``a long, long time'' seems not to be my recollection of how long ago it was. Having said that, Mr. Speaker, I will reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. HOYER. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.