Legislative Program

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM -- (House of Representatives - April 14, 2005)

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. Speaker, let me thank the distinguished whip for yielding. And I have listened to this colloquy. And let me try to add a little bit to it, if I might.

First, I appreciate the leader's acknowledgment on process because the process is very important. I think the debate that we are having on the floor should have been had prior to the rule being brought under a very partisan environment for passage on the first day of session. I think if we would have had a chance, Democrats and Republicans, to review the rules changes, some of the problems that are now being brought out by these rules changes would have been understood.

So let me get to the policy issue that the leader brings up. And that is, yes, the chairman and ranking member can proceed to bring a matter before the full committee. But they do not have the investigative power in order to understand what is involved in the particular matter.

I served on the Ethics Committee for over 6 years, during some very difficult times, including the bank issues, including a charge against the Speaker of the House. And I can tell you this, that if we would have had a 45-day deadline considering an investigation of this matter, there would have been no way that we could have gotten the necessary votes to proceed.

In my entire time on the Ethics Committee we never had a partisan division. We always were able to work out our issues. It was not easy. It took time. We had to sit down and listen to each other, get the facts.

In reality, when you look at the rules that we are bound by and the facts, generally you will reach consensus and agreement within the Ethics Committee, and that is exactly what happens. But if the clock is running and there are only 45 days, and after that time there is an automatic dismissal, and that is what is in these rules now, it encourages a partisan division. It works counterintuitive to trying to work out what a consensus would bring out which is in the best interest of the institution. And I regret we did not have the opportunity to debate that during the process of the adoption of the rules.

It is interesting to point out that the investigation and the charges that were held against Speaker Gingrich brought about a lot of controversy on this floor. And the majority leader and the minority leader at that time recognized that the only way that we could resolve rules changes was to set up a bipartisan task force, and that is when Mr. Livingston and myself were the co-chairs. And we listened to the debate. And due process for the Member was a very important consideration. And we did change the rules in order to provide for that, but we did it in a bipartisan deliberation, and that was missing this time. And I regret that.

http://thomas.loc.gov