69–008 

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 exVerDate Sep 11 2014 05:58 Nov 30, 2016 Jkt 069008 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\HR838.XXX HR838

lotter on DSK3GDR082PROD with REPORTS
2 

pense 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. 


lotter on DSK3GDR082PROD with REPORTS
3 

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. 


lotter on DSK3GDR082PROD with REPORTS
4 

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. 


lotter on DSK3GDR082PROD with REPORTS
(5) 

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. 


lotter on DSK3GDR082PROD with REPORTS
6 

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. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK3GDR082PROD with REPORTS