Date: 2005-01-04
Speaker: GEORGE MILLER (democrat)
Chamber: H
State: California

Mr. Speaker. I rise in opposition to the rules package. Every House Member should vote to put the House on record against ethical and procedural abuses that contaminate this institution. The stench of special interest corruption is overwhelming Congress. and repulsing the public. It is time the House Rules reflected the ethical standards and common sense of the American people. I came to this House 30 years ago. and our historic incoming class brought with it -one of the strongest tides of reform ever seen: rules were changed. chairmen were replaced. procedures were modernized so that the voice of the people was heard. and respected. in this House of the people. Ten years ago. the Republicans took control of the House. promising a new era of reform. To read the national newspapers. it is evident to everyoneexcept themselvesthat the Republicans have betrayed their promise of reform. They have tolerated misconduct and enshrined special interests as never before. Today. we give them. and all Members. an opportunity to restore public trust by voting for two commonsense amendments to the House rules. First. no sitting Member should negotiate for a new job with any organization that has had business before his or her committee for a year. Thats not hard to understood: no one should be shaping public policy with an eye on a future private sector salary. Second. no bill should be brought to the House floor unless Members have had 3 days to read it first. Thats not hard to understand: we should not be passing bills that are hundreds of pages in lengthsometimes over 1.000 pageswithout ever having seen what is in the bill. Ronald Reagan thought it was a bad idea. surely todays House Republicans can agree. Lets be honest aboot it: 99 percent of the American people outside the Beltway will agree with both of these principlesno negotiating for new jobs with special interests. Members should know what they are voting on before it becomes law. We shouldnt even have to have a debate. But we do. Less than a month ago. the Nation was stunnedto learn that the committee chairman who had fashioned a blatantly prodrug industry. antisenior. anticonsumer prescription drug law was retiring and taking a job with the pharmaceutical industry. In fact. our former colleague assumes his job with PIiRMA today. just as we are taking our oaths of office. Mr. Tauzin will reportedly be earning a salary nearly 13 times what he earned when he wrote that proindustry billone of the best paid lobbyists in Washington. He earned it. That prescription drug law will enrich him. but it takes billions of dollars out of the pockets of Americas senior citizens--by prohibiting them from purchasing cheaper drugs from Canada. and by prohibiting the Federal Government from negotiating with the pharmaceutical industryhis new employerfor lower drug prices. Thats worth billions to the drug industry. While the deal was not announced until last month. the discussions began a year ago. as was widely reported at the time. In fact. a top aide to the Republican leadership was quoted last January 24 on CNN.com as saying that Republican Congressman Tauzins negotiation with PhARMA "doesnt look very good." It doesnt look "very good" today either. as millions of seniors face higher drug prices thanks to the Tauzin bill. and Bill Tauzin takes office.to improve the tattered image of the drug industry. We all know this stinks. And so do our constituents. Lets put an end to it today by barring negotiations for private jobs by Members of Congress. Thats what our constituents would want us to do. And at the same time. lets put an end to the outrageous practice of voting on complex and lengthy bills before Congress has had time to read thembills like that prescription drug bill Bill Tauzin wrote while he was listening to PhARMAs whispers in his ears. Isnt it bad enough that Republicans majority writes the bills in secret. without input from the Democrats who represent 48 percent of the country? Without scrutiny by the press? Without review by the public Must we also vote on secret legislation. without reading it. without knowing the tax breaks and earmarked spending for special interests that have been stuck in without any review? I urge all Members to put party aside and vote the way your constituents would want you to vote: an end to private job negotiations while serving in public office. and full disclosure of the contents of legislation before we vote. Mr. Speaker. I also vigorously oppose the proposed rule change that would allow an ethics investigation to end after 45 days of the Ethics Committee of five Democrats and five Republicans remained deadlocked. Today. the Republicans are once again putting partisan politicians ahead of ethics by moving forward with their plan to shield their embattled majority leaderTOM DELAYfrom any further investigation. The goal of this change is to block the Ethics Committee from considering pending and future matters that could prove to be damaging to their party. Under the present rules. if the chair and the ranking minority member of the Ethics Committee cannot agree whether to investigate a complaint. the committee begins an initial investigation into the matter. But. under the Republicans proposed rule change. the Republican chairman of the Ethics Committeewho is handpicked by the Speakercould simply refuse to examine a complaint. After 45 days. the complaint would be dropped. without even an initial investigation into the matter. This new rule would allow Republicans to block pending ethics matters and prevent future investigations from moving forward. And the reason is very simple: there are at least two matters currently pending against Republican leaders. including Majority Leader TOM DELAY. Contrary to this mornings press reports. the Republicans havent backed away from their attempts to shield DELAY from further investigation. theyve simply become a littld more deceptive in how theyre doing it. Last year. when the Ethics Committee ad monished DELAY three times. it deferred action on another serious chargehis role in funneling illegal soft money into Texas races through his State PACuntil after the investigation against him had been completed. The rule change now proposed by his Republican colleagues would allow the Republican chairman of the committee to block any further investigation of DELAYS activities. shielding the minority leader from further admonishments even if he is indicted by a grand jury. Also pending is an investigation of Republican lobbyist. Jack Abramoff. and former DELAY staffer. Michael Scanlon. and their ties to several Republican members. Changing the ethics rules would permit the Republicans to halt any investigation of the Abramoff scandal and the Members who could be implicated in their outrageous tooting of Native Americans. I urge a "no" vote on this unbalanced and improper rules package.