Legislative Branch Appropriations Act, 2017
Floor Speech
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PEARCE. Madam Chair, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Chair, despite what has been said about this amendment, it is very simple. There are two bodies that are funded through the appropriations process in the U.S. Congress. One is the House Committee on Ethics. That is the one that we all know as Members of Congress. But there is another body called the Office of Congressional Ethics that works pretty well outside of this body.
Now, my amendment is simply taking this year's increase away from that outside body. Again, no change to the ethical process inside the body, the one that we are all familiar with and feel accountable to. But we are deducting $191,000 from this outside group because in this time of budget constraints, when I look at my office and all the other offices, our spending has been reduced. Our budgets have been reduced by approximately $200,000 since 2008.
Now, we have to deal with 750,000 to 900,000 constituents. I have five field offices. Generally we drive, as a staff, somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 miles per year to deal with our constituents. Our budgets have gone down $200,000, with a small increase this year of $12,000.
Then, on the other hand, I see a $191,000 increase on this outside group. I just feel like that is extraordinary and would suggest that the appropriations bill, H.R. 5325, be reduced in that amount in this budget area.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PEARCE. Madam Chair, I find it odd that we received the words today on the House floor that we are going to increase transparency through the Office of Congressional Ethics. That is exactly what they do not do.
The Sixth Amendment of the Constitution gives the accused the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him. I will quote from a letter, a legal letter that was given to the OCE:
This investigation has again revealed due process deficiencies within the OCE rules. While the Sixth Amendment of the United States provides for the fundamental right to confront one's accusers, the OCE rules do not allow to confront the accused with the accusers.
Secondly, the Sixth Amendment gives us the right to a lawyer. I will again quote from Paul Solis, an employee of the OCE, in an email to my chief of staff:
I forgot to mention on our call that should you retain a lawyer for the office, that lawyer would most likely be prohibited under our rules from representing a subject of this review to the extent that subject is a current staff member.
So the OCE, in their email to our office, says you don't have the right to legal counsel, even though the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution says that you do.
The third thing that I see is that we should be able to find out the nature of the charges under the Sixth Amendment. Again, our experience and the experience of others who have confronted OCE realizes you do not know what the charges are, you are not going to get to get a lawyer, and you cannot know who is accusing you. This hardly meets the word ``transparency'' that my good friend alluded to.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. PEARCE. Madam Chair, I would remind my friend and colleague that this amendment only addresses the funding. I simply used my time in order to advertise for this agency and the way that they operate.
I would like to quote from an email that I got this morning:
I cried when I saw what your boss did last night on the Leg Branch.
This is referring to my amendment.
I was unfairly targeted by OCE in 2013, for an action in 2008, which had been approved by the Ethics Committee. OCE even admitted there was no evidence. I complied with every provision of the policy, without exception. One of the staffers that was being investigated in this same circumstance left the Hill early on. I considered doing the same thing. I certainly had to endure all the phases of the OCE process, including referral to the Ethics Committee.
The Ethics Committee dismissed the case against us, but it is, by far, the worst thing that has ever happened to me in my 21 years on the Hill. I am a strong person with resources, and was an emotional wreck over the thought of losing my credibility over an ethics investigation. I cried virtually every day for several months. And the prolonged process over many, many months took a toll on my life.
And we are asking to give this agency another $191,000 to continue this kind of action? I think this debate is exactly called for at this moment on this bill and on this spending.
Madam Chair, I urge Members to support the amendment to give notice to the OCE that we are watching what they are doing.
Madam Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source