Partisan Hearing to Build Impeachment Narrative Detracts from Real Committee Priorities

Statement

Instead of focusing on critical issues facing America's infrastructure, including U.S. communities' disaster readiness and ongoing recovery efforts or working to produce a bipartisan infrastructure package, the Committee today held a partisan hearing intended to help opponents of the President try to further the narrative on impeachment.

Today's hearing of the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management focused on the Old Post Office (OPO) Building lease and Trump International Hotel. Opponents of the President claim that the lease, competitively awarded and carried out during the Obama Administration, creates a violation of the little known Emoluments Clause: an unsettled area of Constitutional law that is still before the Courts.

"It's unfortunate that our traditionally bipartisan Committee devoted so much time today to political theater," said Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure Ranking Member Sam Graves (R-MO). "Our Nation has too many infrastructure needs, like improving our roads and bridges, addressing flood protection, renewing our pipeline safety programs, and much more. We shouldn't be wasting our time making declarations about Constitutional law when the Courts are still considering these issues. I hope we can get back to the business of improving our infrastructure, which is what the American people want and need us to do."

"September is National Preparedness Month -- many of our communities are still recovering from disasters from the past few years, including in my state, and some of our communities are being impacted right now by new disasters. We could have held a productive hearing today on disaster readiness, mitigation, and recovery -- just to name one example -- instead of playing these political games," said Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management Ranking Member Mark Meadows (R-NC).

Part of today's hearing focused on a report of the General Services Administration (GSA) Office of Inspector General (OIG), which made its own legal analysis of the Emoluments Clause despite lacking legal expertise in that area. Nevertheless, the OIG report provided no evidence of undue political influence and suggested no partiality in GSA's management of the OPO lease process.

A legal expert who testified today, Hans A. von Spakovsky, Senior Legal Fellow, Center for Legal and Judicial Studies at The Heritage Foundation, testified, "There was no violation of the Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution when the Trump organization was selected to be the developer of the Trump Hotel in 2012 and entered into a lease in 2013. Further, there was no violation after the president was elected based on the specious claim that any state, federal, or foreign government official staying at the hotel and paying for the standard services provided by the hotel is paying an "emolument' to the president."

Several legal cases regarding Emoluments and the President's compliance with the lease are pending, including a case to which Members of the Committee who participated in today's hearing are party.

Source