CREATING A SELECT COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS AND CONDUCT TUESDAY, MARCH 7, 1967 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The committee met at 11:45 a.m., pursuant to recess, in room H-313, the Capitol, Hon. William M. Colmer (chairman of the committee) presiding. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will be in order. STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN DELLENBACK, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OREGON Mr. DELLENBACK. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I am Congressman John Dellenback from Oregon. I am appearing this morning as an individual and also as a representative of approximately 46 of my fellow Republican freshmen Congressmen. This is my first term in the Congress and I must confess that I feel a certain reasonable amount of trepidation in giving my first congressional testimony before a committee as senior and as critically important to the whole legislative process as the House Rules Committee. The accumulated years of congressional service on the part of the members of this committee makes my approximately 2 months of service appear as brief as in truth they are. And yet in part it is this very newness to the congressional scene that is a principal reason for my appearing before you this morning. I realize from my own period of service in our Oregon Legislature that, after one has spent a number of years in such service, one sees and understands the detailed operation of such a body as this much more thoroughly than when he first commences service. Yet there were times in my last term in the Oregon House of Representatives that the thoughts which the newcomers to such body communicated to the rest of us were most helpful in causing me to recall attitudes that I had had as a freshman State legislator, and, more importantly, that reflected very clearly the outside view of the legislative process and of the legislature. So it is that, in coming before you as I do as a freshman, my perspective is in many ways more that of the average citizen of this Nation than it is that of the experienced Federal legislator. And I say to you as forcefully and urgently as I can that the prevailing view in the section of the Nation from which I come, and apparently in many other sections as well, is one of serious question about this Congress of ours. In the minds of the rank and file of our citizens, we who serve in the Congress and the Congress itself are on trial. It is critically important that not only our true and and actual conduct be above reproach, but that this fact be clearly demonstrated to the average citizen in a manner that will wipe from his mind any lingering concern or question and leave him in a mood to accept as the action of dedicated men and women the laws we write and the actions we take as their representatives. The action of a very few Members of this Congress have raised doubts in the minds of many of our average citizens. In my brief time of service here I have already become convinced that any fair analysis of the Congress would clearly demonstrate that, with relatively few exceptions, our Members are able, sincere, honest, and hardworking people who are involved in this business of Government because of what they have to give rather than beacuse of what they might possibly get. I am personally convinced, and our group of freshman Republicans is convinced, that the creation of a meaningful Standards and Ethics Committee, with capacity to set and enforce standards of conduct for all of us, is action which the average citizen of America will understand and strongly approve. If the Congress fails to take this action at this time, we are deeply concerned that such inaction will be misinterpreted by many of the citizens of our areas and quite probably of yours. The other day on the floor of the House, as part of the special order in which some 20 members of our group spoke, I read the following statement in which 46 members of our group have now joined: We newly elected Republican Congressmen feel certain that the Congress of the United States-possibly with a few rare exceptions-is composed of men and women who are honest, dedicated and prepared both to preach and to practice adherence to a code of high personal morality and conduct. We feel strongly that no duly elected individual member of Congress should be singled out from our midst to be judged against any special standard against which we are not all ready and willing to be judged. In an effort to cause these feelings to take solid form, a number of us have earlier in this session introduced, or are today introducing or supporting, bills and resolutions looking to these goals. In order to demonstrate to the people of the United States in a clear and convincing manner the fact that these feelings are not ours alone, but are also the feelings of the entire Congress, we urge the entire Congress, and particularly the Members thereof sitting in positions of leadership in this Congress as Members of the majority Democratic Party, to insist upon immediate study of and action upon proposed changes in House Rules and in statutes that will incorporate these feelings as part of such rules and statutes. We intend to push as hard as we are able toward the earliest possible attainment of these goals. Forty-six signatories, from Oregon and Washington in the West— to Connecticut in the East; from Alaska to the North-to Texas and Florida to the South. The House has now acted on the matter of Adam Clayton Powell. The second point I make on behalf of our group of new Congressmen is to urge as strongly as I can that, particularly in view of House action in the Powell case, it is vital that we demonstrate that we are not singling out one particular individual for special judgment, but rather that our action in this case is part of a consistent program and pattern. Surely this is what it was intended to be in the action taken on the floor. The fairness and fundamental justice of the action taken by the House will be judged by our demonstrating clearly that this was not the application of a special set of standards to one selected individual, but rather that it was action based on a finding that a particular individual had failed to meet the code of conduct expected of all of us. It is of extreme importance that we demonstrate this fact to the people of America by acting swiftly and decisively in the establishment of this special committee on standards and ethics. We are already slow with such action. Our people will very much approve the establishment of this committee. Immediate action looking to its creation is imperative. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I would add a few words other than the prepared statement I have already read. Among the pieces of legislation that were introduced the other day were pieces of legislation and changes in rules looking to the creation of this sort of a committee and our group's unanimous stand with such a proposal. We urge as strongly as we possibly can that you not, in effect, let this thing drag on as you study the question of whether there should be such a committee created so that, in effect, the idea dies and we would urge there be immediate action on this one point. The legislation and change in rules proposed the other day by individuals of our group went into other questions. The question of nepotism, and the group varies as to whether there should be outlawing of nepotism or merely disclosure of nepotism. They went into the question of assets. There were those that said what should be disclosed, but the specifics here are also subject to variation. I don't come on behalf of our entire group to push any one of these proposals in the area of nepotism and disclosure, but to push as strongly as I can, and this group can, the moving ahead with a meaningful committee that will get into these specifics, conduct analysis and couple the thinking of experienced members with the fresh thinking of some new members in moving forward and seeing what ought to be done. I sat through prior hearings of this committee and one of the questions that was dwelt upon at some length was whether this should be a permanent committee. I think the chairman raised this question. Or should this be a temporary committee. I defer to your judgment in this regard, but my feeling is ultimately this should be a permanent committee. Whether you get to this immediately, or over a transitional period, is something which you gentlemen know a great deal more about than I. The question of whether this should be a new committee or placed in the hands of the present House committee is one I also heard a great deal of questioning of prior witnesses on. On this I would urge you create a new committee. This is in no wise because the present House Committee on Administration could not study this. They possibly could and would do this particular thing. But if a portion of the reason for the creation of this committee is to demonstrate, as clearly and unequivocally as this House can, that we attach a high degree of urgency and high degree of importance to this particular study at this particular time, I think the message would come across to our people much more clearly if this were a special committee created at this particular time for this purpose than it ever would come across by saying we already have a committee and we will ask this committee to do a certain study. I would urge again that I do speak to you as a freshman and I don't mean to be presumptuous in doing so. I speak for a group of freshmen and for a group that stand strongly and vigorously behind the urgency of this appeal. This is our Congress in a sense, but it is a Congress that belongs to the people and the people have some serious questions about this whole situation of congressional conduct. In my opinion, much of their feeling is unfounded and yet this. does not detract from the fact that the feeling is there and the obligation is here in Congress to act in such a way that there is no doubt left in their minds. I thank you for the opportunity to testify and for your time and attention. Mr. PEPPER. I think we can all agree that the first statement of the gentleman was excellent. You started off very well. Mr. DELLENBACK. Thank you, Mr. Pepper. The CHAIRMAN. I yield to you, Mr. Pepper, to compliment the gentleman. I had intended to do that myself so I associate myself with your remarks. Mr. PEPPER. Well, I will withdraw mine and associate with you. The CHAIRMAN. I also wanted to ask you a few questions. First, I understand you are speaking for a group, I believe you said. of the minority, the Republicans? Mr. DELLENBACK. That is correct. The CHAIRMAN. But that you do not necessarily urge all of the provisions that are in the resolution that your group has introduced? Mr. DELLENBACK. There is actually a series of proposals. Actually, I tried to make a distinction between the points upon which our group stood solidly and unanimously and a series of other points on which there was, without doubt, some difference of opinion. I tried to disassociate my stand as a representative of the group from my stand as an individual by making clear that over the range there was a series of questions and very possibly, at this early stage on certain specific questions I touched on, possibly a variation of opinion. I am not authorized to speak for the group on what we should do about nepotism or disclosure because there is a variation of preliminary attitude on this. But I speak for the group in urging this committee to act on forming this proposed ethics committee. The CHAIRMAN. That was my observation. If I got the gist of your testimony, it was for the urging of action to be taken and to be taken as speedily as possible consistent with getting something that would be meaningful; is that correct? Mr. DELLENBACK. That is correct, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Now, I, of course, cannot speak for this committee. I can only speak for one individual member of it and that is myself. I don't think there is any disagreement with the gentleman on that subject, on that phase of the subject. I think the committee recognizes the situation that exists and the committee wants to report some kind of a resolution that would be meaningful. Now, as the gentleman is aware, there has been a very large number of these resolutions introduced. There have been quite a few Members who have said that they want to be heard on the resolution, or on their resolutions, and this committee feels that it should hear all of those who want to be heard. If I have any policy as far as this committee is concerned, it is that any Member of Congress who wants to be heard on this or any other matter that comes before the committee should have the opportunity to present his views. I don't think there has been any disposition to dillydally with this or postpone it. I think that something will come out of this committee. The only question involved is what is the best thing to come out of it and there is, as you know, a considerable variance about how it should be handled. The thing that bothers me about expediting the adoption of a meaningful resolution is whether it should be a resolution consisting of our statements and further study, or whether there should be some resolution reported with teeth, to use that common expression, and get through with it rather than having further study. I think we all know what the problem is. And so far as I am concerned, I don't care whether it is a select committee or the rules are amended to give some standing committee jurisdiction. I do think that whatever is reported should be of a permanent nature rather than just a select committee that would expire. Thank you for listening to my remarks. Mr. DELLENBACK. I commend the chairman for a series of points. One, I think your demonstrated intention that this committee will not move too quickly but will listen to the other Members of Congress who wish to testify on this. I appreciate your listening to me this morning, The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman agree with me that hasty and precipitous action would not obtain the best result? Mr. DELLENBACK. I am sure hasty and precipitous action can directly lead to improper results, but I do at the same time urge as strongly as I can on this I know I speak for about 50 of us-that we would urge you and the members of this committee to move on this with all the haste you can bring to bear on it so there is a meaningful action taken at the earliest possible date. If we study this in too great depth, I think the rest of this first session of this 90th Congress could be used on it and I think this would be a serious mistake. Mr. MADDEN. I want to commend the gentleman for his statement, but don't you think that, if a committee like this is created, we ought to include in these resolutions and recommend to the Congress that they go into what I think is one of the most unethical practices, creates more scandal, influences more Members-that is this outlandish practice that in late years has expanded to where Congressmen and Senators have campaign funds that they spend as high as $3 million or $4 million. One Congressman spent $250,000. Whether he spent it, or whether certain influences who wanted to have his ear if he were elected spent it for him, don't you think that has unethical overtones for the Ĉongress when a man comes in with those obligations? 75-196-67-2 |