able committee, the misuse of committee funds and the misuse of his own clerk hire funds.

Would you agree that these cases that I have spoken of would not normally, without general jurisdiction being given your committee, have come before your committee?

Mr. BURLESON. I think I am historically correct that in 1858 the first complete codification of the criminal statutes was made. That came up to the time when a commission was formed by the President in 1909.

From 1909 to 1936, I do not believe there was a complete codification, but growing out of that is title 18 of the Federal Statutes, which of course a Member of Congress is subject to, just like any other citizen.

These situations, as you have cited here are, of course, a violation of the law. Now, as I understand the things we are talking about, certainly a violation of anything under title 18 of the Federal Statutes would be a violation of ethics. I think we could agree to that.

On the other hand, there may be many tributaries to this thing, so to speak, that would be a violation of ethics which would not per se be a violation of those offenses listed under title 18 of the Criminal Code.

So I agree with you that an outright violation such as the cases you referred to, coming under title 18 of the Federal Code, and every Member is subject to it. But a vehicle is needed to surface it. The wording Mr. Bolling used yesterday-professional conduct, which I think is a descriptive term and a proper one.

So I think that in the matter of unbecoming conduct of a public official, coming under ethics, or as a vehicle to violations under the criminal statutes, would be a duty of such a committee as may be constituted.

It is not now. I agree on that part.

Mr. PEPPER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. That is all.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Burleson.

Mr. BURLESON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Bush, you have been around here a good while. We have to hear another committee here, and we have to go to the floor most any moment; that is, some members of this committee do. How long is your statement?

STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE BUSH, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS

Mr. BUSH. Mr. Chairman, I could simply suggest that if it would be agreeable to the committee, since it is similar to Mr. Reid's statement, I will submit it to the committee and have it made a part of the record; that would be agreeable with me. It simply endorses the proposal for a select committee and goes a little beyond that on a bill I have personally introduced, I recognize time is a real problem.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the distinguished gentleman's statement will be incorporated in the record.

(The document referred to follows:)

TESTIMONY OF THE HONORABLE GEORGE BUSH, SEVENTH DISTRICT TEXAS, BEFORE HOUSE RULES COMMITTEE, REGARDING ESTABLISHMENT OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS AND CONDUCT

Gentlemen, I am appearing on behalf of House Resolution 18, introduced by the Honorable Charles Bennett. I realize that it oftentimes is presumptuous for a freshman member to push hard for new legislation. But I strongly feel that the field of ethics goes way beyond seniority, party politics, or regional differences. Mr. Bennett's resolution is a sound one in my opinion as it proposes a Select Committee on Standards and Conduct. I feel we must have a committee formed for this specific purpose because no matter how good the intentions of any other committee are, the fact remains that only a Select Committee will devote its full time and energies to the problem, and only a Select Committee will assure the public we are taking a new and forthright look at the problem. In fact, I would like to see us go even further than Mr. Bennett's resolution and, for that reason, on February 27, I introduced House Resolution 279. It calls for a Select Committee, just as House Resolution 18 does, but it requires the committee to recommend a code of ethics by August 31 of this year. My bill also requires certain disclosure provisions. It asks for specific disclosure of assets, liabilities, and sources of income. It asks for revelation of relationships with lobbying organizations. It requires disclosure of ownership in any concern whose right to conduct business is regulated by the federal government. And it requires a full disclosure by the member and spouse of their relatives on the Congressional payroll.

In the past, none of us felt that any of these provisions should be required of us as members. But I don't think our feelings are of paramount importance right now. I don't think it is a question of what you or I want. I think the issue is

what do the American people want? And I am convinced that they want a full and accurate accounting by us-financially, kin-wise, and business-wise, and they want to see a code of ethics adopted and enforcement provisions voted which require us to live by this code.

I feel this is one area where we can give the American people what they desire. I urge this committee to vote the resolution to the floor for action. Let us once and for all show the public that our only obligation as a duly-elected Representative is to the people and to no one else.

Mr. BUSH. I am not familiar with your rules, but two other members asked me to bring statements to be included in the record, if that will be in order.

The CHAIRMAN. That is in order, and it is so ordered. You can leave them with counsel.

(The documents referred to follow :)

STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DONALD RUMSFELD SUBMITTED TO THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON RULES IN SUPPORT OF HOUSE RESOLUTION 18, TO CREATE A SELECT COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS AND CONDUCT

Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to have an opportunity to present a statement in support of the establishment of a Select Committee on Standards and Conduct in the House of Representatives. It is my hope that the committee be reconstituted so that it can continue the work I consider to be so important to the statute, and ultimately, to the effectiveness, of the U.S. House of Representatives. All would agree, I think, that the recent action by the House to exclude a Member-elect for misconduct does not represent the conclusion of our responsibility. Rather, that action requires us to face the need for a definitive statement of standards for the entire membership in this body, and should serve as an incentive to the House to assure that a committee is established to deal with such problems in the future. To accomplish this goal requires not only the development of reasonable criteria and standards, but, also, and equally important, the establishment of a standing committee to deal with such matters.

It is clearly the responsibility of the House to examine promptly and thoroughly allegations of abuses by Members, officers, and employees of the House not only to ensure that the established standards are honored, but, also, to disprove unfounded allegations. Both functions are important if the House is to have and maintain the respect of the American people. And this it must have if it is to fulfill its important constitutional responsibilities.

The publicity attendant upon the recent exclusion proceedings in the House of Representatives illustrates the problem which we face. Some have saidand probably more have thought—that this body is rampant with corruption and that politics is synonymous with wrongdoing. Certainly, this is not true. And yet, by a hesitancy to act or a reluctance to deal with this question, we may encourage public distrust. I believe this, in part, can be traced to an historical neglect of procedural safeguards, rather than simply to apathy on the part of the membership.

The crisis in public confidence with which we are faced must be met head-on by the establishment of a permanent investigative body to resolve allegations of misconduct. If a Committee on Standards and Conduct should be approved and recommended by the Committee on Rules, the Committee could begin to develop a clear body of standards of conduct for the House and procedures to assure that such criteria would be consistently and equitably applied, and that such regulations would be subject to periodic review and updating.

The Constitution assigns an important role to each branch of our Federal Government. Only if each branch of the Government fulfills its assigned responsibilities well will the system stay in balance. The Judicial Branch, by its very nature, can abide no deviation in ethics. The Executive Branch, by its corporatetype structure and power pyramids has the machinery for dealing with violations. The Legislative Branch is unique in the independent status of each of its elected Members. It is from this relative independence of each Member that the Congress draws much of its strength. Further, it is this independence of each Members that makes the problem of ethics so sensitive and difficult to deal with. However, if the Legislative Branch-the people's branch-fails, fails in any way, the balance in our system of representative government is upset, and our way of life is diminished by just that much.

If the Congress is to function responsively, as an efficient and effective instrument of Government, it must have the support and respect of the people of this Nation. Respect is earned, and we can have that respect only if we merit it. The problem of ethics is a difficult and a personal one, but it is more important than any one Member. And it is, I submit, urgent. I strongly recommend the prompt establishment of an appropriate Committee on Ethics so the House can get on with its job. Finding the best solutions to the problems facing the nation is a big enough task that it will take the best of all of us-unhampered by the difficulties of operating under a cloud of public distrust or by the necessity of dealing with problems of unresolved allegations of misconduct.

I do not pose as an expert on how this problem can be solved. The members of your Committee have had long experience in dealing with problems relating to House Organization. Further, I recognize the difficult problems which could arise by a false step in this sensitive area. I know that you cannot legislate goodness or expect perfection. For this reason, I am reluctant to set forth a firm recommendation. Rather, I would merely express the hope, in closing, that this Committee will act to show the people of this Nation that the House of Representatives recognizes the need for standards of conduct and that we are working to deal with this problem.

STATEMENT OF HON. SAM M. GIBBONS, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE, 6TH DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, BEFORE THE HOUSE RULES COMMITTEE

Mr. Chairman, since this Committee has been holding hearings on legislation to establish an Ethics Committee for the House of Representatives, I have heard many witnesses present impressive testimony highlighting the need to establish such a committee. Although I do not wish to present a detailed statement which, in some respects, would duplicate previous testimony, I do want to express my support for the establishment of a strong, independent Ethics Committee.

During the past few months, public attention has been focused on the question of unethical behavior by Members of Congress. We all know that the misconduct of any Member reflects discredit on all Members and undermines the public trust in the integrity of our government.

In any undertaking involving human beings there will always be questions regarding behavior. As long as these questions exist, there is a need to establish an Ethics Committee to deal with the problem. I hope this Committee will give prompt consideration to the ethics proposal, and I urge that it be approved promptly.

The CHAIRMAN. I understand we have another witness.

Mr. Evans?

STATEMENT OF HON. FRANK E. EVANS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO

Mr. EVANS. Mr. Chairman, I had indicated I would like to appear before the committee, and I can reduce it to less than a minute.

The need for a lengthy statement on my part is mitigated by the excellent testimony you have had here. I would like to subscribe to the idea of a permanent standing committee on ethics, I think it is extremely important, not only for us but for the people of this country as a whole.

I am delighted to see the seriousness with which this committee is ably addressing itself to this issue, and I think the whole country is going to have a better understanding of our problems, which will in turn benefit us by what you are doing now.

I would like to commend you, and I would like to ask for permission to file a statement in the record at this point.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered. (The document referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN FRANK E. EVANS (COLORADO) BEFORE THE RULES COMMITTEE ON THE MATTER OF CONGRESSIONAL ETHICS

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen, I deeply appreciate the opportunity you have granted all of us to appear before you on the question of Congressional ethics. While I am a relatively new member of the Congress, I believe all Congressmen are in the same predicament when it comes to the understanding or misunderstanding of our ethics by the general public.

I do not believe it is enough that our standards of conduct be high. I believe it is essential that we do all we can to acquaint the general public and the news media with what we believe to be proper standards of conduct so that those who judge us will also have an understanding of our ethics and our reasons for them. With these thoughts in mind, I would like to mention a few problem areas where I believe it is important for the members of the House to have a clear understanding of proper conduct because of the frequency with which complaints arise surrounding them.

From time to time all Congressmen are confronted with the problem of gifts of one sort or another. These gifts can range from cash to tangible property having a wide variety of values. Such gifts can be given out of gratitude, friendship, or with a thought to influence a Congressman. I believe it would be wise to have a rule that Representatives should not receive gifts having a real or intrinsic value exceeding $25.

Since Representatives are allowed only four trips home per year at government expense, the great pressure on most Congressmen to return to their Districts as frequently as possible often produces offers of free transportation. Free transportation can come from political parties, interested individuals, special interest groups, unions, or businesses having great interest in pending legislation.

While I do not have a satisfactory answer that could be written into a rule of conduct, I am sure that this Committee or another committee could produce a reasonable standard of conduct in regard to such "free" transportation.

Many times each month most Congressmen have dealings with various departments and agencies of the Government such as the SBA, the ICC and the FCC. Most frequently these contacts involve constituents having a particular interest in the outcome of a question pending before such agency or department.

I believe a proper standard of conduct in dealing with such departments and agencies could go far in not only guiding each Representative, but also in advising the public-at-large that there are areas in which "political influence" should not be brought to bear upon determinations requiring skill and judgment of the personnel in such agencies and departments.

It is my understanding that some Congressmen accept honorariums for speaking engagements in order to augment their income. Some feel this is a necessity in view of the costs of campaigning and of maintaining two homes, while others may simply see this as a means of increasing their total income. Whatever the reason, I believe it would be most helpful for a standard of conduct to be proposed to govern all Representatives regarding honorariums.

Many problems arise in regard to the former business or occupation of a Congressman and his continuing interest in such business or occupation during the time that he serves in Congress. I believe that we should have a provision in our Code of Ethics which will be easy for the public and the members of Congress to understand that will guide members away from any possible conflict in interest while serving as a Congressman.

While I do not subscribe to the necessity of all members of Congress filing a financial statement with the Congress each year, I do believe it would be reasonable to have a standard of conduct requiring all Congressmen who have income produced by businesses that are federally regulated to file the appropriate declaration.

The hiring of relatives by Congressmen has long been the subject of public criticism. In this regard, I do not believe such hiring practices can be compared to a private business for in the Congress we are dealing with public funds when we pay salaries to family members. Personally, I think the wisest course of action for the House to take would be a provision in our Codes of Ethics against the hiring of members of our own immediate family to work anywhere on our own staffs.

ESTABLISHMENT OF AN ETHICS COMMITTEE

The foregoing itemization is not intended to be complete. However, they seemed to me to be some of the most troublesome areas in which I think both members of Congress and the public need to have the confidence of knowing there is a standard of conduct agreed upon to which members of Congress are expected to adhere.

I also hope that the House of Representatives will be able to devise a means of disciplining its members so as to increase the public's confidence in us, as members, and as a legislative body, with enforcement procedures which would not fall prey to misuse politically or by the public or the press. While some people would be prone to misuse an Ethics Committee for sensationalism, news stories, political advantage, and so forth, and while such misuse may well be hard to prevent because of the great public interest in all claims of misdoings of Congressmen, it is my hope that a means can be devised for policing ourselves similar to the Grievance Committee procedures of the bar associations throughout this land.

There has been considerable discussion in regard to the question of whether or not a special committee should be formed for the purpose of handling congressional ethics or whether a standing committee or subcommittee should have such responsibility. Having heard some of the testimony before this Committee, it would be my feeling that it would be proper to have a special subcommittee of the House Administration Committee charged with original responsibility and jurisdiction for grievances against Congressmen. I believe such subcommittee should be represented equally by both parties so that in its job of fact-finding and making of recommendations to the full committee there would be an absence of partisanship. The subcommittee's recommendations would be accepted, with or without amendments, or rejected. If accepted in any form by the full committee, the full committee could then recommend action to the floor of the House where the House would work its will. Obvously, whichever party has a majority in Congress will have a majority in the House Administration Committee and in the House of Representatives itself and, therefore, party responsibility may attach to any final decisions made.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Gude?