Question of Personal Privilege
Floor Speech
Question of Personal Privilege
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Mr. SIMPSON. I thank the gentleman from Washington for yielding.
I have known DOC HASTINGS since I came here in 1999. He has always been kind of a mentor of mine, because we come from adjacent States, and a lot of the issues we deal with are similar. So I have consulted with him and sought his advice on many of the issues that affect our two States. We have done things together. I have known that he has served on the Ethics Committee, has been an honorable member of the Ethics Committee.
In fact, at times, we have been out doing a variety of things, whether it is out to dinner or out playing golf or something together, and there is always a case before the Ethics Committee which sometimes is of interest to other Members of the House. And I have inquired of him, how is that going, what is going on there in that case, or whatever. DOC has never failed to look at me and say, I can't talk about that. He has always kept the confidentiality of that committee on everything that has proceeded before it, and I respect him for that, even though many of us would like to know what is going on behind the closed doors.
Now, I am not an attorney, but I will tell you, I have been, when I served in the Idaho legislature as Speaker of the House, I care an awful lot about the institution. That is some of the debates we are currently having between the administration and the legislative branch and the rights and privileges of the institution in maintaining the rights and privileges of this institution.
So I care deeply about this institution and its future. It is one of the reasons that I had a problem with the legislation that was proposed last night on the ethics reform. As I said, I am not an attorney. What I rely on, and all of us become specialists in some areas when we come here, things that interest us, but what I rely on is the advice of other people.
When it comes to the advice of the Ethics Committee and what they do and the role they play and the impact that the legislation that was presented to us last night has, the impact that would have on the way our Ethics Committee works and the ethics of the House, I thought the information that was presented by DOC HASTINGS was not only important, it was vital to me being able to make a decision. And I think that type of information, as the gentleman from California (Mr. Daniel E. Lungren) said, is vital to the debate on any issue that comes before the House.
How can we deny Members opinions from people who are experts in the area, whether we agree with them or not? I might have read all that and said, you know, that is interesting; I hadn't thought about that, but I disagree with that. But Members rely on other people's and experts' opinions on issues that come before the House. We have not only a right, we have an obligation to have that information if we are going to make informed decisions about issues that come before us. And certainly the ethics of this House and how we proceed is an issue for this House to deal with.
So, to suggest that somehow the information that DOC HASTINGS gave to the Members of this House so that they could weigh it in making a decision on the legislation presented to us last night was vital.
I was very, very disappointed to read what I took to be a threatening letter from the chairwoman of the Ethics Committee suggesting that Mr. Hastings had done something improper. I can find nothing improper that he did. In fact, what he did I thought was advance the debate. We happened to lose that debate last night. That is okay. That is the way the process worked. But to suggest that Members shouldn't have that information is a joke. And to then put out a letter saying that Congressman Hastings did something wrong, as has been mentioned several times, stains the reputation of this good man, and he deserves an apology from the Chair. And to suggest that if this happened again the chairwoman would sanction him brings into question her objectivity in judging him in the future, particularly if an ethics charge were charged against him. I agree with those who suggest that it may have placed in jeopardy her position as chairwoman of the committee.
So, I think at the very least she owes this good man from Washington, who has served us and those Members that serve on the Ethics Committee, an apology, and I hope that she would be big enough to apologize.
I thank the gentleman for yielding, and I thank him for the time that he has served on the Ethics Committee. It is kind of a standard joke around here that, yes, I am on the Ethics Committee. Do you want to be on it, because it is not one of those thankful positions to serve on in this House.
I thank you for the time you have served on that committee. It is a service to all of us and to this institution.
BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT
Source