Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains deals particularly with William G. Whyte and the United States Steel Corporation.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
4520835
label
President - Personal Prior Travel Records
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4520835
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
President - Personal Prior Travel Records
description
This file contains deals particularly with William G. Whyte and the United States Steel Corporation.
citationUrl
collections
Philip W. Buchen Files
Philip Buchen's General Subject Files
subjects
Voyages and travels
Scandals
Political affairs
Governmental investigations
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4520835
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1976-11-01
month
11
year
1976
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1976-09-01
month
9
year
1976
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
0a3b7b806c8858ae
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box 50, folder "President - Personal Prior Travel
Records" of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Gerald R. Ford donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
R W
Digitized from Box 50 of the Philip Buchen Files at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
AM-VACATIONS 9-29
BY RICHARD LERNER
WASHINGTON (UPI) -- PRESIDENT FORD HAS ORDERED A SEARCH FOR
RECORDS THAT MIGHT SHOW WHICH CORPORATE OFFICIALS TOOK HIM GOLFING
WHEN HE WAS IN CONGRESS, AND WHEN, A WHITE HOUSE SPOKESMAN SAID
WEDNESDAY.
PRESS SECRETARY RON NESSEN SAID, HOWEVER, THERE IS NO ASSURANCE
ANY SUCH RECORDS EXIST IN FORD'S STAFF FILES, OR HOW MUCH INFORMATION
THEY MIGHT HOLD, OR HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE TO FIND THEM.
"WE ARE TRYING TO LOCATE THE RECORDS
...
WHATEVER
RECORDS
THERE
ARE," NESSEN TOLD REPORTERS.
WE WANT TO FIND OUT IF WE HAVE ANY RECORDS."
HE DISCLOSED TUESDAY THAT FORD GOLFED AS THE GUEST OF EXECUTIVES
FROM AT LEAST FOUR CORPORATIONS -- U.S. STEEL, BETHLEHEM STEEL,
ALUMINUM CORPORATION OF AMERICA AND FIRESTONE RUBBER -- WHEN HE WAS
IN CONGRESS. BUT HE HAD NO DETAILS ON HOW OFTEN, WHEN, PRECISELY WITH
WHOM OR WHAT EXPENSES MAY HAVE BEEN PAID BY HIS HOSTS.
WITH JIMMY CARTER STARTING TO MAKE A CAMPAIGN ISSUE OF FORD'S
ASSOCIATIONS WITH LOBBYISTS, REPORTERS PRESSED THE WHITE HOUSE FOR
SUCH DETAILS AND NESSEN SAID FORD ORDERED THE SEARCH TUESDAY "AFTER
I TOLD HIM OF YOUR INTEREST."
HE SAID IT WOULD FOCUS AT FIRST ON FORD'S LAST EIGHT YEARS IN
CONGRESS, THROUGH 1973, AND WOULD COVER ONLY OUT-OF-TOWN GOLF DATES
RECORDED IN FORD'S OWN STAFF RECORDS -- NOT THOSE OF THE HOST
CORPORATIONS.
IT SEEMED UNLIKELY THE DESK-CALENDAR AND SECRETARIAL NOTATIONS
WOULD DIVULGE MUCH MORE THAN DATES AND NAMES OF HOSTS AT BEST -- AS
OPPOSED TO EXPENSES PAID AND WHETHER BUSINESS WAS DISCUSSED, THE
ITEMS AT THE HEART OF THE CONTROVERSY.
SPOKESMEN FOR THREE OF THE FIRMS MENTIONED BY NESSEN HAD THESE
COMMENTS WEDNESDAY:
-- A BETHLEHEM STEEL SPOKESMAN SAID CHAIRMAN STEWART CORT HOSTED
FORD ON A ONE-DAY GOLF OUTING AT SAUCON VALLEY COUNTRY CLUB NEAR
BETHLEHEN, PA., IN JULY, 1971, WITH NO OVERNIGHT LODGINGS INVOLVED.
HE COULD NOT RECALL WHO PAID FORD'S TRAVEL EXPENSES OR GOLFING FEES.
-- A FIRESTONE SPOKESMAN SAID VICE PRESIDENT JOHN FLOBERG HOSTED
FORD "ABOUT EIGHT YEARS AGO" AT THE FIRESTONE COUNTRY CLUB IN AKRON,
OHIO. HE SAID FLOBERG PROBABLY PAID FORD'S GREENS FEES OF $5 OR $6,
THERE WERE NO OVERNIGHT LODGING COSTS AND "WE DON'T RECALL HOW HE GOT
UP HERE."
-- A SPOKESMAN FOR ALCOA SAID "NOBODY HERE HAS ANY RECOLLECTION"
OF FORD VISITS AT COMPANY EXPENSE. BUT SOURCES ASSOCIATED WITH THE
ALUMINUM INDUSTRY SAID FORD VISITED THE COMPANY'S LODGE NEAR THE
TENNESSEE-NORTH CAROLINA BORDER MORE THAN ONCE.
THE CONTROVERSY AROSE LAST WEEK WHEN WILLIAM WHYTE, U.S. STEEL'S
CHIEF WASHINGTON LOBBYIST, TOLD UPI HIS COMPANY HAD TREATED FORD TO
AT LEAST THREE GOLF OUTINGS AND TWO VISITS TO DISNEY WORLD WHEN HE
WAS IN CONGRESS.
AT THE WHITE HOUSE BRIEFING, A REPORTER TOLD NESSEN THE
CONTROVERSY RAISES THE SUGGESTION FORD LET OTHERS PAY FOR HIS
VACATIONS AS PART OF HIS LIFESTYLE, AND THE PRESIDENT SHOULD "COME
OUT HERE AND SAY, 'HELL, NO."
"I CAN SAY 'HELL NO' FOR HIM RIGHT NOW," NESSEN REPLIED
NOBODY HAS SAID THAT HE DID."
UPI 09-29 03:41 PED
a249
r a byluivqyv
AM-Political Rdp, Bjt, 2 takes, 490-960
By DICK BARNES
Associated Press Writer
Questions about President Ford's old campaign money and golf outings
and about Jimmy Carter's foreign travel expenses swirled through the
presidential election chase Wednesday.
In a flurry of developments that broke the campaign pattern of
statistical gunfire on the issues:
-Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter said President Ford should go
before the news media to discuss reports that the Watergate special
prosecutor is investigating what happened to contributions made by two
unions to Ford's past congressional campaigning.
-Ford's press secretary said "hell. no" it isn't the President's
lifestyle to let lobbyists pay for his vacations and golf games. But
he promised to release at an unspecified date the results of a records
search aimed at finding out who paid when Ford played golf from 1965
to 1973.
-Carter acknowledged that foreign governments had picked up some of
the costs of trips he took abroad as Georgia governor when he was
trying to drum up trade for the state. Carter said the trips were
strictly business, and he distinguished them from acceptance of free
golfing vacations.
-Two large companies said Ford had played each of their courses once
as the guest of a company official between four and eight years ago.
Carter offered his suggestion of a Ford news conference during his
own first formal news conference in almost two weeks as he wound up a
two-day rest stop at his Plains, Ga. home.
Carter said the best way for Ford to clear up the matter about the
Watergate special prosecutor is for him to have a frank discussion
with the American people through the news media, which so far he has
failed to do."
The former Georgia governor said be did not want to be interpreted
as having assumed that there's any substance to the allegations. I
have no way to know that."
Carter said speciál prosecutor Charles Ruff should make public a
full report on the investigation when it is finished, regardless of
whether that is before or after the Nov. 2 election.
Ruff has repeatedly declined comment on the probe, which reportedly
centers around whether Ford converted campaign funds to his own use
through a local Republican party organization in Michigan while he was
in the House.
The separate matter of golf games came up recently when William
Whyte a lobbyist for U.S. Steel Corp., said Ford, a longtime personal
friend, had taken three golfing trips at company expense in New
Jersey and stayed twice in a company-owned house near Disney World in
Florida while he was a congressman.
White House Press Secretary Ron Nessen said Tuesday that Ford had
played on courses owned by three other companies before he became vice
president.
Nessen said Wednesday the President has ordered his records searched
to see what can be learned about golf games he played during bis last
eight years as a congressman and House Republican leader.
MORE
1654pED 09-29
FORD is LIBRARY 076831
APRE
20
C
THE NEW YORK TIMES, THURSDAY
Carter, as Governor, Got Free Rides
On Planes of Lockheed and Coca-Cola
By NICHOLAS M. HORROCK
had not constituted a conflict
investigation in the United
Special to The New York Times
of interest.
States and abroad on charges
ATLANTA, March 31-Jim-
"He [Mr. Carter] (never did
of bribing Government officials
my Carter took free rides on
a favor for either companY,"
as part of its aircraft sales
the executive jets of Lockheed
Mr. Powell said in a telephone
technique.
Company. Mr. Granum, howev-
Aircraft Corporation and the
interview. "I'm sure he felt
Used for Demonstrations
er, disputed specific trips raised
Coca-Cola Company while Gov-
no obligation to these compa-
in questions by a reporter as
ternor of Georgia even though
nies."
Lee Rogers, a spokesman for
a result of interviews with oth-
the state provides aircraft and
Mr. Powell suggested that
Lockheed, said the Aircraft
er state officials. In checking
travel funds for the Governor's
using the corporate jets might
company carries such passen-
three trips, he said, he had
use, according to businessmen
have "saved the taxpayers'
gers only when it is making
found Mr. Carter had used com-
and former state officials.
money" by reducing the cost
a demonstration trip-one de-
mercial travel on two of, them
of the Governor's transporta-
signed to demonstrate the air-
The longest trip, according
and in another case had used
40 interviews and records, was
tion.
craft for sales purposes.
a state plane. But Mr. Granum
three-week sweep through
Mr. Powell and Rex Granum,
Carl E: Sanders who was
acknowledged that there which
America that Mr. Carter
a Carter campaign spokesman
Governor of Georgia in 1963-67,
Mr. Carter had used Coca-Cola
linok aboard a Lockheed Corpo-
based in Atlanta, said that
and S. Ernest Vandiver Jr.,
aircraft for state business in
Ition Jetstar executive plane
either the Lockheed not the
1959-63, are among several re-
some instances.
In April 1972
Coca-Cola trips had been taken
cent Governors who have used
Mr. Davis, Coca-Cola vice
Governor Carter also used
on what Mr. Granum called
Coca-Cola aircraft for trips on
president in charge of govern-
Colo
"private business or personal
state business, according to
mental affairs, said that the
to attend several National
state officials.
affairs" but had been for state
soft drink company is one of
and Southern Governors Con-
business.
A Coca-Cola vice president,
several companies that provide
forences and may have ridden
Mr. Granum said the cam-
Ovid Davis, said that the public
products or services for the
150 flights to Washington, and
paign staff did not have a
service of free flights had been
National Governors Confer-
other places, according to for-
list of all such Coca-Cola
extended to Georgia Governors
ence, and it flies a corporate
mer state officials and a Coca-
flights, their purpose or the
throughout his 39 years as a
aircraft to these and to South-
Cola Company official.
company official.
destination but the staff was
ern Governors Conferences
Both companies have major
Mr. Rogers said that under
attempting to prepare one.
each year. He said he was
installations in Georgia. Mr.
He and Mr. Powell acknow-
Federal Aviation Agency rules
confident that Mr. Carter had
Carter, queried at a news con-
ledged, however, that the state
Lockheed was not a passenger
been invited to both conferen-
Verence in Appleton. Wis., to-
carrier and could not bill a
ces during the four years he
Double-routing 'strictly legal'
Funds for Ford
By SETH KANTOR
News Washington Barese
/
WASHINGTON President Ford him-
self acknowledged as far back as 1973
that, as a congressman, he personally fun-
neled political contributions earmarked
'diverted'
for Ford reelection committees into the
campaigns of other politicians.
And the White House today contends
and voting which almost never hap-
pens.
It is not unusual for House leaders, such
as Mr. Fond was, to receive a strong cam-
that the double-routing of the Ford cam-
paign money was strictly legal, despite a
paign cash flow from special-interest
groups. Normally, a House leader is from
federal probe under way into funds con-
a "sala" congressional district, which
tributed by the Seafarers International
reelects him without his having to
Union (SIU) and the Marine Engineers
Benelicial Association (MEBA).
Concluded on Page 6A
Watergate special prosecutor Charles
Ruff has subpenaed records of Republican
political committees in Grand Rapids,
and the FBI has been interviewing former
cont
officials of those committees in the Presi-
NEWS.
dent's longtime congressional district.
A source close to SIU activities in the
late 1960's has told The Detroit News that
P/A
the union regularly provided from $10,000
to $20,000 a year for Ford congressional
campaign committee accounts.
9-28-76
This same source said that former long-
time Brooklyn (N.Y.) Democratic Con-
gressman Emanuel Celler was another
Sinator named
regular recipient, and that the political
contributions were in exchange for "a
guarantee that gave us 100 votes without
any trouble on each side of the aisle" on
in
maritime legislation.
A guarantee of 200 GOP and Demo-
cratic votes would be enough to lock up a
House majority on almost any issue, since
article
it takes only 218 votes for absolute control
of an issue if every member is present
FORD is LIBRARY 0705
Points of View
Rumors Couldn't Be Ignored
Ford Investigation: A Test
For the Special Prosecutor
FREE
PRESS
BY JIM SQUIRES
the haste in which the House went about
Chicago Tribune
investigating its own minority leader. And
9/29/ 76
Ruff didn't.
WASHINGTON - Thei current investi-
gation into some of President Ford's old
By Issuing subpenas for the campaign re-
campaign contributions clearly illustrates
cords in Kent County, Ruff removed the
P.9A
both the need for and danger of having a
allegations from the "rumor" category and
special prosecutor independent of the
virtually assured that they would be se-
White House and Justice Department.
ported in the news media.
Ever since Gerald Ford was tapped by
His Involvement may well have played a
Richard Nixon to succeed Spiro Agnew.
role in the disclosures by President Ford's
nimase have shounded that AAmA of Road's
old friend William Whyle of U.S. Strel
United States Senate
OFFICE OF
THE ASSISTANT MINORITY LEADER
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20510
formy Sinferi U.S.S.
OFFICIAL BUSINESS
Mr. Phillip Buchen
The White House
9/30/76
/. L.Cutler:
Howard Willins
872-6137
1974 Hawaian trip - Betty probably flew
8,700 at Mona KUID
commercis, with
Whyte
suite of adjoining bedroom
-billed GRFonly for
bedroom 375
-hotol records show GRF billed Grsuite:
865 for 3 days
-Whyte picked up all miscellaneous
charges
-all expensed to Corp.
(Comp. financed Whyte's
Boy Scouts activities)
- -Ford am yed mly late of leftearly
Perkins Cuttiboars Maguire's house In
New U.S. Steel plant in Freeport
(Corg. plane)
2 H.Willins:
3. H.Tyler: Recess app'ts - I should call him
next week.
4. HaWillins:
Pine Valley Lodge
-spring 1964 with Goldwater week-end
FORD LIBRARY
Corp. plane
- Sopt. 19.21, 1949 by Corp. plant-SonAllott
- June 1973 by Complane Goldwater with
9/30/76 (cont.)
Bay Hill facility in Florida
Aug 25-27, 1972 Fords + 3 children,
with MarGregors of Markleys
-commercial flight
March or April, 1973 in connection
withU.S. Chamber
-commercial flight
Caribern Trips (4):
-EH Eluthers - mid 1960's (chork)
to Rome home ot Perkins Maguire
who was there
-trip by commercial flightdon
-corp Plane on side-trip
to Freeport -over night-
of back to Wash.
- Elithera in 1969
-Whytes, Fords + MaGregors
to Maguire's home
-corp.plane used
- Tryall Golf Club in Jamaica,
Nov. 1970 - Fords, Whytes
& Markleys -- traveled
com merceal & splitexponses
-Tryall Golf Club in Nov. 70
(0/50 Cong Jorman) Bill recollacts Commercial
Bolling Rock Club in P3. - Aug 1970
but
doubtful
-Fords Whytes for 4 or 5 days
Markley
- individual 24 tomobiles & split
records
lodging (Whytopidformeals)
show
plit
Howard in May 1974
expenses
FORD & BERALD LIBRARY
1968
Feb.14-18 Jamaica with Bill Whyte
Jan. 4-7 P.R.
FORD & LIBRARI 07087
1967
March J8-31 Polm Springs
July
June 30-July 8 G.B.
Aug 18-19 Bar Horbor
GERALD AUVURIT ? FORD
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Mr. President
The following trip was not included in information I sent you yesterday
because it was prior to the date the law was passed in April of 1968.
February 13th to February 20th. Palm Beach Feb. 13th for Lincoln Day speech
Montego Bay Feb. 14th to 18th
NAM meeting (ladies) Feb. 19th Boca Raton
NAM Board meeting - Feb. 20th Boca Raton
You left National on National #105 at 2:55 p.m. on Feb. 13th, Mrs. Ford left
National via NE #85 at 6:30 p.m. and met you in Miami because she didn't
intend to be at the Lincoln Day dinner at which you had to speak.
On Feb. 14th you and Mrs. Ford left Miami via Pan Am #437 for Montego Bay.
The GOP Committee paid for airline Washington to Miami. You paid fare from
Miami to Montego Bay.
Record also shows that you made a prior deposit for accommodations at Tryall
and paid balance when you left.
On Feb. 18th you left Montego Bay in U. S. Steel plane for Boca Raton for
the NAM meetings on Feb. 19th and 20th. You were guest of NAM at Boca Raton
Hotel.
On Feb. 20th you returned to Washington, leaving at 3:00 p.m. from Boca Raton
in U. S. Steel plane.
ITEMS FROM PERSONAL CALENDAR OF ENGAGEMENTS WHICH
ARE NOT REFLECTED IN MATERIAL PREPARED BY
MILDRED LEONARD
1969
April 6-13 (Easter) "El"
May 3 "Kty Derby"
August 1 "Akron"
September 11-12 (Elpaso) (Leon Parma)
September 20-21 (Whytes - Pine Valley)
1970
April 27 - Vail
April 28-31 P/S
August 16-21 R.R.C.
1971
January 1-5 - Vail
January 6 - San Clemente
April 9-11 - Westlands
April 12-16 - P/S
1972
January 28 - Tuson, Arizona and January 29 -"Carbons"
December 26-29 - Brown's
1973
April 23-27 P/S
Fund
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
(1968)
September 29, 1976
WASHINGTON
Mr. President:
Here are golf trips in 1968
June 28, 1968 - Gum Dip Open Tournament at Akron, Ohio
You left at 10:00 a.m. and returned the same evening at 10:30 p.m.
(Firestone supplied Lockheed JetStar for you and other Members of
Congress) Mrs. Ford did not go.
November 9th to 16th - Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, Mexico
(This was fishing rather than golfing)
Teledyne Ryan furnished plane from Page at National for you
and Mrs. Ford and Cong. and Mrs. Wilson to Puerto Vallarta
and return to Palm Beach. You paid Mrs. Ford's and your air
fare back to Washington from Los Angeles. You also paid your
share of the villa that was rented by the five couples (Wilsons,
Jamesons, Parmas, Kleins, and you). Air fare back was $279.30.
Villa was $271.40.
FORD (TRRAG)
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
1969
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976
Trips in 1969
September 22, 1969
You left at 8:00 a.m. from Dulles in Bethlehem plane and went to Grand
Rapids for ROSPATCH meeting. Then left Grand Rapids in same plane to
Bethlehem, Penn. Plawed golf and had dinner at Saucon Valley Country Club
and returned to National at 10:00 p.m. the same day.
This is all I can find for 1969 - Gum Dip Open was scheduled for August 14,
1969 but you cancelled.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
(1970)
September 29, 1976
There is only one golf trip in 1970 -
November 8th to 15th, 1970 Tryall - Montego Bay, Jamaica
You and Mrs. Ford left Friendship on Eastern #995 at 10:55 a.m. on Nov. 8th
and returned on Eastern #994 from Montego Bay on Nov. 15th, arriving Friendship
at 8:12 p.m. You paid round-trip fare of $348.00
You also paid your share of the Tryall expenses which was divided between you,
the Markleys, the Whytes, and the Burkes. Your share was $394.37
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
97'
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976
Golf trips for 1971
June 8th and 9th, 1971 Kemper Open Tournament
You left National via private plane at 4:30 p.m. on June 8th and
arrived at 5:30 p.m. in Charlotte. You stayed over night at Holiday Inn and
returned on June 9th at 11:00 p.m. by private plane. You were the personal
guest of James Kemper who also invited other Members of Congress.
This is all I can find in 1971
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
September 29, 1976
WASHINGTON
11972
Golf dates in 1972
March 31st, 1972 - Palm Desert, Calif. (You were scheduled to speak for
two or three GOP functions in Southern California, but you and Mrs. Ford
went out a few days early to play golf at Palm Desert with Leon Parma and
some others. GOP Committee paid your plane expense for your return trip
from Washington to San Diego. Leon Parma arranged flight from San Diego
to Palm Desert and back for speaking commitments. You left San Diego via
Western 603 on April 7th for Denver where you spoke for Cong. McKevitt.
You stayed overnight in Denver and returned to Washington via United #166 at
2:45 p.m. on April 8th. File doesn't show where you stayed in Palm Desert
because that was apparently worked out verbally between you and Leon Parma.
May 30th to June 1st, 1972 - Kemper Open Tournament.
Kemper Insurance Co. chartered a Peidmont plane to take you and other Members
of Congress to Charlotte, North Carolina. You stayed at Holiday Inn South
in Charlotte until June 1st at 8:00 a.m. when you returned to Washington
in the same chartered Piedmont plane. You and other Members were guests of
James Kemper.
August 25, 1972 - The day after the GOP Convention in Miami you and some
others along with the Whytes went to Bay Hill, Florida.
I understand
you were all' Bill Whyte's guests, but I don't have the details. You stayed
until Sunday; August 27th when you had to leave for a GOP event in Milwaukee,
Wisc. for Cong. Davis. You drove from Disney World to Orlando where you
took Delta #132 to Chicago and North Central #205 to Milwaukee. GOP
Committee paid for this transportation and also your flight to Grand Rapids
from Milwaukee on North Central#984.
November 9th to 19th - Montego Bay, Jamaica.
Nothing came back in this file to me. But Bill Whyte's office says it was
at their expense. (notcorrect)
(Actually you spoke at a Boy Scout Luncheon here in Washington on at the
International Club on November 20th - so he may have considered the above
trip a sort of honorarium)
THE WHITE HOUSE
1973
WASHINGTON
1973
March 29- You and Mrs. Ford left from National Airport 7:25 PM for
Orlando, Florida. Met at airport by Bill Whyte and taken
to Polynesian Village at Disney World.
You were the luncheon speaker on the final day of three-day
meeting of the Public Affairs Committee of the U.S. Chamber
of Commerce.
You left Orlando on April 1 at 2:50 PM.
May 29 - You left from Piedmont at National airport via chartered plane
for Charlotte, N.C. and the Kemper Pro Am. Your accommodations
were at the Holiday Inn South, and the tournament at the
Quail Hollow Country Club. Letter of invitation says you
were the personal guest of James S. Kemper Jr.
You returned to National Airport on May 30 at 8:45 PM via
Piedmont. Ticket was purchased by check.
June 22- Departed Washington early evening for Clementon, New Jersey,
Pine Valley Laurel Ridge Lodge for weekend with the Bill
Whytes, returning on Sunday, June 24. My book does not
show means of transportation, and I seem to recall your
driving there and back.
ITEMS FROM PERSONAL CALENDAR OF ENGAGEMENTS WHICH
ARE NOT REFLECTED IN MATERIAL PREPARED BY
MILDRED LEONARD
1969
April 6-13 (Easter) "El"
May 3 "Kty Derby"
August 1 "Akron"
September 11-12 (Elpaso) (Leon Parma)
September 20-21 (Whytes - Pine Valley)
1970
April 27 - Vail
April 28-31 P/S
August 16-21 R.R.C.
1971
January 1-5 - Vail
January 6 - San Clemente
April 9-11 - Westlands
April 12-16 - P/S
1972
January 28 - Tuson, Arizona and January 29 - -"Carbons"
December 26-29 - Brown's
1973
April 23-27 P/S
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
September 29, 1976
WASHINGTON
Mr. President:
Here are golf trips in 1968
June 28, 1968 - Gum Dip Open Tournament at Akron, Ohio
You left at 10:00 a.m. and returned the same evening at 10:30 p.m.
(Firestone supplied Lockheed JetStar for you and other Members of
Congress) Mrs. Ford did not go.
November 9th to 16th - Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, Mexico
(This was fishing rather than golfing)
Teledyne Ryan furnished plane from Page at National for you
and Mrs. Ford and Cong. and Mrs. Wilson to Puerto Vallarta
and return to Palm Beach. You paid Mrs. Ford's and your air
fare back to Washington from Los Angeles. You also paid your
share of the villa that was rented by the five couples (Wilsons,
Jamesons, Parmas, Kleins, and you). Air fare back was $279.30.
Villa was $271.40.
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
1969
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976
Trips in 1969
September 22, 1969
You left at 8:00 a.m. from Dulles in Bethlehem plane and went to Grand
Rapids for ROSPATCH meeting. Then left Grand Rapids in same plane to
Bethlehem, Penn. Plawed golf and had dinner at Saucon Valley Country Club
and returned to National at 10:00 p.m. the same day.
This is all I can find for 1969 - Gum Dip Open was scheduled for August 14,
1969 but you cancelled.
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
1970
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976
There is only one golf trip in 1970 -
November 8th to 15th, 1970 Tryall - Montego Bay, Jamaica
You and Mrs. Ford left Friendship on Eastern #995 at 10:55 a.m. on Nov. 8th
and returned on Eastern #994 from Montego Bay on Nov. 15th, arriving Friendship
at 8:12 p.m. You paid round-trip fare of $348.00
You also paid your share of the Tryall expenses which was divided between you,
the Markleys, the Whytes, and the Burkes. Your share was $394.37
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
971
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976
Golf trips for 1971
June 8th and 9th, 1971 Kemper Open Tournament
You left National via private plane at 4:30 p.m. on June 8th and
arrived at 5:30 p.m. in Charlotte. You stayed over night at Holiday Inn and
returned on June 9th at 11:00 p.m. by private plane. You were the personal
guest of James Kemper who also invited other Members of Congress.
This is all I can find in 1971
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
September 29, 1976
WASHINGTON
1972
Golf dates in 1972
March 31st, 1972 - Palm Desert, Calif. (You were scheduled to speak for
two or three GOP functions in Southern California, but you and Mrs. Ford
went out a few days early to play golf at Palm Desert with Leon Parma and
some others. GOP Committee paid your plane expense for your return trip
from Washington to San Diego. Leon Parma arranged flight from San Diego
to Palm Desert and back for speaking commitments. You left San Diego via
Western 603 on April 7th for Denver where you spoke for Cong. McKevitt.
You stayed overnight in Denver and returned to Washington via United #166 at
2:45 p.m. on April 8th. File doesn't show where you stayed in Palm Desert
because that was apparently worked out verbally between you and Leon Parma.
May 30th to June 1st, 1972 - Kemper Open Tournament.
Kemper Insurance Co. chartered a Peidmont plane to take you and other Members
of Congress to Charlotte, North Carolina. You stayed at Holiday Inn South
in Charlotte until June 1st at 8:00 a.m. when you returned to Washington
in the same chartered Piedmont plane. You and other Members were guests of
James Kemper.
August 25, 1972 - The day after the GOP Convention in Miami you and some
others along with the Whytes went to Bay Hill, Florida.
I understand
you were all' Bill Whyte's guests, but I don't have the details. You stayed
until Sunday, August 27th when you had to leave for a GOP event in Milwaukee,
Wisc. for Cong. Davis. You drove from Disney World to Orlando where you
took Delta #132 to Chicago and North Central #205 to Milwaukee. GOP
Committee paid for this transportation and also your flight to Grand Rapids
from Milwaukee on North Central#984.
November 9th to 19th - Montego Bay, Jamaica.
Nothing came back in this file to me. But Bill Whyte's office says it was
at their expense. (notcomect)
(Actually you spoke at a Boy Scout Luncheon here in Washington on at the
International Club on November 20th - so he may have considered the above
trip a sort of honorarium)
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
1973
1973
March 29- You and Mrs. Ford left from National Airport 7:25 PM for
Orlando, Florida. Met at airport by Bill Whyte and taken
to Polynesian Village at Disney World.
You were the luncheon speaker on the final day of three-day
meeting of the Public Affairs Committee of the U.S. Chamber
of Commerce.
You left Orlando on April 1 at 2:50 PM.
May 29 - You left from Piedmont at National airport via chartered plane
for Charlotte, N.C. and the Kemper Pro Am. Your accommodations
were at the Holiday Inn South, and the tournament at the
Quail Hollow Country Club. Letter of invitation says you
were the personal guest of James S. Kemper Jr.
You returned to National Airport on May 30 at 8:45 PM via
Piedmont. Ticket was purchased by check.
June 22- Departed Washington early evening for Clementon, New Jersey,
Pine Valley Laurel Ridge Lodge for weekend with the Bill
Whytes, returning on Sunday, June 24. My book does not
show means of transportation, and I seem to recall your
driving there and back.
House Calendar No. 203
90th Congress, 2d Session
-
-
-
-
-
House Report No. 1176
REPORT
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS
OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT
OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETIETH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF H. RES. 418
MARCH 14, 1968.-Referred to the House Calendar
and ordered to be printed
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
91-318 0
WASHINGTON : 1968
LETTER OF SUBMITTAL
MARCH 14, 1968.
COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT
Hon. JOHN W. McCormack,
(Pursuant to H. Res. 418, 90th Cong., first sess.)
Speaker of the House,
MELVIN PRICE, Illinois, Chairman
House of Representatives,
OLIN E. TEAGUE, Texas
CHARLES A. HALLECK, Indiana
Washington, D.C.
JOE L. EVINS, Tennessee
LESLIE C. ARENDS, Illinois
DEAR MR. SPEAKER: I have the honor of submitting herewith the
WATKINS M. ABBITT, Virginia
JACKSON E. BETTS, Ohio
WAYNE N. ASPINALL, Colorado
ROBERT T. STAFFORD, Vermont
report of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct in response
EDNA F. KELLY, New York
JAMES H. QUILLEN, Tennessee
to House Resolution 418, adopted April 13, 1967.
LAWRENCE G. WILLIAMS, Pennsylvania
This resolution established this bipartisan committee with a direc-
JOHN M. SWANNER, Staff Director
tive to "recommend as soon as practicable to the House of Repre-
BENNETT WOLFE, Assistant Staff Director
sentatives such changes in laws, rules, and regulations as the committee
Hon. BROOKS HAYS, Special Consultant
deems necessary to establish and enforce standards of official conduct
(II)
for Members, officers, and employees of the House."
Pursuant thereto, the committee transmits its report, with recom-
mendations.
With highest regards,
Sincerely,
Melvin Price
M.C.
MELVIN PRICE, Chairman.
(III)
CONTENTS
Part I:
Page
1. Introduction
1
2. Background
1
3. Assessing the task
2
Part II: The recommendations
7
Part III: Comment on the recommendations
12
Part IV: Conclusion
28
Appendix
29
1. House Resolution 418, 90th Congress, first session
29
2. House Resolution
-
to implement the recommendations of this
report
30
3. Short history of rules of conduct enforcement in the House of Repre-
sentatives
34
4. Constitutional and statutory provisions and Rules of the House
governing the conduct and activities of Members of Congress
36
5. Task organization chart
44
(V)
HIGHLIGHTS OF RECOMMENDATIONS
REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL
Establishment of the present Committee on Standards of Official
CONDUCT OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 90TH
Conduct as a permanent standing committee of the House with powers
CONGRESS, SECOND SESSION
to enforce standards of conduct hereinafter proposed.
Public disclosure of certain assets, income, gifts, and SO forth;
PART I
private filing of more detailed information which could be made
public in event of an investigation.
INTRODUCTION
Modernization of the Federal Corrupt Practices Act to bring about
stricter management of political finances.
The House created this committee on April 13, 1967, with instruc-
Clearer guidelines for use of so-called counterpart funds and report-
tions "to recommend as soon as practicable to the House of Repre-
ing of expenditures thereof.
sentatives such changes in laws, rules, and regulations as the committee
Adoption of the following Code of Official Conduct (the language
deems necessary to establish and enforce standards of official conduct
in this presentation is condensed for the sake of brevity):
for Members, officers, and employees of the House."
Members, officers, and employees of the House of Representatives
The authorizing resolution provided for a bipartisan committee of
shall-
12 members, and on May 1, 1967, six members of the Democratic
1. Conduct themselves at all times in a manner which shall
majority and six from the Republican minority were chosen to con-
reflect creditably on the House.
stitute the committee, thus signifying that the assignment would be
2. Adhere to the spirit and the letter of the Rules of the House
carried out without partisanship.
and to the rules of duly constituted committees thereof.
In this spirit and mindful of the fact that matters of ethical conduct
3. Receive no compensation nor permit any to accrue to their
are not subject to the justifiable differences of opinion that characterize
beneficial interest, the receipt of which would occur by virtue
public policy questions, the committee undertook its task.
of influence improperly exerted from their positions in the
The committee believes that its performance has been responsive
Congress.
to both the letter and the spirit of its assignment and respectfully
4. Accept no gifts of substantial value from any person, orga-
submits this report with the recommendation that the House take
nization, or corporation having a direct interest in legislation
appropriate action to implement the proposals contained therein.
before the Congress.
5. Accept no honorarium for a speech, writing for publication,
BACKGROUND
or other similar activity, from any person, organization, or
corporation in excess of the usual and customary value for
For much of the history of this country the question of restraints
such services.
that might properly be placed on the legislative role has occupied
6. Keep campaign funds separate from personal funds. No
scholars of self-government systems. In the most ideal sense any
campaign funds shall be converted to personal use in excess of
limitation on the representative role is unthinkable for it is at the same
reimbursement for legitimate and verifiable prior campaign
time a limitation on the constituent. But the private citizen also
expenditures.
evidences that he recognizes his representation as not absolute and
7. Treat as campaign contributions all proceeds from testi-
requires in the interest of orderly processes in his Government that
monial or other fundraising events if the sponsors of such affairs
certain standards be met by his representative in Congress. These
do not give clear notice in advance to the donors or participants
requirements find expression in the Constitution, the statutes and
that the proceeds are intended for other purposes.
rules of legislative bodies, and, as in other human institutions, they
8. Retain no one from their clerk-hire allowance who does not
need revision with changing conditions.
perform duties commensurate with the compensation he receives.
But revision in the rules of institutions of such proven durability
as the House of Representatives properly should take place only in
(VI)
response to clearly demonstrated need and genuine public concern.
Although there is some history of this need and concern even prior
to that indicated in the following figures, the tabulation reflects the
growing demand for congressional action in this area and offers ample
evidence of the appropriateness of this committee's assignment.
(1)
2
3
The tabulation shows the number of proposals relating to standards
of official conduct which have been introduced in recent Congresses:
As may be seen from the organizational chart in the appendix, various
sources were called upon.
The committee issued a large number of invitations seeking testi-
Congress
House
Senate
Total
mony or submission of statements for its consideration. These were
directed to major national organizations in the fields of industry, labor,
85th
12
8
20
86th
10
7
17
the professions, politics, and the news media, as well as to prominent
87th
10
4
14
88th
63
5
68
figures in law and political science, special groups working on similar
89th
72
9
81
or identical projects, and through the press to the general public. The
90th (1st sess.)
169
10
179
contributions from those who responded were invaluable to the com-
Total
336
43
379
mittee. But the great majority of the invitations was declined or
ignored.
In the last 3 years several events of national interest involving
Simultaneously the committee issued invitations, through a speech
Members and employees of the Congress have focused much attention
in the House by the chairman and through individually addressed
on the question of congressional ethics. This is not to say there was
letters to all Members of the House. In response, 30 Members testified
not already a formal code of ethics, as well as the rules of both bodies
before the committee and 24 others submitted statements. The com-
and certain statutes applicable to the conduct of the Members of
mittee held seven public hearings, the printed record of which is
the Congress; but the absence of a well-organized framework providing
available.
some cohesiveness around these proscriptions made it difficult to view
Additionally, studies were made of standards of conduct in force
the sum of them in perspective.
in other nations, States of the Union and U.S. cities; the work of the
The Senate on July 24, 1964, adopted a resolution (S. Res. 338,
prior Select Committee on Standards and Conduct was reviewed; and
88th Cong.) creating a Select Committee on Standards and Conduct,
prior legislation introduced on the topic was studied, to provide broadly
empowering it to "receive complaints and investigate allegations of
based source material.
improper conduct which may reflect upon the Senate, violations of
After having received the testimony and assessing other material, it
law, and violations of rules and regulations of the Senate, relating to
became clear the committee had to accept several premises.
the conduct of individuals in the performance of their duties as
One was that the committee could not permit itself to think of
Members of the Senate, or as officers or employees of the Senate,
standards of conduct for the legislative branch in precise comparison
and to make appropriate findings of fact and conclusions with respect
with standards for other governmental entities. The primary difference
thereto. * * The Senate select committee was instructed also to
was noted numerous times in the testimony received by the commit-
make recommendations for establishment of a code of ethics for
tee-namely, that the legislative branch regularly submits itself to
dealing with related matters.
the electorate.
The House on October 19, 1966, established a select committee
Another premise was the far more profound political reality that the
(H. Res. 1013, 89th Cong.) of 12 Members with a directive to make
Representative in Congress is the extended voice of the constituent,
recommendations for additional rules and regulations * necessary
and, therefore, any undue restriction placed upon him is repugnant to
or desirable to insure proper standards of conduct by Members of the
elemental self-government. It is only in the sense that the Represent-
House and by officers or employees of the House, in the performance
ative is an element within a singularly operating body, and as such
of their duties and the discharge of their responsibilities * * " The
contributes or fails to contribute to its performance, that he should be
select committee, existing as it did for only a few months at the end
subjected to any proscriptions for the greater benefit of the functioning
of the 89th Congress, submitted a report (No. 2338, 89th Cong.) of
House. The recommendations set forth here are aimed toward avoid-
considerable merit, but obviously, in such a short time, the report
ance of any semblance of restraint on the proper role of the Repre-
could not reach to great depth in all the questions that seemed to
sentative as the alter ego of the people he represents.
demand attention.
The committee noted, too, that the framers of the Constitution,
After the opening of the 90th Congress, a number of resolutions
while displaying great insight in all the areas with which they dealt,
aimed at the same general objectives were introduced. More than 100
made no provision for an institutionalized means of enforcing the
such resolutions were referred to the Committee on Rules which, after
limitations which they imposed on members of the legislative branch.
hearings and extensive consideration, reported out House Resolution
The presumption must be, not that the Founding Fathers carelessly
418.
overlooked making any such provision, but rather that some factors
The resolution was adopted 400 to 0 by the House on April 13, 1967.
are now present that were not present when the Constitution was
adopted.
ASSESSING THE TASK
Perhaps one such factor is the dramatic increase in the apportion-
ment of population per Member, particularly since 1910 when the
The committee's first step was to organize and more precisely define
House was increased to its present total of 435 Members. This
its assignment. The importance of certain sources of input into the
development is noted, not because of any direct bearing on congres-
committee's deliberations was apparent from the outset and, equally
sional ethics, but simply to help bring into perspective the problems
important, the committee felt, was that all viewpoints should be heard.
of a Member in communicating effectively with ever increasing
numbers of constituents.
91-318 0-68-2
4
5
As the committee work progressed and it began deliberations on
specific questions of conduct, other considerations were indicated.
200'
There are, of course, some questions of ethical conduct which do
not yield to categorical judgments, and the committee does not insist
1999
that this report contains the last word of conscience or wisdom. It
might even be said that one clear value of the study and of House
1989
consideration of the committee's proposals is the sparking of a dialog
across the country on the basic questions of conduct, not only of
1979
Representatives in Congress but of all who occupy places of responsi-
bility in government service.
1969
Men, equally conscientious, sometimes take opposite views of
particular questions of conduct. Nevertheless, the committee is
1959
unanimous in the conviction that some questions do not yield to
individual opinions-they are rigid and immutable. The language of
Apportionment Population
1949
an ancient proponent of rectitude in the public service, Cicero, states
Per Representative
the point in eloquent terms:
1939
True law is right reason in agreement with nature
***
unchanging and everlasting
*
We
cannot
be
freed
1929
from its obligations by senate or people, and we need not
look outside ourselves for an expounder or interpreter of it.
And there will not be different laws at Rome and at Athens,
or different laws now and in the future, but one eternal and
1909
unchangeable law will be valid for all nations and all
times
*
The committee does not regard its recommendations, hereinafter
set forth, as completing its task. While the concise code, as recom-
1889
mended, is based upon abstract principles of public morality and
will doubtless be little affected by changed conditions, even that
Members
1879
enumeration of principles may in time be improved upon.
It is the conviction of your committee that the record of the Con-
1869
gress, over a period of almost two centuries, is by and large an excellent
one and that, in spite of the rare departures from rectitude, the main-
APPORTIONMENT OF MEMBERSHIP
1859
tenance of ideals of political and personal integrity has been a matter
IN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
of genuine concern to the overwhelming majority of our national
1849
legislators.
In the few months of its existence, the committee has made a
determined effort to proceed with all practicable speed in the per-
1789 TO 2009 (Projected)
formance of its difficult and delicate assignment. But the committee
felt the thoroughness of its studies and the soundness of its recom-
mendations should not be impaired by any effort to rush its report
to the House.
1819
The committee emphasizes that it regards its proposals not as the
full answer to the maintenance of ethical standards of conduct but as
a meaningful beginning. The committee contemplates that the
proposed code of standards, if adopted, will be subject to revision and
1799
refinement as experience and developments indicate. The provisions
recommended herein for the disclosure of certain financial details
Members
1789
may prove in practice not as workable as they do in the hypothetical.
Apportionment
Per Representative
450
(Thousands)
400 400
350 350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
These, too, may need modification as experience dictates.
750
700
650
600
550
500
450
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
The committee acknowledges with appreciation the help offered by
other Members of the House and the outside witnesses who accepted
invitations to testify. And a special vote of thanks is due, the com-
6
mittee feels, to a predecessor committee, the Select Committee on
Standards and Conduct, of which Representative Charles E. Bennett,
of Florida, served as chairman, for the spadework it did during its
short-lived tenure in the second session of the 89th Congress.
PART II
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
The following is a summary of the recommendations contained
in this report. The rationale leading up to each specific recommenda-
tion is discussed in the third part.
RECOMMENDATION NO. I-PERMANENT COMMITTEE
Amendment of the Rules of the House to incorporate this com-
mittee as a permanent standing committee of the House of
Representatives.
RECOMMENDATION NO. II.-POWERS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE
COMMITTEE
Investment of the following powers in the committee:
1. To have referred to it measures relating to the code of
official conduct and measures relating to financial disclosure
for Members, officers, and employees of the House of
Representatives.
2. To recommend to the House of Representatives, from time
to time, such legislative or administrative actions as the com-
mittee may deem appropriate to establish or enforce standards
of official conduct for Members, officers, and employees of the
House of Representatives.
3. To investigate, subject to limitations, any alleged violation,
by a Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representa-
tives, of the code of official conduct or of any law, rule, regula-
tion, or other standard of conduct applicable to the conduct of
such Member, officer, or employee in the performance of his
duties or the discharge of his responsibilities and, after notice
and a hearing, the committee shall recommend to the House of
Representatives, by resolution or otherwise, such action as the
committee may deem appropriate in the circumstances.
4. To report, to the appropriate Federal or State authorities,
with the approval of the House of Representatives, any sub-
stantial evidence of a violation, by a Member, officer, or employee
of the House of Representatives, of any law applicable to the
performance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities
which may have been disclosed in a committee investigation.
5. To give consideration to the request of a Member, officer,
or employee of the House of Representatives for an advisory
opinion with respect to the general propriety of any current or
proposed conduct of such Member, officer, or employee and, with
appropriate deletions to assure the privacy of the individual con-
cerned, to publish such opinion for the guidance of other Mem-
bers, officers, and employees.
(7)
8
9
Establishment of the following limitations on the committee's
5. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Represent-
authority:
atives shall accept no honorarium for a speech, writing for pub-
1. No resolution, report, recommendation, or advisory opinion
lication, or other similar activity, from any person, organization
relating to the official conduct of a Member, officer, or employee
or corporation in excess of the usual and customary value for such
of the House of Representatives shall be made, and no investiga-
services.
tion of such conduct shall be undertaken, unless approved by the
6. A Member of the House of Representatives shall keep his
affirmative vote of not less than seven members of the committee.
campaign funds separate from his personal funds: He shall con-
2. Except in the case of an investigation undertaken by the
vert no campaign funds to personal use in excess of reimburse-
committee on its own initiative, the committee may undertake
ment for legitimate and verifiable prior campaign expenditures. He
an investigation relating to the official conduct of an individual
shall expend no funds from his campaign account not attributable
Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representatives
to bona fide campaign purposes.
only (A) upon receipt of a complaint, in writing and under oath,
7. A Member of the House of Representatives shall treat as
made by or submitted to a Member of the House of Representa-
campaign contributions all proceeds from testimonial dinners or
tives and transmitted to the committee by such Member, or (B)
other fund-raising events if the sponsors of such affairs do not give
upon receipt of a complaint, in writing and under oath, directly
clear notice in advance to the donors or participants that the
from an individual not a Member of the House of Representa-
proceeds are intended for other purposes.
tives if the committee finds that such complaint has been sub-
8. A Member of the House of Representatives shall retain no
mitted by such individual to not less than three Members of the
one from his clerk hire allowance who does not perform duties
House of Representatives who have refused, in writing, to trans-
commensurate with the compensation he receives.
mit such complaint to the committee.
3. No investigation shall be undertaken of any alleged violation
RECOMMENDATION IV.-FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
of a law, rule, regulation, or standard of conduct not in effect at
the time of the alleged violation.
Amendment of the rules of the House to require that Members,
4. A member of the committee shall be ineligible to participate,
officers, principal assistants to Members and officers, and professional
as a member of the committee, in any committee proceeding
staff members of committees shall, not later than April 30, 1969, and
relating to his official conduct. In any case in which a member
by April 30 of each year thereafter, file with the Committee on Stand-
of the committee is ineligible to act as a member of the com-
ards of Official Conduct a report disclosing certain financial interests,
mittee under the preceding sentence, the Speaker of the House
as described below. The interest of a spouse or any other party, if
of Representatives shall designate a Member of the House of
constructively controlled by the person reporting, shall be considered to
Representatives from the same political party as the ineligible
be the same as the interest of the person reporting. The report shall be
member of the committee to act as a member of the committee
in two parts, hereinafter designated part A and part B.
in any committee proceeding relating to the official conduct of
such ineligible member.
Part A
RECOMMENDATION NO. III.-CODE OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT
(1) List the name, instrument of ownership, and any position
of management held in any business entity doing a substantial
Amendment of the Rules of the House to establish this code of
business with the Federal Government or subject to Federal
official conduct for Members, officers, and employees of the House of
regulatory agencies, in which the ownership is in excess of $5,000
Representatives:
fair market value as of the date of filing or from which income of
1. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Represent-
$1,000 or more was derived during the preceding calendar year.
atives shall conduct himself at all times in a manner which
Do not list any time or demand. deposit in a financial institution,
shall reflect creditably on the House of Representatives.
or any debt instrument having a fixed yield unless it is convertible
2. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Represent-
to an equity instrument.
atives shall adhere to the spirit and the letter of the Rules of
(2) List the name, address, and type of practice of any profes-
the House and to the rules of duly constituted committees
sional organization in which the person reporting, or his spouse, is
thereof.
an officer, director, or partner, or serves in any advisory capacity,
3. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Represent-
from which income of $1,000 or more was derived during the
atives shall receive no compensation nor shall he permit any
preceding calendar year.
compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any source,
(3) List the source of each of the following items received
the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly
during the preceding calendar year:
exerted from his position in the Congress.
(a) Any income for services rendered (other than from the
4. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Represent-
U.S. Government) exceeding $5,000.
atives shall accept no gift of substantial value, directly or in-
(b) Any capital gain from a single source exceeding $5,000,
directly, from any person, organization or corporation having a
other than from the sale of a residence occupied by the
direct interest in legislation before the Congress.
person reporting.
10
11
(c) Reimbursement for expenditures (other than from the
RECOMMENDATION NO. VII.-CORRUPT PRACTICES
U.S. Government) exceeding $1,000 in each instance.
Campaign receipts shall not be included in this report.
That the House take prompt action to review the entire body of
Information filed under part A shall be maintained by the Com-
of law in areas covered by the Federal Corrupt Practices Act and
mittee on Standards of Official Conduct and made available at
enact measures realistically applicable to present day situations.
reasonable hours to responsible public inquiry, subject to such regula-
tions as the committee may prescribe including, but not limited to,
regulations requiring identification by name, occupation, address, and
telephone number of each person examining information filed under
part A and regulations requiring the committee promptly to notify
each Member of the House of Representatives of each instance of an
examination of information filed under part A by such Member.
Part B
(1) List the fair market value (as of the date of filing) of each
item listed under paragraph 1 of part A and the income derived
therefrom during the preceding calendar year.
(2) List the amount of income derived from each item listed
under paragraphs 2 and 3 of part A.
The information filed under part B shall be sealed by the person
filing and shall remain sealed unless the Committee on Standards of
Official Conduct, pursuant to its investigative authority, determines by
a vote of not less than seven members of the committee that the ex-
amination of such information is essential in an official investigation by
the committee and promptly notifies the Member concerned of any
such determination. The committee may, by a vote of not less than
seven members of the committee, make public any portion of the
information unsealed by the committee under the preceding sentence
and which the committee deems to be in the public interest.
Any person required to file a report who has no interests covered by
any of the above provisions shall file a report SO stating.
In any case in which a person required to file a sealed report under
this part B is no longer required to file such a report, the committee
shall return to such person, or his legal representative, all sealed reports
filed by such person under part B and remaining in the possession of
the committee.
RECOMMENDATION NO. V.-APPLICATION TO CANDIDATES
That the chairmen of national political committees, in turn, recom-
mend to candidates seeking nomination or election to the House of
Representatives, under the sponsorship of the respective parties,
that such candidates comply with all provisions of the code of official
conduct insofar as they are applicable.
RECOMMENDATION NO. VI.-COUNTERPART FUNDS
That the Committee on House Administration recommend revisions
in law and regulations to provide for standardizing the controls over
the use by committees of counterpart funds for travel outside the
United States and full reporting and adequate review of such reports
in the House of Representatives.
91-318 0-68-3
13
in restraint by both legislative and practical influences, will not only
be able to cope with situations before they bring discredit to the
Congress, but, more importantly, will deter most such situations from
developing.
Some instrumentality, preferably the continuing committee, must
PART III
necessarily serve as the determinant of the subjective terms necessary
in spelling out the Code of Official Conduct. An essential difference
COMMENT ON THE RECOMMENDATIONS
between a statute and a standard is that the former usually is capable
of precise definition and therefore may be objectively tested, whereas
RECOMMENDATION NO. I.-PERMANENT COMMITTEE
the latter can only be stated in subjective language and must rely on
That the Rules of the House of Representatives be ap-
the facts as determined in each situation. If it should be necessary to
propriately amended to incorporate this Committee as a
measure an allegation against a standard, that measurement will be
permanent standing committee of the House.
as meaningful as the depth to which the measuring body draws out
the facts and nuances. Clearly this can be done better by a body
Pivotal to the remaining portion of this report is the recommenda-
smaller and more flexible than the entire House, and one that is more
tion that the Rules of the House be amended to make this com-
acquainted with the history and development of the standards and
mittee a permanent standing committee of the House, not just of
enforcement procedures, than special committees created to deal only
this 90th Congress. The reasons for this are several.
with individual cases as they arise.
On April 9, 1963, Chairman Omar Burleson of the Committee on
House Administration, during hearings before his committee, stated:
RECOMMENDATION NO. II.-POWERS AND LIMITATIONS
Incidentally, the record should show at this point that
OF THE COMMITTEE
this committee is not charged by law or under the Rules of
Powers
the House of Representatives with making this type investi-
Investment of the following powers in the committee:
gation. It is not charged with the responsibility or the author-
ity of overseeing the conduct of Members of Congress.
(1) to have referred to it measures relating to the Code of
Official Conduct and measures relating to financial dis-
Nor is any other committee SO charged. Although there have been
closure for Members, officers and employees of the House
rules and constitutional provisions relating to the official conduct of
of Representatives.
Members from the First Congress, there never has existed an in-
stitutionalized body or means expressly directed toward monitoring
The changing conditions over the years that have made desirable
them. Historically, infractions usually have been dealt with when the
the statement of these canons and establishment of means for verifying
severity or exposure of them took on such public weight as to demand
their observance must be expected to continue. Thus changes in both
that the House appoint a special committee to deal with a problem
substance and method will be required as the need is demonstrated.
ad hoc. There have been instances when standing committees pursuing
These will come from the less than perfect work, which this committee
other avenues of investigation chanced upon apparent misconduct
concedes is present in this report, and also from new situations which
on the part of a Member and sought permission of the House by
are not now predictable. The committee feels that placement of this
resolution to extend the scope of their investigation to deal with the
authority with it is the most suitable means of providing for the
discovered infraction. But both of these approaches are slow of
orderly treatment of changes which may become necessary in the
implementation and tend to become effective only after unsavory
future-
practices have proliferated into abuse.
(2) to recommend to the House of Representatives, from
In the extreme, one can envision a permanent standing committee
time to time, such legislative or administrative actions as
as a vehicle of continuing inquisition, if the powers sought here were
the Committee may deem appropriate to establish or enforce
carelessly placed or injudiciously handled once placed. That this
standards of official conduct for Members, officers, and
would not be the case, now or in the future, should be assured by the
employees of the House.
fact that the members of the committee are also Members of the House
This provision would merely continue the recommendatory juris-
who are elected as are other committee members and are subject to
diction contained in the original resolution. Under (1) as stated above,
the same rules and procedures which they will administer. Beyond
referral jurisdiction would apply only to the Code of Official Conduct
this, of course, is the fact that the committee can only recommend
and measures relating to financial disclosure. Under (2) the com-
definitive action to the full House. Even greater insurance is provided
mittee would have the broader authority to continue to recommend
by the spelling out in the authorizing resolution, in more precise and
measures aimed at maintaining highest standards of conduct.
detailed language than usual, the functions of the committee, thus
It is readily conceivable that information can come to the committee,
leaving less latitude to the internal rules of the committee.
through an investigation or a variety of other means, which would
This committee is convinced that a more streamlined procedure for
suggest remedies to existing or impending situations. Such remedies
the handling of allegations of infractions, provided that procedure is held
might be recommendations for House action as a whole or proposals
(12)
14
15
directed at a particular committee, or possibly even recommendations
employee and, with appropriate deletions to assure the
for new statutes or amendments to existing ones. Recommendations
privacy of the individual concerned, to publish such opinion
in the latter category, with or without the accompaniment of imple-
for the guidance of other Members, officers, and employees.
menting legislation, would insure referral to the committee in which
The committee feels that as a continuing body this perhaps could
the appropriate jurisdiction resides, and from which could be expected
be its most valuable function; certainly it can be an extremely im-
greater expertise. Of prime importance, however, is the existence of
portant protective service.
a continuing authority to take the initiative to address the House on
From the outset of its work, the committee has proceeded on the
practices which, if ignored, could bring irreparable harm.
premise that enforcement is a poor substitute for prevention or de-
(3) to investigate, subject to limitations, any alleged viola-
terrence. While the committee necessarily requires power to recom-
tion, by a Member, officer, or employee of the House of
mend disciplinary action, it sincerely believes there will be little need
Representatives, of the Code of Official Conduct, of any
for using such authority if it can build precedents through published
law, rule, regulation, or other standard of conduct applicable
decisions showing how it regards specific acts in their fullest context.
to the conduct of such Member, officer, or employee in the
In the committee's hearings, it was pointed out on numerous occa-
performance of his duties or the discharge of his responsi-
sions that there simply has not existed any means of examining an act
bilities and, after notice and a hearing, the Committee shall
before the fact, especially in the cases of Members with relatively
recommend to the House of Representatives, by resolution
little seniority. But even among the more senior Members, it was
or otherwise, such action as the Committee may deem appro-
apparent that their understanding of the permitted and the taboo
priate in the circumstances.
was often more intuitive than guided by specific authority, and was
Recent history offers vivid evidence of the need for enforcement
by no means consistent.
machinery to accompany any code of conduct. A mere statement of
It is felt that the Code of Official Conduct recommended herewith
guidelines serves neither as a deterrent to improper conduct nor as a
should do considerable toward removing any question of doubt but,
yardstick for punitive action, in the absence of means that demand
to the extent to which it fails, the early warning device provided by
respect for the guidelines. Enforcement is the substance that makes
this recommendation should be invaluable.
standards meaningful. It would arm the House with the weapon
Limitations
needed to defend itself, and, in truth, make it the judge of its own
At several places in this report, limits on the powers of the com-
membership.
mittee are recommended. They are-
It must be stressed, however, that the powers contained in this pro-
vision, like any authority under constitutional self-government, need
(1) No resolution, report, recommendation, or advisory
restraints and, as pointed out elsewhere in this section, such restraints
opinion relating to the official conduct of a Member, officer,
are built into the authorizing resolution, and above all, it must be
or employee of the House of Representatives shall be made,
emphasized that in the practical reality any final authority to punish
and no investigation of such conduct shall be undertaken,
is vested only in the House as a whole.
unless approved by the affirmative vote of not less than
seven members of the committee.
(4) to report to the appropriate Federal or State au-
thorities, with the approval of the House of Representatives,
Rule XI, clause 26(e), provides, "No measure or recommendation
any substantial evidence of a violation, by a Member,
shall be reported from any committee unless a majority of the com-
officer or employee of the House of Representatives, of any
mittee were actually present," and clause 26(h) specifies, "Each
law applicable to the performance of his duties or the dis-
committee may fix the number of its members to constitute a quorum
charge of his responsibilities, which may have been dis-
for taking testimony and receiving evidence, which shall not be less
closed in a committee investigation.
than two." Additionally, this committee felt it was important, par-
ticularly since it also would render advisory opinions, which are not
This provision, while generally self-explanatory, differs from many
technically covered by the provisions above referred to, that the
similar ones found in prior bills and resolutions. The difference is that
House be assured that no recommendations could come to it from
the committee may report only violations of laws applicable to the
the committee unless they represented the views of a majority of
performance of duties or the discharge of responsibilities, whereas
the committee's authorized membership. And, no investigation could
the language of most of such bills and resolutions grants general
be undertaken except under the same conditions.
authority to Congress to report violations to enforcement agencies.
The difference may suggest that the committee is laboring a point
(2) Except in the case of an investigation undertaken by
unworthily, but it is noted simply to reflect the committee's sensi-
the committee on its own initiative, the committee may
tivity to remaining strictly within established boundaries.
undertake an investigation relating to the official conduct of
an individual Member, officer, or employee of the House of
(5) to give consideration to the request of a Member,
Representatives only (A) upon receipt of a complaint, in
officer or employee of the House of Representatives, for an
writing and under oath, made by or submitted to a Member
advisory opinion with respect to the general propriety of
of the House of Representatives and transmitted to the
any current or proposed conduct of such Member, officer, or
committee by such Member, or (B) upon receipt of a com-
16
17
plaint, in writing and under oath, directly from an individual
RECOMMENDATION NO. III.-ADOPTION OF THIS CODE OF OFFICIAL
not a Member of the House of Representatives if the com-
CONDUCT FOR THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
mittee finds that such complaint has been submitted by such
individual to not less than three Members of the House of
(1) A Member, officer, or employee of the House of
Representatives who have refused, in writing, to transmit
Representatives shall conduct himself at all times in a
such complaint to the committee.
manner which shall reflect creditably on the House of
The committee is fully aware that persons with unworthy motives
Representatives.
might seek to lodge irresponsible allegations against Members. This
Since the Constitution quite clearly makes the House the judge of
provision would bar the committee from serving such ulterior purposes.
its own membership, it seems appropriate to summarize in a single
In addition, the several thresholds built into the committee's investiga-
standard a tentative description of conduct, by which the House,
tive technique (see chart in appendix, page 44) would insure that only
through referral from this committee, can treat promptly with a
those allegations which meet successive tests of legitimacy would ever
given act or an accumulation of acts of a Member which it determines
surface.
to have reflected discredit on the Congress.
It is conceivable, of course, that someone lodging an allegation
It is possible that a flagrant violation of law reflecting on the
against a Member might find it impossible to have another Member
Congress as a whole could go unpunished if the virtually unlimited
transmit it to the committee. Upon the written refusal of any three
power of law enforcement officials to prosecute were not exercised.
Members to transmit the allegation, the committee would accept it
In such circumstances, the legislative branch would find it difficult
under all other specified terms and conditions. This provision should
to assert the right to be the judge of its own membership.
quieten any notion that a legitimate complaint may be technically
A contrary situation might well find an investigation by this com-
avoided.
mittee establishing that there exists no "probable grounds" for a
(3) No investigation shall be undertaken of any alleged
particular complaint. Under such conditions, this finding would have
violation of a law, rule, regulation, or standard of conduct not
some appearance to enforcement officials of invocation of the "judge
in effect at the time of the alleged violation.
of its own membership" doctrine. While conceding that this standard
probably would remain untested, the committee feels it should be a
This limitation insures that the committee can function in its
part of a code of standards in the interest of, and as a safeguard for,
investigative capacity only from the date the authorizing resolution
the House as a whole.
becomes effective. It prohibits the committee from reaching to a prior
point in time unless the act or practice was existing before the effective
(2) A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Repre-
date of the applicable standard and continued thereafter.
sentatives shall adhere to the spirit and the letter of Rules
The committee also considered limiting the initiation or continuance
of the House and to the rules of duly constituted com-
of any investigation of any Member for a period immediately prior to
mittees thereof.
any primary or general election in which the subject Member may be
It is also unlikely that the above standard ever will have to meet
a candidate. While the general objectives of such a restraint are desir-
the tests of enforcement. Its purpose in the code is to restate and
able, the practical effect could be one that would introduce more
reemphasize the importance of the precedents of decorum and con-
hazards than it would eliminate. The other general powers and limi-
sideration that have evolved in the House over the years. These
tations, plus the bipartisan character of the committee, should be
precedents are more than mere politeness; they are the essence of the
adequate to prevent abuses that might arise from "timed" allegations.
order of the House.
(4) A member of the Committee shall be ineligible to par-
The committee heard recommendations that it draw standards to
ticipate, as a member of the committee, in any committee
reduce the number of time-consuming quorum calls, govern attend-
proceeding relating to his official conduct. In any case in
ance on the floor and in committee meetings, and deal with seemingly
which a member of the committee is ineligible to act as a
unfair and dilatory legislative tactics. Such proposals were considered,
member of the committee under the preceding sentence, the
but proposed drafts illustrated the greater impracticality of this ap-
Speaker of the House of Representatives shall designate a
proach in comparison with a more general admonition to observe the
Member of the House of Representatives from the same
spirit of existing and adequate rules and practices.
political party as the ineligible member of the committee to
From the apportionment chart shown on page 4 of this report, it
act as a member of the committee in any committee pro-
is clear that the business of the House has multiplied rapidly during
ceeding relating to the official conduct of such ineligible
our national life. But, as the chart shows, the projected growth for
member.
the future is even more startling. Many fields of legislation are pres-
ent today that were unheard of even a short time ago, and forecasts
This provision assures that, in the event a member of the committee
for the future appear to offer no hope for reduction in the workload
should become the subject of an investigation, he shall be entitled
to precisely the same treatment as any Member of the House who is
of the House. And although this report is not primarily directed
toward legislative efficiency, it is clear that ethical observance of the
not a member of the committee.
spirit and the letter of the rules of the House and rules of its com-
mittees will work toward that objective.
18
19
(3) A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Repre-
point toys with the essence of the representative function and is po-
sentatives shall receive no compensation nor shall he permit
tentially dangerous. For if a Member makes use of the only remedy
any compensation to accrue to his beneficial interest from any
now available for prevention of conflicts of interest-disqualification
source, the receipt of which would occur by virtue of influence
of himself from acting in any situation in which he has a private or
improperly exerted from his position in the Congress.
pecuniary interest-he risks disqualification also of the voice of his
The attention of the committee to the general topic of conflicts of
constituents. It should be noted, too, that use of the remedy is left
interest was in direct proportion to the emphasis that virtually every
largely to the option of the individual Member. The remedy, as it now
witness put on the subject. There was this emphasis despite:
exists, is prescribed in Jefferson's Manual and in rule VIII of the rules
of the House.
Of the practice of influencing a Congressman's action on
Much has been written on the venality of conflicts of interest, real
legislation through outright bribery, there were no publicly
or seeming, but the dearth of substantive recommendations either to
proven instances from 1945 through 1964, although it is
or from the committee for absolute means of preventing conflicts is in
possible that some bribes were offered or received secretly.
all likelihood due to the essential paradox that the concept evokes in
There were no publicly known cases of a Congressman selling
self-government systems. Whether the motive behind a single act is
his vote for an outright cash payment. There was no case in
ultimate avarice, genuine unselfishness or a point somewhere between
which there was any evidence that a speaker's fee paid to a
these poles, what it truly is, is known only in the heart of one man, and
Congressman ostensibly for making a speech before an organi-
in such cases he must be judged by others humbly.
zation (a widespread and perfectly legal practice) had as its
real purpose to buy the Congressman's vote, which would
(4) A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Repre-
have been a crime. There were no publicly known cases of
sentatives shall accept no gift of substantial value, directly or
a Congressman selling his vote on a bill for the secret promise
indirectly, from any person, organization, or corporation
of a future job or for some inside information on the stock
having a direct interest in legislation before the Congress.
market, land values, the commodity market, etc. There
Under most circumstances the giving and receiving of gifts is an
were no publicly known cases in which it was proven that a
expression of genuine unselfishness, and is evidence of the civilization
Congressman had been offered or accepted a campaign
which man has achieved. The same act, however, can be a badge of the
contribution made for the express purpose of buying his
depths to which he sometimes sinks-meaning bribery.
vote on a particular issue.¹
The extreme cases present no problems in any attempt to define
Nevertheless the committee sought to define and approach the sub-
proper conduct. It is in the middle area that the problems arise. This
ject in such a way that a standard seeking to prevent conflicts of in-
is the area of the intended quid for the quo, the potlatch, and contains
terest would be reasonably meaningful and to some degree enforceable.
the even further complication of timing factors which might be de-
The generally understood notion is that conflicts of interest occur
scribed as casting bread upon the waters.
when one's governmental responsibilities are to any degree affected,
The ill-motivated giving or receiving of gifts certainly has no place
or appear to be affected, by his or her personal economic interests.
in government, but to make a flat prohibition against this most
This definition is adequate until an attempt is made to prove what
human expression would be artificial and unenforceable.
fits the definition and where a legislator's community of interest with
The committee fully realizes the considerable subjectivity of this
his constituents ceases and conflict of interest commences.
standard, but believes that, given the facts to test the standard, the
A substantial body of law already exists covering certain types of
subjectivity can be resolved, and that, otherwise, the potential
overt duality, but that law is weak in that it, too, is incapable of
problem of extraordinary gifts may be beyond definition.
penetrating the indivisibility of the human and human motivations.
(5) A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Rep-
In every lawmaker, there is also some living-maker, and the instincts
resentatives shall accept no honorarium for a speech,
which compel him to provide are essentially competitive. These
writing for publication, or other similar activity, from any
instincts are fundamental. Yet they must be suppressed in the role
person, organization, or corporation in excess of the usual
of the lawmaker except when the action in question is simultaneously
and customary value for such services.
and, to no greater degree, beneficial to all the constituents for whom
the representative is serving in a brokerage function. It could be
The acceptance of an honorarium by any person, a Member of
Congress or otherwise, for a speech or presence is a durable and honor-
argued that even this condition could be further tempered if a greater
able practice, provided, of course, that it is just that and no more.
public benefit might stem from voting a position contrary to the
When the fee offered a Member of the Congress is in excess of what
constituent but in the interest of the Member.
another person of equal public importance could command, the
Clearly all these possibilities are totally incapable of examination
except in the subjective sense and, therefore, this standard is so stated.
Member is presented a serious ethical problem. In such circumstance,
To imagine the test, one must first know all the facts and then apply
the excess is either a gift or a campaign contribution, and properly
should be treated separately and appropriately reported.
an equally ideal unselfish judgment. To attempt to define beyond this
The committee recognizes that political practices in the 435 con-
1 Legislators and the Lobbyists," (p. 3) a publication of Congressional Quarterly Service.
gressional districts vary widely, and that the honorarium has been
91-235 0-68-1
20
21
more usual in some than in others. The committee wants to emphasize
When the purpose is not stated in adequate, advance notice, the
its belief that receipt of a proper honorarium constitutes no abuse,
contributions must be considered as meant for campaign purposes
but to warn that it is something else if a so-called honorarium is a
and treated just as if notice to that effect had been stated.
subterfuge for the gift of money intended for other purposes. It is that
(8) A Member of the House of Representatives shall
kind of abuse to which the above code provision is directed.
retain no one from his clerk hire allowance who does not
(6) A Member of the House of Representatives shall keep
perform duties commensurate with the compensation he
his campaign funds separate from his personal funds.
receives.
He shall convert no campaign funds to personal use in excess
A subject widely commented upon to the committee was the prac-
of reimbursement for legitimate and verifiable prior cam-
tice of hiring relatives from the clerk hire allowance. Recommenda-
paign expenditures. He shall expend no funds from his cam-
tions for dealing with the subject ranged from complete prohibition
paign account not attributable to bona fide campaign
to approval. The question was preempted with the passage of the
purposes.
Postal Revenue and Federal Salary Act of 1967, which, in effect,
The committee recognizes the political process as essentially an ad-
prohibits the hiring of any relatives by Government officials.
versary one. Aspirants to seats in the House of Representatives are, to
Within the same general area, however, the subject of reasonable
some degree, planning and campaigning to unseat the incumbent at
performance of duties by employees, regardless of relationship, was
all times. The incumbent counters these efforts if he is to remain the
raised. The need for conscientious performance was stated in the
incumbent. The degree of subtlety, whether called tactics by the one
1958 Code of Ethics. It commands all persons in Government service
or exposure by the other, lessens as an election approaches, but it
to "Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving to the per-
must be understood that campaigning is a continuing process, not one
formance of his duties his earnest effort and best thought. This
that commences with the sound of a bell and ends with the wave of a
principle must be kept in mind by the Member making an appoint-
flag.
ment and by the person appointed.
The costs of this process are the subject of existing law and proposed
legislation. The committee recognizes the importance of realistic cor-
RECOMMENDATION NO. IV-FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
rupt practices legislation in the total context of standards of official
conduct. But, within the scope of this code of official conduct, it is
Amendment of the rules of the House to require that Members,
the meaningful separation and proper application of campaign funds
officers, principal assistants to Members and officers, and professional
versus personal funds that is important. Otherwise, there is grave
staff members of committees shall, not later than April 30, 1969, and
danger of the presence of potential sources of conflicts of interest.
by April 30 of each year thereafter, file with the Committee on
should be noted that the reimbursement for prior expenditures
Standards of Official Conduct a report disclosing certain financial
provided for in the standard is not an exception to the general proposi-
interests, as described below. The interest of a spouse or any other
tion. Its purpose is to take notice of the continuing and overlapping
party, if constructively controlled by the person reporting, shall be
nature of campaign expenditures by providing a degree of flexibility
considered to be the same as the interest of the person reporting. The
in the financing of them without any sacrifice of the principal objective
report shall be in two parts, hereinafter designated "part A" and
of the standard.
"part B."
Part A
(7) A Member of the House of Representatives shall treat
as campaign contributions all proceeds from testimonial
(1) List the name, instrument of ownership, and any position
dinners or other fund-raising events if the sponsors of such
of management held in any business entity doing a substantial
affairs do not give clear notice in advance to the donors or
business with the Federal Government or subject to Federal
participants that the proceeds are intended for other purposes.
regulatory agencies, in which the ownership is in excess of $5,000
Political fundraising practices vary widely across the country, but
fair market value as of the date of filing or from which income of
one in fairly general use is the testimonial dinner. Like many other
$1,000 or more was derived during the preceding calendar year.
topics mentioned in this report, the practice is capable of a high
Do not list any time or demand deposit in a financial institution,
purpose or of abuse. In this instance, the motive behind the act is
or any debt instrument having a fixed yeild unless it is convertible
not as important as the assurance that all participants in the event
to an equity instrument.
are fully aware of what their role is. If an event is for raising campaign
(2) List the name, address, and type of practice of any pro-
funds, and that purpose is clearly stated (for example, in imprinting
fessional organization in which the person reporting, or his spouse,
on the tickets), not only is the donor aware of the purposes to which
is an officer, director, or partner, or serves in any advisory
his contribution will be put, but, equally important, the Member is
capacity, from which income of $1,000 or more was derived during
in no doubt as to the uses to which he is permitted to put the funds
the preceding calendar year.
and as to the reporting he is required to make under law. If, on the
(3) List the source of each of the following items received during
other hand, the testimonial is intended to provide a gift for the
the preceding calendar year:
unlimited use of the Member, that fact should be equally clear and
(a) Any income for services rendered (other than from the
the political implications open for full observance.
U.S. Government) exceeding $5,000.
22
23
(b) Any capital gain from a single source exceeding $5,000,
Proponents of the broadest disclosure seemed to take axiomatically
other than from the sale of a residence occupied by the
that under this scrutiny, conflicts of interest would be eliminated.
person reporting.
Opponents held with the same conviction that compelling disclosure
(c) Reimbursement for expenditures (other than from the
of one's personal finances would deter and eventually eliminate
U.S. Government) exceeding $1,000 in each instance.
qualified persons from public office.
Campaign receipts shall not be included in this report.
The committee feels that a true position falls between these extremes
Information filed under part A shall be maintained by the Committee
and that there is a totally justifiable point at which some financial
on Standards of Official Conduct and made available at reasonable
disclosure is necessary to equip the voters with enough information to
hours to responsible public inquiry, subject to such regulations as the
make a proper judgment at the polls, but that disclosure beyond that
committee may prescribe including, but not limited to, regulations
point is unnecessary and, in truth, is an invasion of one's privacy.
requiring identification by name, occupation, address, and telephone
The purposeful and premeditated conflict of interest is not, and
number of each person examining information filed under part A and
cannot be, the target of a financial disclosure technique. As was noted
regulations requiring the committee promptly to notify each Member
earlier, these situations are rare, and common sense suggests that, if
of the House of Representatives of each instance of an examination
an outright bargaining of one's legislative influence could be contem-
of information filed under part A by such Member.
plated, the same person would not hesitate to falsify any type of filing
imposed upon him. To unearth and punish a violation of the code or
Part B
applicable statutes in this area would present no greater problem than
to treat a misfiling, SO it must be concluded that the code and the
(1) List the fair market value (as of the date of filing) of each
statutes are adequate to deal with flagrant abuses of legislative
item listed under paragraph 1 of part A and the income derived
authority.
therefrom during the preceding calendar year.
The remaining area of what is commonly referred to as conflict of
(2) List the amount of income derived from each item listed
interest refuses to yield to such easy definition. In fact, if rule VIII 2
under paragraphs 2 and 3 of part A.
were literally applied, any legislation requiring appropriations could
The information filed under part B shall be sealed by the person
be construed to contain a "direct personal or pecuniary interest"
filing and shall remain sealed unless the Committee on Standards of
since it theoretically affects taxes, the quality of investments' and
Official Conduct, pursuant to its investigative authority, determines
perhaps other extremely remote interests.
by a vote of not less than seven members of the committee that the
While precedent has provided the solution to this technicality, it
examination of such information is essential in an official investiga-
illustrates that conflict of interest is a matter of proximity or degree of
tion by the committee and promptly notifies the member concerned
personal or pecuniary interest rather than an absolute state. Therefore,
of such determination. The committee may, by a vote of not less
in the absence of any precise definition, it is the judgment and in-
than seven members of the committee, make public any portion of
stincts of the member voting that provide the first test of whether the
the information unsealed by the committee under the preceding
representative function is being compromised for personal gain. As a
sentence and which the committee deems to be in the public interest.
practical matter, it is the governing criterion.
Any person required to file a report who has no interests covered
In the totally ideal legislative circumstance, the judgment of the
by any of the above provisions shall file a report SO stating.
Member blends into that of his constituency and expresses itself
In any case in which a person required to file a sealed report under
unequivocally. To the extent then that any vote is less than ideal is
this part B is no longer required to file such a report, the committee
the failure of this synthesis, and systems that will improve the com-
shall return to such person, or his legal representative, all sealed
munication and understanding toward this objective are justifiable.
reports filed by such person under part B and remaining in the posses-
It is toward this goal that financial disclosure is worthy. It works
sion of the committee.
to keep the person reporting ever mindful of where the accumulation
Financial disclosure brought the most positive opinions of any
of his estate has occurred and keeps before him the fact that his first
subject that came before the committee. The overwhelming majority
obligation-his legislative duty-may not be even subconsciously
of the testimony favored application of some form of disclosure to
subverted to his own interests. It further works to keep before those
Members, officers and certain employees of the House. But while
he represents the areas where his personal financial interests lie so
there were passionate demands for exposure of every minute detail
that they may judge whether his interests are contrary to their own,
of fiscal involvement, the committee also heard the completely oppo-
and, if so, whether to a sufficient degree that he fails to adequately
site view that such disclosure would be an unwarranted invasion of
represent them.
privacy. The majority of the recommendations supporting disclosure
No apology need be made for the fact that the proper role of the
stressed and defended the principle of disclosure but only a few placed
legislator is to express the very direct interests of his constituency.
emphasis on the objectives the technique was intended to serve.
If his own be the same or different interests and he votes either posi-
A matter of such sensitivity, having generated such extremes of
tion, there is no proof that he acted from conflict of interest. Whether,
opinion, needs the most careful scrutiny. The one thing strikingly
in fact, it was or was not is known but to himself.
absent from the arguments was any evidence that the results claimed
2 Rule VIII. Every Member shall be present within the Hall of the House during its sittings, unless
would in fact obtain, and that the conclusions were not largely
excused or necessarily prevented; and shall vote on each question put, unless he has a direct personal or
speculative.
pecuniary interest in the event of such question.
24
25
The legitimate objectives of financial disclosure, then, are to serve
It can be argued with considerable merit that point 3 of the "Code
as a deterrent reminder to the person filing and to acquaint the voters
of Official Conduct," along with the means for enforcement recom-
with the areas in which it is possible for a conflict of interest to occur.
mended in this report, is sufficient to monitor conflicts of interest, thus
It must follow that only such information as serves those objectives
obviating any need for financial disclosure. The committee did not
can be validly required.
overlook this alternative. It concluded that even if both approaches
The method of financial disclosure recommended in this report seeks
became duplicative in effect rather than complementary, the better
to accomplish these objectives. The means would require a two-part
judgment was to err on the side of duplication.
type of disclosure. One part, aimed primarily at the deterrent objec-
The committee was told that "not only Congress, but the churches,
tive, would be sealed and not made public except under unusual con-
the professional societies, the universities, the research organizations,
ditions. This portion would contain specific items of valuation and
the corporations, in fact all organizations and all of us are being pro-
income-information which is not essential to the public judgment
pelled, willy-nilly, into an era in which ethics must become a dominant
objective.
concern if we are to survive" (Dr. Franklin Kilpatrick; hearings,
The other part, which would be made public, would identify certain
August-September 1967, p. 23). The committee is mindful of the fact
assets, business, or professional affiliations and the sources of outside
that Members of the House of Representatives are as entitled to pri-
income, any of which might be persuasive of the judgment of the
Member in his legislative role. The committee made a careful analysis
vacy as any other citizen. But because they are the closest link between
other citizens and their Government, it is appropriate that they take
of factors capable of doing this, and strongly feels that only this much
this extra measure of ethical concern.
information is essential to the objectives earlier stated.
For instance, ownership in business entities having no essential
RECOMMENDATION NO. V.--APPLICATION TO CANDIDATES
dealings with the Federal Government, or even minimal holdings of
this type, do not present an opportunity for conflict of interest. The
That the Chairman of National Political Committees, in
committee appreciates the difficulty that might arise in some instances
turn, recommend to candidates seeking nomination or elec-
of determining whether a holding meets the criteria stated in para-
tion to the House of Representatives, under the sponsorship
graph (1) of part A above; namely, that the entity in question does
of the respective parties, that such candidates comply with
a substantial business with the Federal Government or is subject to
all provisions of the Code of Official Conduct insofar as they
Federal regulation. One such example would be a diversified mutual
are applicable.
fund having changing components. In such uncertain cases, where
honest differences of opinion can be expected, to err on either side is
The committee saw the equity of requiring aspirants to seats in the
unlikely to do harm to the objectives of the reporting requirement.
House of Representatives to abide by the same rules, especially with
Assets such as financial deposits, Government bonds, or even cor-
respect to financial disclosure, as apply to incumbents. Technically
porate bonds lacking any provision for conversion to equity instru-
it was stopped from doing so if the Code of Official Conduct was placed
ments similarly are incapable of enhancement by improper legislative
in the rules of the House rather than being made statutory, a step
influence. Thus, such interests do not serve the objectives of disclosure
which would require Senate approval. It seems reasonable that
and therefore present no reason to be revealed. These exclusions also
candidates would be willing to meet any requirements which might
would prevent any person from calculating the net worth position of
later apply to them as Members.
the reporting individual, information which the committee feels most
The committee feels that the most reasonable means of communi-
strongly is unnecessary to any goals of financial disclosure.
cating this suggestion is through the machinery of the national political
The committee notes the limitations on this or any form of financial
parties.
disclosure for the objectives mentioned. The principal limitation is
If experience shows abuse of this recommendation by candidates to
that it never reveals the present situation but rather the past, which
the detriment of incumbents, legislation to correct the abuses can be
may bear no relevancy to the purposes of disclosure. The technique
considered later.
as a rule of the House is difficult, if not impossible, to impose on a
nonincumbent candidate. Also, it is not meaningful with respect to
RECOMMENDATION NO. VI.-COUNTERPART FUNDS
a first-year report since it would cover a period prior to the service of
the person reporting and conversely the final year of service of any
That the Committee on House Administration recom-
person covered would not be reported. Likewise, transactions wholly
mend revisions in law and regulations to provide for stand-
contained in a calendar year and not existing at the time of filing
ardizing the controls over the use by committees of counter-
would escape report unless they led to gains or income which would
part funds for travel outside the United States and full
be reported. While these defects limit the effectiveness of the effort,
reporting and adequate review of such reports in the House
the committee feels that on balance they do not outweigh the possible
of Representatives.
benefit.
Any Members or employees of committees of Congress traveling in a
Again it is emphasized that nothing in this section pertains to the
foreign country on official business of the U.S. Government are re-
disclosure of moneys received for campaign purposes. That subject
quired by law to use U.S. funds on deposit in that country's currency
is treated elsewhere in this report.
if such funds exist. These balances for the most part arose from lend-
lease, foreign aid, or some similar arrangement. Recovery of them by
26
27
the U.S. Treasury is for all practical purposes limited to their use in
about a Member that is needed to reach a judgment as to whether
the country of origin.
proximity to any of the sources disclosed is sufficient to create a
The law further spells out per diem limits of these funds available to
potential conflict of interest.
official travelers but that law has been revised a number of times with
The absence of greater detail in this recommendation is due to the
the result that it now is often confusing as to authorized uses and
committee's decision that the specific steps to accomplish its general
accountability.
aims should be recommended by the appropriate legislative com-
Without question this confusion has led to some actual abuse and
mittee. This committee notes that considerable legislation aimed at
certainly to some appearance of abuse in the utilization and reporting
the general objectives has been introduced in recent years. It reiterates
of these disbursements. That the amounts involved in actual abuses
that it feels no preference for any specific bill. But it feels strongly
have been relatively miniscule is no justification for less than meticulous
that stricter management and reporting of campaign finances are
stewardship over these like any other public moneys.
needed to complement the recommendations it is making in the areas
The committee feels that recommendations from the appropriate
assigned to it by the House.
legislative source to clarify all aspects of this law will be a step toward
eliminating any uncertainty from this area and removing both error
and suspicion.
RECOMMENDATION NO. VII.-CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT
That the House take prompt action to review the entire
body of law in areas covered by the Federal Corrupt Prac-
tices Act and enact measures realistically applicable to
present day situations.
No report, responsive to the committee's assignment, could omit
consideration of the entire scope of campaign fund practices. Any
consideration of standards of conduct for legislators must include the
question of whether the sources of campaign money requirements are
capable of either overtly or subconsciously compromising the legisla-
tive independence of the recipient. No system can be foreseen which
will obviate the raising of such funds, SO the only remedy appears to
be strict management of them. This must be done if the public's con-
cern over conflicts of interest is to be lessened.
Testimony received by the committee in this area was largely general
in scope. However, two specific areas were singled out: (1) elimination
of unrealistic limits on campaign spending, and (2) more extensive
and realistic disclosure of campaign contributions and expenditures
than is required under present law.
It should be made clear that disclosure of political campaign finances
is entirely separate and apart from the committee's recommendation,
elsewhere in this report, for a method of financial disclosure as a means
of enabling the public to monitor possible conflicts of interest.
Campaign funds in the hands of a candidate for Congress are in a
unique category. Although he has possession of them and may elect
how they shall be spent, their status is transitional until they have
in fact been spent. If they are expended for legitimate purposes either
in a current or any future campaign for public office, they effectively
pass through his hands without any trace of ownership or title re-
maining, and the accountability for them, in and out, is covered by
the Federal corrupt practices law. If on the other hand some of these
funds are expended for personal use, not related to his campaign, that
portion becomes personal income, reportable for Internal Revenue
purposes and possibly subject to disclosure under recommendations
contained elsewhere in this report. Together, these two disclosure
requirements would provide the fullest exposure of financial details
APPENDIX
90TH CONGRESS
IST SESSION
H. RES. 418
PART IV
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
CONCLUSION
APRIL 6, 1967
Mr. COLMER, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;
The observations and recommendations contained in this report
which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
by no means cover all the subjects debated in the committee. Many
additional areas were discussed, but failed of a position in the report
APRIL 13, 1967
because, in the judgment of the committee, they either were of minimal
Considered and agreed to
importance or were in a category for which no appropriate recommen-
dations were immediately apparent. This is not to say that the com-
RESOLUTION
mittee feels there are great remaining areas demanding of attention.
Rather, it is to say that, in the judgment of the committee, a con-
Resolved, That there is hereby established a standing committee
tinuing committee can deal with remaining areas more deliberately
of the House of Representatives to be known as the Committee on
and effectively, and with minimal risk that the cure may be worse
Standards of Official Conduct (hereafter referred to as the "commit-
than the disease. In the interim, none of these areas impresses the
tee"). The committee shall be composed of twelve Members of the
committee as of sufficient weight to do conceivable harm if action on
House of Representatives. Six members of the committee shall be
them is deferred.
members of the majority party and six shall be members of the
It is regrettable that this report does not lend itself to the same
minority party.
precision as reports on some other subjects. Concepts and ideas simply
SEC. 2. The jurisdiction of the committee shall be to recommend
will not permit themselves to be as neatly arranged as measurable
as soon as practicable to the House of Representatives such changes
facts.
in laws, rules and regulations as the committee deems necessary to
This committee boasts of no superior wisdom or special insight, but
establish and enforce standards of official conduct for Members,
it does assure the House of Representatives that it has, with some
officers, and employees of the House.
experience, sincere humility, genuine reverence for the institution
SEC. 3. The committee may hold such hearings and take such
itself, and, above all, true respect for each individual Member, con-
testimony as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this
sidered the contents of this report and deems adoption of its recom-
resolution.
mendations in the best interest of all.
(29)
(28)
31
" '(4) to give consideration to the request of a Member,
officer, or employee of the House of Representatives, for an
advisory opinion with respect to the general propriety of any
current or proposed conduct of such Member, officer, or employee
and, with appropriate deletions to assure the privacy of the
90TH CONGRESS, 2D SESSION
individual concerned, to publish such opinion for the guidance
RESOLUTION
of other Members, officers, and employees of the House of
Representatives.
Amending House Resolution 418, Ninetieth Congress, to continue the Committee
" '(d) (1) No resolution, report, recommendation, or advisory
on Standards of Official Conduct as a permanent standing committee of the
opinion relating to the official conduct of a Member, officer, or
House of Representatives, and for other purposes.
employee of the House of Representatives shall be made, and no
Resolved, That House Resolution 418, Ninetieth Congress, is
investigation of such conduct shall be undertaken, unless approved
amended to read as follows:
by the affirmative vote of not less than seven members of the
committee.
"That clause 1 of Rule X of the Rules of the House of Represent-
atives is amended—
" '(2) Except in the case of an investigation undertaken by the
"(1) by redesignating paragraphs (r), (s), and (t) as paragraphs
committee on its own initiative, the committee may undertake an
(s), (t), and (u), respectively; and
investigation relating to the official conduct of an individual Member,
"(2) by inserting immediately after paragraph (q) the following
officer, or employee of the House of Representatives only (A) upon
new paragraph:
receipt of a complaint, in writing and under oath, made by or sub-
"(r) Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, to consist of
mitted to a Member of the House of Representatives and transmitted
twelve Members as follows: six members of the majority party and
to the committee by such Member, or (B) upon receipt of a complaint,
six members of the minority party.'
in writing and under oath, directly from an individual not a Member
"SEC. 2. Rule XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives
of the House of Representatives if the committee finds that such
is amended—
complaint has been submitted by such individual to not less than
"(1) by redesignating clauses 18 through 30 as clauses 19
three Members of the House of Representatives who have refused,
through 31, respectively;
in writing, to transmit such complaint to the committee.
"
"(2) by inserting immediately after clause 17 the following
'(3) No investigation shall be undertaken of any alleged violation
new clause:
of a law, rule, regulation, or standard of conduct not in effect at the
" '18. Committee on Standards of Official Conduct.
time of the alleged violation.
" '(a) Measures relating to the Code of Official Conduct.
" '(4) A member of the committee shall be ineligible to participate,
" '(b) Measures relating to financial disclosure by Members,
as a member of the committee, in any committee proceeding relating
officers, and employees of the House of Representatives.
to his official conduct. In any case in which a member of the committee
" '(c) The committee is authorized-
is ineligible to act as a member of the committee under the preceding
'(1) to recommend to the House of Representatives, from
sentence, the Speaker of the House of Representatives shall designate
time to time, such legislative or administrative actions as the
a Member of the House of Representatives from the same political
committee may deem appropriate to establish or enforce stand-
party as the ineligible member of the committee to act as a member of
ards of official conduct for Members, officers, and employees of
the committee in any committee proceeding relating to the official
the House of Representatives;
conduct of such ineligible member.
"(2) to investigate, subject to paragraph (d) of this clause,
" '(e) For the purpose of carrying out the foregoing provisions of
any alleged violation, by a Member, officer, or employee of the
this clause, the committee, or any subcommittee thereof, is author-
House of Representatives, of the Code of Official Conduct or of
ized to sit and act at such times and places within the United States,
any law, rule, regulation, or other standard of conduct applicable
whether the House is in session, has recessed, or has adjourned, to
to the conduct of such Member, officer, or employee in the per-
hold such hearings, and to require, by subpena or otherwise, the
formance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities and,
attendance and testimony of such witnesses and the production of
after notice and a hearing, shall recommend to the House of
such books, records, correspondence, memorandums, papers, and docu-
Representatives, by resolution or otherwise, such action as the
ments, as it deems necessary. Subpenas may be issued under the signa-
committee may deem appropriate in the circumstances;
ture of the chairman of the committee or any member of the committee
'(3) to report to the appropriate Federal or State authorities,
designated by him, and may be served by any person designated by
with approval of the House of Representatives, any substantial
such chairman or member.';
evidence of a violation, by a Member, officer, or employee of the
"(3) by inserting immediately before 'the Committee on Vet-
House of Representatives, of any law applicable to the perform-
erans' Affairs' where it appears in clause 22, as SO redesignated
ance of his duties or the discharge of his responsibilities, which
by paragraph (1) of this section, the following: 'the Committee
may have been disclosed in a Committee investigation; and
on Standards of Official Conduct-on resolutions recommending
action by the House of Representatives with respect to an indi-
(30)
32
33
vidual Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representa-
" '8. A Member of the House of Representatives shall retain no one
tives as a result of any investigation by the committee relating
from his clerk hire allowance who does not perform duties commen-
to the official conduct of such Member, officer, or employee of
surate with the compensation he receives.
the House of Representatives;';
"As used in this Code of Official Conduct of the House of Rep-
"(4) by striking out 'paragraph 26' in clause 27 (j), as SO re-
resentatives—
designated by paragraph (1) of this section, and inserting in lieu
"(a) the terms "Member" and "Member of the House of
thereof 'clause 27'; and
Representatives" include the Resident Commissioner from
"(5) by inserting immediately after 'Rules,' where it appears
Puerto Rico; and
in clause 31, as SO redesignated by paragraph (1) of this section,
'(b) the term "officer or employee of the House of Represen-
the following: 'on Standards of Official Conduct,'.
tatives" means any individual whose compensation is disbursed
"SEC. 3. Clause 2 of Rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Rep-
by the Clerk of the House of Representatives.
resentatives is amended by striking out 'clause 21' and inserting in
lieu thereof 'clause 22'.
"RULE XLIV
"SEC. 4. (a) The Rules of the House of Representatives are amended
"Financial Disclosure
by adding at the end thereof the following new rules:
"Members, officers, principal assistants to Members and officers,
"RULE XLIII
and professional staff members of committees shall, not later than
April 30, 1969, and by April 30 of each year thereafter, file with the
"Code of Official Conduct
Committee on Standards of Official Conduct a report disclosing
certain financial interests as provided in this Rule. The interest of a
""There is hereby established by and for the House of Repre-
spouse or any other party, if constructively controlled by the person
sentatives the following code of conduct, to be known as the "Code of
reporting, shall be considered to be the same as the interest of the
Official Conduct":
person reporting. The report shall be in two parts as follows:
is '1. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representa-
tives shall conduct himself at all times in a manner which shall reflect
"PART A
creditably on the House of Representatives.
" 2. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representa-
"1. List the name, instrument of ownership, and any position of
tives shall adhere to the spirit and the letter of the Rules of the House
management held in any business entity doing a substantial business
of Representatives and to the Rules of duly constituted committees
with the Federal Government or subject to Federal regulatory
thereof.
agencies, in which the ownership is in excess of $5,000 fair market
" '3. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representa-
value as of the date of filing or from which income of $1,000 or more
tives shall receive no compensation nor shall he permit any compensa-
was derived during the preceding calendar year. Do not list any time
tion to accrue to his beneficial interest from any source, the receipt
or demand deposit in a financial institution, or any debt instrument
of which would occur by virtue of influence improperly exerted from
having a fixed yield unless it is convertible to an equity instrument.
his position in the Congress.
"2. List the name, address, and type of practice of any professional
" '4. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representa-
organization in which the person reporting, or his spouse, is an officer,
tives shall accept no gift of substantial value, directly or indirectly,
director, or partner, or serves in any advisory capacity, from which
from any person, organization, or corporation having a direct interest
income of $1,000 or more was derived during the preceding calendar
in legislation before the Congress.
year.
'5. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of Representa-
'3. List the source of each of the following items received during
tives shall accept no honorarium for a speech, writing for publication,
the preceding calendar year:
or other similar activity, from any person, organization, or corpora-
'(a) Any income for services rendered (other than from the
tion in excess of the usual and customary value for such services.
United States Government) exceeding $5,000.
" '6. A Member of the House of Representatives shall keep his
" '(b) Any capital gain from a single source exceeding $5,000,
campaign funds separate from his personal funds. He shall convert no
other than from the sale of a residence occupied by the person
campaign funds to personal use in excess of reimbursement for legiti-
reporting.
mate and verifiable prior campaign expenditures. He shall expend no
'(c) Reimbursement for expenditures (other than from the
funds from his campaign account not attributable to bona fide cam-
United States Government) exceeding $1,000 in each instance.
paign purposes.
Campaign receipts shall not be included in this report.
7. A Member of the House of Representatives shall treat as
Information filed under Part A shall be maintained by the Com-
campaign contributions all proceeds from testimonial dinners or other
mittee on Standards of Official Conduct and made available at reason-
fund-raising events if the sponsors of such affairs do not give clear
able hours to responsible public inquiry, subject to such regulations as
notice in advance to the donors or participants that the proceeds are
the Committee may prescribe including, but not limited to, regulations
intended for other purposes.
requiring identification by name, occupation, address, and telephone
34
35
number of each person examining information filed under Part A and
Congress. Today, that condition still obtains in the House of Repre-
regulations requiring the committee promptly to notify each Member
sentatives.
of the House of Representatives of each instance of an examination of
Cases of breaches of ethics by Members of the House thus far, if
information filed under Part A by such Member.
they appeared to warrant official attention, have been considered
pursuant to resolutions of censure or expulsion in accordance with the
" 'PART B
constitutional power of each House to prescribe rules for the conduct
of its Members (art. I, sec. 5). These have been handled through
'1. List the fair market value (as of the date of filing) of each item
resolutions offered on the floor or through the creation of select
listed under paragraph 1 of Part A and the income derived therefrom
investigating committees.
during the preceding calendar year.
There have been only three instances of expulsion from the House.
'2. List the amount of income derived from each item listed under
All three occurred during the 37th Congress in the Civil War year of
paragraphs 2 and 3 of Part A.
1861. Resolutions to expel have been submitted on various occasions,
"The information filed under this Part B shall be sealed by the per-
but, except for the three instances, they either failed to receive the
son filing and shall remain sealed unless the Committee on Standards
necessary two-thirds vote or else a resolution of censure was
of Official Conduct, pursuant to its investigative authority, determines
substituted.
by a vote of not less than seven members of the Committee that the
There have been 16 instances of censure by the House, the last
examination of such information is essential in an official investigation
one occurring in 1921. The House has imposed censure against a
by the Committee and promptly notifies the Member concerned of any
Member for (1) unparliamentary language during House proceedings
such determination. The Committee may, by a vote of not less than
against a fellow Member or against the Speaker, or other disorderly
seven members of the Committee, make public any portion of the
conduct; (2) physical assault against another Member for words
information unsealed by the Committee under the preceding sentence
spoken in debate; (3) treasonable words uttered in the course of
and which the Committee deems to be in the public interest.
proceedings; (4) presentation of a resolution construed as insulting to
'Any person required to file a report under this Rule who has no
the House; (5) corrupt acts, that is, sale of appointments to service
interests covered by any of the provisions of this Rule shall file a
academies; distribution of credit mobilier stock to Members below
report so stating.
value in order to influence their actions; (6) abuse of the privilege of
'In any case in which a person required to file a sealed report under
inserting material in the Congressional Record, in this case obscene
Part B of this Rule is no longer required to file such a report, the Com-
material, and (7) presentation of resolutions of an incendiary nature
mittee shall return to such person, or his legal representative, all sealed
purportedly approving "mutiny and murder" in a section of the
reports filed by such person under Part B and remaining in the pos-
country then a subject of negotiation between the United States and
session of the Committee.
Great Britain.
'As used in this Rule-
There has not been a consistent procedure for the examination of
'(1) the term "Members" includes the Resident Commissioner
allegations and charges leading to expulsion or censure.
from Puerto Rico; and
Other situations have involved resolutions declaring a Member's
"
'(2) the term "committees" includes any committee or sub-
seat forfeited because of his acceptance of another Federal office in
committee of the House of Representatives and any joint com-
contravention of article I, section 6, clause 2, of the Constitution.
mittee of Congress, the expenses of which are paid from the
The House has refused, also, to readmit a Member whom it would
contingent fund of the House of Representatives.'
have expelled for commission of an infamous crime but for his resig-
"(b) Paragraph (a) of clause 16 of Rule XI of the Rules of the House
nation (Hinds' "Precedents of the House of Representatives," vol. I,
of Representatives is amended by striking out 'rules, joint rules' and
sec. 464). It is the custom of the House, however, to defer such final
inserting in lieu thereof 'rules and joint rules (other than rules or joint
action as expulsion of Members under criminal charges pending
rules relating to the Code of Official Conduct or relating to financial
disposition of the cases in the court of last resort (Cannon's "Precedents
disclosure by a Member, officer, or employee of the House of Repre-
of the House of Representatives," vol. VI, sec. 238). Neither will the
sentatives)'.
House consider expulsion proceedings for offenses committed by
Members in preceding Congresses (Hinds', supra, vol. II, secs.
SHORT HISTORY OF RULES OF CONDUCT ENFORCEMENT IN THE HOUSE
1284-1285).
OF REPRESENTATIVES
Officers of the House have been removed or suspended by vote of
the House in acting on reports by standing or select committees, or on
(From Legislative Reference Service, Library of Congress)
resolutions offered from the floor (Hinds', supra, vol. I, sec. 287).
Prior to July 24, 1965, when, for the first time in the history of the
On one occasion, the House requested Executive authority to prosecute
its clerk for embezzlement of public funds (Hinds', supra, vol. I, sec.
Congress, the Senate adopted a substitute proposal for Senate Resolu-
287).
tion 388 creating its Select Committee on Standards and Conduct
On another occasion, the House, by resolution, instructed one of its
(110 Congressional Record 16939), no institutionalized means of
standing committees to make an investigation of the conduct of
enforcing standards of conduct had existed in either body of the
certain officers of the House while they were officers of the preceding
House (Hinds', supra, vol. III, sec. 2617).
36
37
As respects employees of the House, of its committees, and of
Members, certain statutory provisions relate to aspects of their
created, or the emoluments whereof shall have been in-
dismissal. Employees of Members are subject to removal at any time
creased during such time;
***
by the Member, with or without cause (2 U.S.C. 92). The services of
(4) Article I, section 9, clause 8-
professional members of committee staffs may be terminated by ma-
No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States;
jority vote of the committee (2 U.S.C. 72a(a)). (Note: Clerks are
and no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under
usually appointed and dismissed by the chairman with the approval
them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of
of the committee.) (Hinds', supra, vol. IV, sec. 4533; Cannon's, supra,
any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind what-
vol. VIII, secs. 2206, 2207). Employees of the Clerk, Sergeant at Arms,
ever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.
Doorkeeper, and Postmaster are subject to removal for violation of
any of the provisions of 2 U.S.C. 85-89 (2 U.S.C. 90). The Committee
(5) Article VI, clause 3-
on House Administration is charged with the duty of inquiring into
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and
the enforcement or violation of sections 85-89 (2 U.S.C. 91).
the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all
Aside from acting under such statutory provisions, the House has
executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States
declined to interfere, for instance, with the Clerk's power of removing
and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirma-
his subordinates (Hinds', supra, vol. I, sec. 249).
tion, to support this Constitution;
***
In addition, Members of Congress, officers, and employees of the
House are subject to various statutes, provisions, and rules relating
B. STATUTES
to ethical conduct listed below, and to the Code of Ethics for Gov-
ernment Service (72 Stat., pt. 2, 812, July 1958).
(1) CODE OF ETHICS (72 Stat., pt. 2, B 12, July 11, 1958).-
In summary, on the whole, there has been no consistent procedure
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate con-
for examining alleged infractions, for recommending changes in or
curring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the follow-
additions to the House rules or regulations respecting ethics, or for
ing Code of Ethics should be adhered to by all Government
initiating enforcement thereof. In some instances, as in regard to the
employees, including officeholders:
enforcement of the Code of Ethics adopted in 1958, no formal pro-
cedure for enforcement has been created.
CODE OF ETHICS FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICE
CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY PROVISIONS AND RULES OF THE
Any person in Government service should:
HOUSE GOVERNING THE CONDUCT AND ACTIVITIES OF MEMBERS
OF CONGRESS
1. Put loyalty to the highest moral principles and to
country above loyalty to persons, party, or Government
(Compiled by the Library of Congress, Legislative Reference Service,
department.
Robert L. Tienken, Legislative Attorney, American Law Division)
2. Uphold the Constitution, laws, and legal regula-
tions of the United States and of all governments therein
and never be a party to their evasion.
A. CONSTITUTION
3. Give a full day's labor for a full day's pay; giving
(1) Article I, section 5, clause 2-
to the performance of his duties his earnest effort and
Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings,
best thought.
punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the
4. Seek to find and employ more efficient and economi-
Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member.
cal ways of getting tasks accomplished.
5. Never discriminate unfairly by the dispensing of
(2) Article I, section 6, clause 1--
special favors or privileges to anyone, whether for re-
They shall in all cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach
muneration, or not; and never accept, for himself, or his
of the Peace, be privileged from arrest during their Attend-
family, favors or benefits under circumstances which
ance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going
might be construed by reasonable persons as influencing
to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or De-
the performance of his governmental duties.
Place. bate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other
6. Make no private promises of any kind binding on
the duties of office, since a Government employee has no
private word which can be binding on public duty.
(3) Article I, section 6, clause 2-
7. Engage in no business with the Government, either
No Senator or Representative shall, during the Time for
directly or indirectly, which is inconsistent with the
which he was elected, be appointed to any civil office under
conscientious performance of his governmental duties.
the Authority of the United States, which shall have been
8. Never use any information coming to him confi-
dentially in the performance of governmental duties as a
means of making private profit.
38
39
9. Expose corruption wherever discovered.
(10) Federal Crop Insurance Act [7 U.S.C. 1514(f)].-Provides
10. Uphold these principles, ever conscious that a
that section 22 of title 41 shall not apply to any crop insurance
public office is a public trust.
agreements made under chapter 36 of title 7, United States Code
(2) Bribery [18 U.S.C. 201(c)].-Soliciting or receiving a bribe for
(insurance by Federal Crop Insurance Corporation against loss of
being influenced: (1) in the performance of any official act, or (2)
crops planted for harvest in 1948 and thereafter).
for the violation of an official duty, or (3) respecting fraud, on the
(11) Commodity Credit Corporation: Interest of Members of Congress
United States; penalty, $20,000 fine or three times the monetary
(15 U.S.C. 714 I).-Provides that section 22 of title 41 shall apply to
equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater, or imprison-
all contracts or agreements by the Commodity Credit Corporation
ment for not more than 15 years, or both, plus possible disqualification
except contracts or agreements of a kind which the corporation may
from holding office.
enter into with farmers participating in a program of the corporation.
(3) 18 U.S.C. 201(g).-Soliciting or receiving anything of value for
(12) U.S. information and educational exchange programs [22 U.S.C.
himself or because of any official act performed or to be performed by
1472 (b)].-Exempts from the provisions of section 22 of title 41,
him; penalty, $10,000 fine, or imprisonment for not more than 2 years,
contracts (including contracts with governmental agencies and inter-
or both.
governmental organizations of which the United States is a member)
(4) Outside compensation for particular services (18 U.S.C. 203 (a)).-
for the carrying out of its functions.
Soliciting or receiving any compensation for services in relation to
(13) Contracts for flood control (33 U.S.C. 702m).-Provides that
any proceeding, contract, claim, controversy, etc., in which the United
contracts with the United States for the acquisition of land by private
States is a party or has a direct or substantial interest, before any
sale or condemnation for flood control purposes as set forth in the
department, agency, court martial, officer or civil or military commis-
statute shall contain a clause as required by 41 U.S.C. 22.
sion; penalty, $10,000 fine and imprisonment for not more than 2
(14) Indian Claims Commission (25 U.S.C. 700).-Prohibits a
years, or both, plus disqualification from holding office.
Senator, Member, or Delegate to Congress from practicing before the
(5) Practice in Court of Claims (18 U.S.C. 204).-Such practice
Commission during his term in office.
forbidden; penalty, $10,000 fine or imprisonment for not more than 2
(15) Specific representation for claims [46 U.S.C. 1223(e)].-Makes
years, or both, plus disqualification from holding office.
it unlawful for any contractor or charterer who holds any contract
(6) Acceptance or solicitation to obtain appointive public office (18
made under the authority of the Merchant Marine Act to employ any
U.S.C. 211).-Receiving as a political contribution or otherwise, any-
Member of Congress as an attorney either with or without compensa-
thing of value for promising use of or using influence to obtain for any
tion.
person an appointive office or place under the United States; penalty,
(16) Use of name by persons practicing before Government departments
$1,000 fine, or imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both.
or agencies (5 U.S.C. 101).-Prohibits any person or firm practicing
(7) Contracts (18 U.S.C. 431).-Prohibits contracts with Govern-
before a Government department or agency from using the name of
ment by Members of Congress; penalty, $3,000 fine, and voidance of
any Member.
such contracts. 18 U.S.C. 433 exempts from the provisions of section
(17) Accounting of foreign local currencies [22 U.S.C. 1754(b)].-
431 contracts by the United States with corporations for the general
Requires committee members and employees to make to the chairman
benefit of the corporation, and contracts entered into under the RFC
of such committee an itemized report showing the amounts and dollar
Act, the Agricultural Adjustment Act, the Federal Farm Loan Act,
equivalents of each foreign currency expended and the amounts of
the Emergency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933, the Farm Credit Act of
dollar expenditures made from appropriated funds in connection with
1933, the Home Owners Loan Act of 1933, the Farmers' Home Admin-
travel outside the United States, together with the purposes of the
istration Act of 1946, the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act.
expenditures including lodging, meals, transportation, and other
(8) Interest of Members of Congress in contracts (41 U.S.C. 22).-
purposes. Committee chairmen prepare consolidated reports of such
Provides that in every contract entered into with the United States,
total expenditures within 60 days of the beginning of each session for
there shall be inserted a provision that no Member shall be admitted
forwarding to the Committee on Appropriations in the Senate, or,
to any share or part of such contract or any benefit to arise thereupon.
respectively, the House Committee on Administration.
Exempted are contracts entered into under the statutes listed in 18
(18) Reports of expenditures as members of American delegations to
U.S.C. 433.
certain international conferences (22 U.S.C. 276c-1).-Requires reports
(9) Commodity Credit Corporation: Insurance of Cotton [7 U.S.C.
of expenditures by Members who are delegates to: the Interparlia-
1383(a), 1386].-Section 1383(a) authorizes the Commodity Credit
mentary Union, the NATO Parliamentarian's Conference, the Canada-
Corporation to place insurance of every nature taken out by it on
United States Interparliamentary Group, the Mexico-United States
cotton, with insurance agents who are bona fide residents of and
Interparliamentary Group, or any similar interparliamentary group
doing business in the State where the cotton is warehoused. Section
of which the United States is a member. Such reports to be filed with
1386 provides that section 22 of title 41, and sections 431 and 433
the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations and House Foreign
of title 18 shall be applicable to loans or payments made under
Affairs Committee, respectively. Such chairmen report respective con-
section 1383(a).
solidated statements within 60 days of the beginning of each session.
40
41
The Senate report is filed with the Senate Appropriations Committee,
(28) Soliciting or receiving political contributions in a Federal
the House report with the House Administration Committee.
building (18 U.S.C. 603).-Prohibited by persons mentioned in 18
(19) Deductions of pay for absence from Congress (2 U.S.C. 39).-
U.S.C. 602; penalty, fine of not more than $5,000 or imprisonment
Provides for deductions from the monthly salaries of Members for
for not more than 3 years, or both.
each day of absence from the Senate or House unless the reason
(29) Solicitation of political contributions from persons on relief (18
assigned is illness of the Member or his family.
U.S.C. 604).-Solicitation or receipt of assessments, contributions,
(20) Deductions for delinquent indebtedness (2 U.S.C. 40a).-Pro-
etc., for political purposes from persons known by solicitor to be
vides for deductions from any salary, mileage, or expense money due
receiving benefits or compensation provided by a Federal act appro-
any Member for any delinquent indebtedness owed by a Member to
priating funds for work relief, or relief purposes, is punishable by fine
the Senate or House.
of not more than $1,000, or imprisonment of not more than 1 year,
(21) Employment by Members of clerks in Washington, D.C., or
or both.
in home district, Only (H. Res. 294, 88th Cong., 110 Cong. Rec. 19710-
(30) Solicitation of political contributions from corporations or labor
19711; H. Res. 7, 89th Cong., 111 Cong. Rec. 21; made permanent law,
unions (18 U.S.C. 610).-Prohibits solicitation or receipt from na-
79 Stat. 281, P.L. 89-90, July 27, 1965).-Provides that no person
tional banks, corporations, and labor unions, of political contributions
employed by a Member shall be paid from any clerk hire allowance
for use in any primary, convention, caucus, or general election in-
if such person does not perform the services for which he receives
volving Federal office. Penalty for such conduct-fine of not more
such compensation in the offices of such Member in Washington,
than $1,000, or imprisonment of not more than 1 year, or both; and
D.C., or in the State or the district which such Member represents.
if violation is willful, fine of not more than $10,000 or imprisonment
(22) Franking privilege.-Each Member may send under frank,
of not more than 2 years, or both.
official business mail (39 U.S.C. 4161), public documents (39 U.S.C.
(31) Soliciting political contributions from persons or firms having
4162), the Congressional Record (39 U.S.C. 4163), and seeds and
contracts with the United States (18 U.S.C. 1).-Penalty for such
reports from the Department of Agriculture (39 U.S.C. 4164), only.
conduct, fine of not more than $5,000, or imprisonment for not more
(23) Academy appointments.-Each Member of the House is
than 5 years, or both.
limited to Academy appointments from his own congressional district
(32) Paying either for registration or voting in Federal primaries and
(10 U.S.C. 4342, Military Academy) (10 U.S.C. 6958, Naval Academy)
elections [Voting Rights Act, 1965, 79 Stat. 443, sec. 11(c)].-Prohibits
(10 U S.C. 9342, Air Force Academy).
paying or offering to paymeither for registration or voting in Federal
(24) Filing of accounts under Corrupt Practices Act (2 U.S.C. 246).-
primaries and elections. Penalty is fine of not more than $10,000, or
Requires filing by each candidate for Senate and House, a list of
imprisonment of not more than 5 years, or both.
contributions received by him, a list of campaign expenditures, with
designated exceptions, a statement of every promise made by him or
C. RULES
any person for him relative to appointment of persons to any public or
(a) House of Representatives
private employment, for the purpose of securing support in- his
(1) Applicability of "Jefferson's Manual"-House Rule XIII.-
candidacy.
(25) Limitations on campaign expenditures (2 U.S.C. 248).-Limits
Provides that rules of parliamentary practice comprised in "Jefferson's
campaign expenditures to amounts prescribed by State laws and by
Manual" shall govern the House in all cases to which they are appli-
cable, and in which they are not inconsistent with the standing rules
Corrupt Practices Act. Sets forth exceptions regarding items of
and orders of the House.
expenditure.
(2) Disqualification in voting-Rule VI I, section 1.-Provides that
(26) Promises or pledges by candidate (2 U.S.C. 249).-Prohibits
a Member shall not vote on a question where he has a direct personal
candidates for election to Congress from promising or pledging directly
or pecuniary interest. See also "Jefferson's Manual" ("House Rules
or indirectly, the appointment or use of his influence or support for
Manual", par. 376).
the appointment of any person to any public or private employment,
(3) Speaker shall preserve order and decorum-Rule I, section 2.
for the purpose of procuring support in his candidacy; penalties,
(4) Decorum and debate-Rule XIV.-
2 U.S.C. 252-provides fine of not more than $1,000 or imprisonment
for not more than 1 year, or both, for violations of the above provisions,
Section 1: Obtaining the floor and method of address ("confine
and a fine of not more than $10,000 and imprisonment for not more
himself to the question under debate, avoiding personality").
than 2 years for willful violations. See also 18 U.S.C. 599 as to
Section 4: Call to order of a Member on his transgressing the
penalty for promises of appointment by a candidate.
rules during sessions.
(27) Solicitation or receipt of political contributions by a Member or
Section 5: Words taken down if a Member is called to order.
a candidate from Federal employees (18 U.S.C. 602).-Such solicitation
Section 7: Prohibition on exiting while Speaker is putting the
or receipt is punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000, or by
question; prohibition on passing between a Member who has the
imprisonment for not more than 3 years, or both.
floor and the Chair while the Member is speaking; prohibition
against wearing a hat or smoking while on the floor (as respects
42
43
movement while the House is telling, see "Jefferson's Manual"
Section 3: No offensive reference to any State.
["House Manual", par. 506]).
Sections 4 and 5: Procedure for calling a Senator to order if he
Section 8: Prohibition against introducing to the House or
transgresses the rules of the Senate.
calling attention of the House, during a session, to people in the
Section 7: Prohibition against introducing people in the galleries
galleries.
or calling attention to them.
(5) Prohibition against speaking impertinently, or beside the ques-
(3) Procedure for conducting executive sessions.-Rule XXXVI.-
tion, superfluously or tediously-("Jefferson's Manual," see "House
Section 3: Secrecy of communications from the President.
Manual," par. 359).
Section 4: Expulsion for disclosure of secret proceedings.
(6) Prohibition against use of indecent language against the pro-
ceedings of the House; no reflections on prior determinations, unless a
motion to rescind is intended ("Jefferson's Manual," see "House
Manual," par. 360).
(7) Prohibition against mentioning Member by name, or reviling,
nipping or using unmannerly words against him ("Jefferson's Manual,"
see "House Manual," par. 361).
(8) No arraigning the motives of those proposing a measure ("Jeffer-
son's Manual,' par. 361).
(9) No disturbing another Member in his speech by hissing, cough-
ing, spitting, speaking or whispering to another, etc. ("Jefferson's
Manual," see "House Manual," par. 364).
(10) Requiring a Member to withdraw where he has persisted
despite repeated calls to order ("Jefferson's Manual," see "House
Manual," par. 366).
(11) No criticism of the Senate ("Jefferson's Manual," see "House
Manual;" par. 371), nor personal abuse, innuendo or ridicule of the
President ("Jefferson's Manual," see "House Manual," par. 370).
(12) No Member to be present when a bill or any business concerning
himself is debating, although he may be heard in certain instances
("Jefferson's Manual," see "House Manual," par. 375).
(13) Proceedinge against a Member by the House, not by a com-
mittee ("Jefferson's Manual," see "House Manual," par. 321).
(14) Rule on questions of privilege-House Rule IX.
(15) Absence of privilege for speeches made outside the House
("Jefferson's Manual," see "House Manual," par. 302).
(16) Punishment by House of a Member for things of which the
House has cognizance ("Jefferson's Manual," see "House Manual,"
par. 303-307).
(NoTE.-On January 31, 1963, the House restricted travel by
members of the House Committee on Agriculture, Banking and Cur-
rency, Education and Labor, and Judiciary, to the United States,
but the Rules Committee has permitted specific requests for members
of such committees to attend specific functions abroad; see Congres-
sional Quarterly, week of April 19, 1963, No. 16, p. 631.)
(b) Senate
(1) Self-disqualification in Voting-Rule XII, section 2.-Requires
statement of reasons for declining to vote. Provides for Senate per-
mission to excuse a Senator from voting.
(2) Debates and decorum.-Rule XIX.-
Section 1: Form of address and rule on interruption.
Section 2: No imputation of unworthy motive or conduct to
another Senator.
COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT
OUTSIDE
MEMBERS
STUDY OF
PRIOR WORK
COORDINATE
PRIOR AND
WITNESS
TESTIMONY
STATES AND
BY SELECT
WITH SENATE
PENDING
TESTIMONY
OTHER CODES
COMMITTEE
COMMITTEE
LEGISLATION
SOURCE MATERIALS
COMMITTEE DELIBERATES AND DRAFTS REPORTS.
H. RES. 418 DIRECTS RECOMMENDING "SUCH CHANGES IN
LAWS, RULES AND REGULATIONS AS NECESSARY TO..."
ENFORCE
ESTABLISH
STANDARDS OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT
RECOMMEND INVESTIGATIVE JURISDICTION
RECOMMEND LEGISLATIVE JURISDICTION,
OR OTHERWISE DEFINE STANDARDS AS THE 304 OF ALL LINS.
THIS MUST BE CONSIDERED IN TWO ASPECTS:
RULES, REGULATIONS, AND CODE OF ETHICS THAT AFFECT
MEMBERS OF THE HDJSE. INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO...
INVESTIGATIVE JURISDICTION ONLY
STATUTORY PROVISIONS
EXISTING
PROPOSED
CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS:
Code of Ethics (T2 Stat. PL. 2. 812, 7/11/58)
ARTICLE L. SECTION 5. CLAUSE 2
Bribery and Other Conflicts (18 U.S.C. 201, 203, 204, 211,
SECTION 6, CLAUSES AND 2
431, 433, 602. 603, 604, 610. 611)
SECTION 9, CLATSE 8
Contracts Interest (4) U.S.C. 22: 22 U.S.C. 1472(b);
ARTICLE VI
CLAUSE 3
33 U.S.C. 702m)
TOGETHER
Franking Privilege (39 U.S.C. 4161-4164)
THESE CONSTITUTE
Employment of Clerks (P.L. 89-90. 7/27/65)
EXISTING
Deductions--Abxence and Debt (2 U.S.C. 39 40a)
RULES OF THE HOUSE:
Counterpart--Forelyn Accounting [22 U.S.C. 1754(b),
"STANDARDS
22 U.S.C. 276(n)-1)
RULE XIII; RULE VIII SECT. 1; RULE I SMCT. 2,
RULE AIV SECTS. 4,
Corrupt Practices, etc. (2 D.S.C. 246, 248 249)
PARAGRAPHS 302, 303-307, 321, 359-361, 363, 362,
OF OFFICIAL
366, 370, yn, 375
Paying for Registration or Voting [79 Stat. 443, 111(e)]
RULE IX
CONDUCT
Agency Connections [CCC-T D.S.C. 1383(a): 1306]--[FCIA-
7 U.S.C. 15)4(f) 05 U.S.C. 7140)
Indian Claims Commission-125 U.S.C. 70o)
Representation Claims [46 U.S.C. 1223(e)
PROPOSED RULE CHANGES
Use of Name (5 U.S.C. 101)
INVESTIGATION
CHARGES OF VIOLATIONS OF ETHICS,
CHARGES OF SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS OF LAW
HOUSE RULES, AND CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS
COMMITTEE EVALUATES AND
MOVES TO DISMISS, INVESTIGATE
OR SEPARATE ALLEGATION INTO
COMPONENTS AND REFER
APPROPRIATE PORTIONS
SUBCOMMITTEE OF CHAIRMAN AND
VICE CHALIMAN, NEET WITH SUSJECT,
OTHERWISE ASSESS THE ALLEGATION
AND RECOMMEND TO FULL COMMITTES
ACTION TO BE TAKEN
45
MEMBER MAY
COMMITTEE MAY
PROCESSING OF ALLEGATION AND
ALSO REQUEST
MAKE INQUIRY
FORMAL MOTION COMMITTEE TO
ADVISORY OPINIONS
ON ITS OWN
EVALUATE THE ALLEGATION
ON "ETHICS"
IMIATIVE
MATTERS
PASS RESOLUTION:
PASS RESOLUTION:
1. RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CHARGES
RECOMMENDING DISMISSAL OF CHARGES
2.
RECOMMENDING FORWARDING OF INFORMATION
RECOMMENDING REPRIMAND
DEVELOPED TO APPROPRIATE ENFORCEMENT
3.
RECOMMENDING CENSURE
BRANCH
RECOMMENDING EXPELSION
FINDINGS
FORMAL MEANS AND
FINDINGS
CONDITIONS
ACCEPTANCE OF
ALLEGATIONS
ENFORCEMENT PROCEDURE
COMMENCES HERE
22
R U
PM-VACATIONS SKED S-29
BY RICHARD E. LERNER
WASHINGTON (UPI) -- PRESIDENT FORD GOLFED AS THE GUEST OF AT LEAST
FOUR CORPORATIONS WHEN HE WAS A CONGRESSMAN, ACCORDING TO THE WHITE
FORD
HOUSE, BUT HE QUIT ACCEPTING SUCH HOSPITALITY WHEN HE BECAME VICE
PRESIDENT IN 1973.
PRESS SECRETARY RON NESSEN, IN ANSWER TO QUESTIONS FROM REPORTERS
LIBRARY
TUESDAY, SAID FORD ATTENDED GOLF OUTINGS WHILE A MICHIGAN CONGRESSIMN
AS THE GUEST OF CORPORATE OFFICIALS OF BETHLEHEM STEEL CO., THE
ALUMINUM CORPORATION OF AMERICA, FIRESTONE RUBBER CORP., AND U.S.
STEEL CORP.
NESSEN SAID FORD WOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED THE GOLFING INVITATIONS
"IF HE THOUGHT THERE WAS ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT" AND BELIEVES HE HAS
"LIVED UP TO THE SPIRIT" OF THE 1968 CONGRESSIONAL ETHICS CODE
BANNING ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS OF SUBSTANTIAL VALUE.
"THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT CONSIDER A GOLF GAME TO BE A GIFT OF
SUBSTANTIAL VALUE," NESSEN SAID,
THE CONTROVERSY AROSE LAST WEEK WHEN WILLIAM WHYTE. U.S. STEEL'S
CHIEF WASHINGTON LOBBYIST, DISCLOSED HIS COMPANY TREATED FORD TO
EXPENSE-PAID TRIPS TO ITS LODGE AT PINE VALLEY GOLF CLUB IN NEW
JERSEY IN 1964, 1969 AND 1973.
THE WHITE HOUSE SAID FORD WAS WHYTE'S GUEST FOR WEEKENDS IN 1964
AND 1971.
WHYTE ALSO SAID U.S. STEEL PAID FOR TWO FORD STAYS AT ITS LODGINGS
NEAR DISNEY WORLD IN FLORIDA IN 1972 AND 1974. THE WHITE HOUSE
DECLINED COMMENT ON THAT.
WHYTE, A LONGTIME FRIEND OF FORD'S, IS A REGULAR MEMBER OF THE
PRESIDENT'S GOLFING FOURSOME AT THE BURNING TREE CLUB AT SUBURBAN
BETHESDA, MD.
NESSEN SAID FORD STOPPED ACCEPTING SUCH HOSPITALITY WHEN HE BECAME
VICE PRESIDENT IN 1973.
"AS AN AVID GOLFER, THE PRESIDENT OVER THE YEARS HAS ACCEPTED
INVITATIONS TO PLAY WITH FRIENDS AT DIFFERENT CLUBS AROUND THE
COUNTRY AND HAS INVITED FRIENDS TO PLAY AT HIS CLUB," NESSEN SAID.
NESSEN WAS ASKED WHERE FORD HAD PLAYED.
"I KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, THE FIRESTONE GOLF COURSE, WHICH IS OWNED
BY THE FIRESTONE EMPLOYES. HE HAS PLAYED ON THAT COURSE. I DON'T KNOW
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THAT. I KNOW HE PLAYED ON A COURSE OWNED BY THE
EMPLOYES OF ALCOA, I BELIEVE, AND ANOTHER COURSE, I BELIEVE, IS A
BETHLEHEN STEEL COURSE SOMEUHERE. THESE ARE THREE I KNOW ABOUT."
NESSEN WAS ASKED WHETHER THE COMPANIES PAID LODGING AND FOOD_COSTS
AS IN THE U.S. STEEL CASE. HE SAID: "I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS ANY
LODGING OR FOOD COSTS, OR JUST AN AFTERNOON OF GOLF."
HE WAS ASKED IF FORD HAD PAID HIS TRAVEL EXPENSES TO ANY OF THE
COURSES.
"HE DOESN'T RECALL," NESSEN SAID. "SOME HE PAID FOR, SOME HE WAS
GUEST AND, AS I SAY, SOMETIMES HE WAS THE HOST."
WITHOUT NAMING FORD, CARTER TOOK AN OBVIOUS JAB AT HIM MONDAY IN A
CAMPAIGN SPEECH ATTACKING WASHINGTON POLITICIANS WHO GET "FINANCIAL
SUPPORT FROM LOBBYISTS."
"THEY BELONG TO THE SAME CLUBS, THEY PLAY GOLF ON THE SAME GOLF
COURSES, THEY COMMUNICATE WITH ONE ANOTHER, THEY SUPPORT ONE
ANOTHER," HE SAID.
NESSEN SAID THAT HE HAD READ IN THE NEWSPAPERS THAT CARTER, WHILE
GOVERNOR OF GEORGIA, HAD ACCEPTED FREE RIDES ON A PLANE OWNED BY
THER LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORP. OR THE COCA-COLA CO.
RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
$ 939.
Rule XLIII.
Rule XLIII.
$ 939.
in force since the Forty-third Congress. Discussion of the importance
of Jefferson's Manual as an authority in congressional procedure (VII,
Enization, or corporation having a direct interest in
1020, 1049; VIII, 2501, 2517, 2518, 3330).
legislation before the Congress.
5. A Member, officer, or employee of the House
RULE XLIII.
3 Cynil '68
of Representatives shall accept no honorarium for
CODE OF OFFICIAL CONDUCT.
a speech, writing for publication, or other similar
activity, from any person, organization, or corpora-
There is hereby established by and for the House
tion in excess of the usuaband customary value for
of Representatives the following code of conduct, to
such services.
be known as the 'Code of Official Conduct":
6. A Member of the House of Representatives
8 939. Official con-
1. A Member, officer, or employee
shall keep his campaign funds separate from his
duct of Members,
officers, or
of the House of Representatives shall
personal funds. Unless specifically provided by law,
employees of the
conduct himself at all times in a man-
he shall convert no campaign funds to personal use
House.
ner which shall reflect creditably on
in excess of reimbursement for legitimate and veri-
the House of Representatives:
fiable prior campaign expenditures and he shall
2. A Member, officer, or employee of the House of
expend no funds from his campaign account not
Representatives shall adhere to the spirit and the
attributable to bona fide campaign purposes.
letter of the Rules of the House of Representatives
7. A Member of the House of Representatives
and to the rules of duly constituted committees
shall treat as campaign contributions all proceeds
thereof.
from testimonial dinners or other fund raising
3. A Member, officer, or employee of the House
events if the sponsors of such affairs do not give
of Representatives shall receive no compensation
clear notice in advance to the donors or participants
nor shall he permit any compensation to accrue to
that the proceeds are intended for other purposes.
his beneficial interest from any source, the receipt
8. A Member of the House of Representatives
of which would occur by virtue of influence improp-
shall retain no' one from his clerk hire allowance
erly exerted from his position in the Congress.
who does not perform duties commensurate with
4. A-Member, officer, or employee of the House of
the compensation he receives.
Representatives shall accept no gift of substantial
9.A Member, officer or employee of the House of
value, directly or indirectly, fromany person, orga-
Representatives shall not discharge or refuse to
hire any individual, or otherwise discriminate
[644]
[645]
RULES OF THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
R
# 940.
Rule XLIV.
against any individual with respect to compensa-
10. A ]
tion, terms, conditions, or privileges of employ-
who has ]
ment, because of such individual's race, color,
commissi
religion, sex, or national origin.
or more
As used in this Code of Official Conduct of the
should 1'0
House of Representatives-(a) the terms "Mem-
of each (
ber" and "Member of the House of Representa-
should re
tives" include the Resident Commissioner from
meeting <
Puerto Rico and each Delegate to the House; and
Whole H
(b) the term "officer or employee of the House of
proceedir
Representatives" means any individual whose
sumption
compensation is disbursed by the Clerk of the
to the H
House of Representatives.
This rule was adopted on April 3, 1968 (H. Res. 1099, 90th Cong.).
The jurisdiction of the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct
was also redefined by this resolution. The rule was amended in the 92d
Congress to bring the Delegates from the District of Columbia, Guam
and the Virgin Islands within the definition of "Member" (H. Res. 5,
Jan. 22, 1972, p. 144; H. Res. 1153, Oct. 13, 1972, p. 36021-23). The
rule was further amended in the 94th Congress by adding in clause (6)
the words "Unless specifically provided by law" and by adding clause
(0) (H. Res. 5, Jan. 14, 1975, p. -). Clause (10) was adopted by the
House on April 16, 1975 (H. Res. 46, 94th Cong.).
RULE XLIV
FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE.
Members, officers, principal assistants to Mem-
§ 940. Financial re-
bers and officers, and professional
port disclosing cer-
tain financial
staff members of.committees shall, not
interests.
later than April 30, 1969, and by
April 30 of each year thereafter, file with the Com-
[040]
FORD
LIBRARY
074800
22
R W
PM-VACATIONS SKED 9-29
BY RICHARD E. LERNER
WASHINGTON (UPI) -- PRESIDENT FORD GOLFED AS THE GUEST OF AT LEAST
FOUR CORPORATIONS WHEN HE WAS A CONGRESSMAN, ACCORDING TO THE WHITE
HOUSE, BUT HE QUIT ACCEPTING SUCH HOSPITALITY WHEN HE BECAME VICE
PRESIDENT IN 1973.
PRESS SECRETARY RON NESSEN, IN ANSWER TO QUESTIONS FROM REPORTERS
TUESDAY, SAID FORD ATTENDED GOLF OUTINGS WHILE A MICHIGAN CONGRESSMAN
AS THE GUEST OF CORPORATE OFFICIALS OF BETHLEHEM STEEL CO., THE
ALUMINUM CORPORATION OF AMERICA, FIRESTONE RUBBER CORP., AND U.S.
STEEL CORP.
NESSEN SAID FORD WOULD NOT HAVE ACCEPTED THE GOLFING INVITATIONS
"IF HE THOUGHT THERE WAS ANYTHING WRONG WITH IT" AND BELIEVES HE HAS
"LIVED UP TO THE SPIRIT" OF THE 1968 CONGRESSIONAL ETHICS CODE
BANNING ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS OF SUBSTANTIAL VALUE.
"THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT CONSIDER A GOLF GAME TO BE A GIFT OF
SUBSTANTIAL VALUE," NESSEN SAID.
THE CONTROVERSY AROSE LAST WEEK WHEN WILLIAM WHYTE. U.S. STEEL'S
CHIEF WASHINGTON LOBBYIST, DISCLOSED HIS COMPANY TREATED FORD TO
EXPENSE-PAID TRIPS TO ITS LODGE AT PINE VALLEY GOLF CLUB IN NEW
JERSEY IN 1964, 1969 AND 1973.
THE WHITE HOUSE SAID FORD WAS WHYTE'S GUEST FOR WEEKENDS IN 1964
AND 1971.
WHYTE ALSO SAID U.S. STEEL PAID FOR TWO FORD STAYS AT ITS LODGINGS
NEAR DISNEY WORLD IN FLORIDA IN 1972 AND 1974. THE WHITE HOUSE
DECLINED COMMENT ON THAT.
WHYTE, A LONGTIME FRIEND OF FORD'S, IS A REGULAR MEMBER OF THE
PRESIDENT'S GOLFING FOURSOME AT THE BURNING TREE CLUB AT SUBURBAN
BETHESDA, MD.
NESSEN SAID FORD STOPPED ACCEPTING SUCH HOSPITALITY WHEN HE BECAME
VICE PRESIDENT IN 1973.
"AS AN AVID GOLFER, THE PRESIDENT OVER THE YEARS HAS ACCEPTED
INVITATIONS TO PLAY WITH FRIENDS AT DIFFERENT CLUBS AROUND THE
COUNTRY AND HAS INVITED FRIENDS TO PLAY AT HIS CLUB," NESSEN SAID.
NESSEN WAS ASKED WHERE FORD HAD PLAYED.
"I KNOW, FOR INSTANCE, THE FIRESTONE GOLF COURSE, WHICH IS OWNED
BY THE FIRESTONE EMPLOYES. HE HAS PLAYED ON THAT COURSE. I DON'T KNOW
THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THAT. I KNOW HE PLAYED ON A COURSE OWNED BY THE
EMPLOYES OF ALCOA, I BELIEVE, AND ANOTHER COURSE, I BELIEVE, IS A
BETHLEHEM STEEL COURSE SOMEWHERE. THESE ARE THREE I KNOW ABOUT.
NESSEN WAS ASKED WHETHER THE COMPANIES PAID LODGING AND FOOD. COSTS
AS IN THE U.S. STEEL CASE. HE SAID: "I DON'T KNOW THAT THERE WAS ANY
LODGING OR FOOD COSTS, OR JUST AN AFTERNOON OF GOLF.
HE WAS ASKED IF FORD HAD PAID HIS TRAVEL EXPENSES TO ANY OF THE
COURSES.
"HE DOESN'T RECALL," NESSEN SAID. "SOME HE PAID FOR, SOME HE WAS
GUEST AND, AS I SAY, SOMETIMES HE WAS THE HOST."
WITHOUT NAMING FORD, CARTER TOOK AN OBVIOUS JAB AT HIM MONDAY IN A
CAMPAIGN SPEECH ATTACKING WASHINGTON POLITICIANS WHO GET "FINANCIAL
SUPPORT FROM LOBBYISTS."
"THEY BELONG TO THE SAME CLUBS, THEY PLAY GOLF ON THE SAME GOLF
COURSES, THEY COMMUNICATE WITH ONE ANOTHER, THEY SUPPORT ONE
ANOTHER," HE SAID.
NESSEN SAID THAT HE HAD READ IN THE NEWSPAPERS THAT CARTER, WHILE
GOVERNOR OF GEORGIA, HAD ACCEPTED FREE RIDES ON A PLANE OWNED BY
ITHER LOCKHEED AIRCRAFT CORP. OR THE COCA-COLA CO.
MEMORANDUM
68)
THE WHITE HOUSE
September 29, 1976
WASHINGTON
Mr. President:
Here are golf trips in 1968
June 28, 1968 - Gum Dip Open Tournament at Akron, Ohio
You left at 10:00 a.m. and returned the same evening at 10:30 p.m.
(Firestone supplied Lockheed JetStar for you and other Members of
Congress) Mrs. Ford did not go.
November 9th to 16th - Puerto Vallarta, Jalisco, Mexico
(This was fishing rather than golfing)
Teledyne Ryan furnished plane from Page at National for you
and Mrs. Ford and Cong. and Mrs. Wilson to Puerto Vallarta
and return to Palm Beach. You paid Mrs. Ford's and your air
fare back to Washington from Los Angeles. You also paid your
share of the villa that was rented by the five couples (Wilsons,
Jamesons, Parmas, Kleins, and you). Air fare back was $279.30.
Villa was $271.40.
VORD
LIBIT
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
1969
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976
Trips in 1969
September 22, 1969
You left at 8:00 a.m. from Dulles in Bethlehem plane and went to Grand
Rapids for ROSPATCH meeting. Then left Grand Rapids in same plane to
Bethlehem, Penn. Played golf and had dinner at Saucon Valley Country Club
and returned to National at 10:00 p.m. the same day.
This is all I can find for 1969 - Gum Dip Open was scheduled for August 14,
1969 but you cancelled.
FORD
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
1970
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976
There is only one golf trip in 1970 -
November 8th to 15th, 1970 Tryall - Montego Bay, Jamaica
You and Mrs. Ford left Friendship on Eastern #995 at 10:55 a.m. on Nov. 8th
and returned on Eastern #994 from Montego Bay on Nov. 15th, arriving Friendship
at 8:12 p.m. You paid round-trip fare of $348.00
You also paid your share of the Tryall expenses which was divided between you,
the Markleys, the Whytes, and the Burkes. Your share was $394.37
FORD
LIBRARY
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
971
WASHINGTON
September 29, 1976
Golf trips for 1971
June 8th and 9th, 1971 Kemper Open Tournament
You left National via private plane at 4:30 p.m. on June 8th and
arrived at 5:30 p.m. in Charlotte. You stayed over night at Holiday Inn and
returned on June 9th at 11:00 p.m. by private plane. You were the personal
guest of James Kemper who also invited other Members of Congress.
This is all I can find in 1971
is
FORD
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
September 29, 1976
WASHINGTON
1972
Golf dates in 1972
March 31st, 1972 - Palm Desert, Calif. (You were scheduled to speak for
two or three GOP functions in Southern California, but you and Mrs. Ford
went out a few days early to play golf at Palm Desert with Leon Parma and
some others. GOP Committee paid your plane expense for your return trip
from Washington to San Diego. Leon Parma arranged flight from San Diego
to Palm Desert and back for speaking commitments. You left San Diego via
Western 603 on April 7th for Denver where you spoke for Cong. McKevitt.
You stayed overnight in Denver and returned to Washington via United #166 at
2:45 p.m. on April 8th. File doesn't show where you stayed in Palm Desert
because that was apparently worked out verbally between you and Leon Parma.
May 30th to June 1st, 1972 - Kemper Open Tournament.
Kemper Insurance Co. chartered a Peidmont plane to take you and other Members
of Congress to Charlotte, North Carolina. You stayed at Holiday Inn South
in Charlotte until June 1st at 8:00 a.m. when you returned to Washington
in the same chartered Piedmont plane. You and other Members were guests of
James Kemper.
August 25, 1972 - The day after the GOP Convention in Miami you and some
others along with the Whytes went to Bay Hill, Florida.
I understand
you were all' Bill Whyte's guests, but I don't have the details. You stayed
until Sunday, August 27th when you had to leave for a GOP event in Milwaukee,
Wisc. for Cong. Davis. You drove from Disney World to Orlando where you
took Delta #132 to Chicago and North Central #205 to Milwaukee. GOP
Committee paid for this transportation and also your flight to Grand Rapids
from Milwaukee on North Centra1#984.
November 9th to 19th - Montego Bay, Jamaica.
Nothing came back in this file to me. But Bill Whyte's office says it was
at their expense.
(Actually you spoke at a Boy Scout Luncheon here in Washington on at the
International Club on November 20th - so he may have considered the above
trip a sort of honorarium)
FORD
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
1973
1973
March 29- You and Mrs. Ford left from National Airport 7:25 PM for
Orlando, Florida. Met at airport by Bill Whyte and taken
to Polynesian Village at Disney World.
You were the luncheon speaker on the final day of three-day
meeting of the Public Affairs Committee of the U.S. Chamber
of Commerce.
You left Orlando on April 1 at 2:50 PM.
May 29 - You left from Piedmont at National airport via chartered plane
for Charlotte, N.C. and the Kemper Pro Am. Your accommodations
were at the Holiday Inn South, and the tournament at the
Quail Hollow Country Club. Letter of invitation says you
were the personal guest of James S. Kemper Jr.
You returned to National Airport on May 30 at 8:45 PM via
Piedmont. Ticket was purchased by check.
June 22- Departed Washington early evening for Clementon, New Jersey,
Pine Valley Laurel Ridge Lodge for weekend with the Bill
Whytes, returning on Sunday, June 24. My book does not
show means of transportation, and I seem to recall your
driving there and back.
it.
FORD
MEMORANDUM
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
Mr. President
The following trip was not included in information I sent you yesterday
because it was prior to the date the law was passed in April of 1968.
February 13th to February 20th. Palm Beach Feb. 13th for Lincoln Day speech
Montego Bay Feb. 14th to 18th
NAM meeting (ladies) Feb. 19th Boca Raton
NAM Board meeting - Feb. 20th Boca Raton
You left National on National #105 at 2:55 p.m. on Feb. 13th, Mrs. Ford left
National via NE #85 at 6:30 p.m. and met you in Miami because she didn't
intend to be at the Lincoln Day dinner at which you had to speak.
On Feb. 14th you and Mrs. Ford left Miami via Pan Am #437 for Montego Bay.
The GOP Committee paid for airline Washington to Miami. You paid fare from
Miami to Montego Bay.
Record also shows that you made a prior deposit for accommodations at Tryall
and paid balance when you left.
On Feb. 18th you left Montego Bay in U. S. Steel plane for Boca Raton for
the NAM meetings on Feb. 19th and 20th. You were guest of NAM at Boca Raton
Hotel.
On Feb. 20th you returned to Washington, leaving at 3:00 p.m. from Boca Raton
in U. S. Steel plane.
FORD
AND
EXCENSE
COMMISSION
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
MCMXXXIV
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
OFFICE OF THE
GENERAL COUNSEL
October 27, 1976
BY HAND
Philip W. Buchen, Esq.
Counsel to the President
The White House
Washington, D.C. 20500
Dear Mr. Buchen:
During the course of our telephone conversation on
October 18, 1976, I inquired whether President Ford main-
tained any records or possessed any information relating
to United States Steel Corporation or William G. Whyte and
any payments or other consideration they may have expended
on behalf of the President. During the course of the conver-
sation, I indicated that, if any such information existed,
we would appreciate having access to it to assist the Commission
in connection with its on-going inquiry of United States Steel.
During the October 18 conversation, we also discussed
an October 6, 1976, statement prepared by Mr. Whyte. You
indicated that it would be useful to you if the Commission
would provide you with a copy of the statement for the pur-
pose of determining whether the President has any pertinent
information. At that time, I indicated that it would be
necessary to seek the express approval of the Commission prior
to sending Mr. Whyte's statement to you.
The Commission has considered this matter and authorized
me to make available to you Whyte's statement. Accordingly, I
am enclosing herewith a copy of the statement. I have deleted
from the enclosed copy those portions of the statement which
discuss unrelated matters.
I appreciate your cooperation in this matter. If you have
any questions, please do not hestitate to contact me.
Sincerly yours,
Harvey L. Pott Hs.
Harvey Pitt
General Counsel
Enclosure
FORD
LIBR.
STATEMENT OF WILLIAM G. WHYTE
Before the Securities and Exchange Commission
October 6, 1976
On Wednesday, September 22, 1976, I appeared
before you voluntarily with Mr. Richard M. Hays, Senior
General Attorney of the Company, to give testimony
relating to your inquiry concerning my employer, United
States Steel Corporation. At that time, we produced
documents that you had requested of the Company. As you
know, we appeared and produced the documents on little
more than a day's notice. We did so because I believed
at the time, and I still believe, that the Company and I
should make every effort to cooperate with the Commission
so that this inquiry can be concluded as promptly as
possible on the basis of all relevant facts. It is in
that spirit that I appear here again today on a voluntary
basis.
BERALE 1. FORD
- 9 -
Now, let me turn to other areas of my previous
testimony. The first of these concerns weekends and
longer vacations with President and Mrs. Ford (all before
his Presidency), both at U. S. Steel facilities and
elsewhere. While I touched on most of these trips in my
testimony, I have recalled other trips as well as addi-
tional facts about the trips I did discuss. To avoid
piecemeal disclosure, and the embarrassment to the
President that such partial disclosure might cause, I
have decided to summarize all of the facts that bear on
these trips, even at the risk of repetition.
Pine Valley
As I testified, I recall three visits to the
Laurel Ridge Lodge at the Pine Valley Golf Club in
Clementon, New Jersey. The first occurred in 1964;-
I cannot fix the date any more specifically. In addition
to Congressman and Mrs. Ford, the guests were Senator
and Mrs. Barry Goldwater and General and Mrs Nathan
Twining; I also recall that another U. S. Steel executive,
Mr. Ben Chapple, and his wife were also present.
The second trip to Pine Valley with the Fords
occurred on the weekend of September 19-21, 1969. In
7
addition to Congressman and Mrs. Ford, the guests include
ded Senator and Mrs. Gordon Allott and Mr. Rod Markley,
LIBRARY
- 10 -
Vice President of the Ford Motor Company, and Mrs. Markley.
Also present were Mr. Heath Larry, Vice Chairman of U. S.
Steel, and his wife.
Our third and last trip to Pine Valley with
Congressman Ford occurred on June 22 through 24, 1973. My
recollection is that Mrs. Ford decided not to come at the
last minute. Also present were Senator Goldwater and
Lt. Gen. (Ret.) and Mrs. Quinn.
On each visit to Pine Valley, the party flew
between Philadelphia and Washington by corporate aircraft,
although on the last visit Congressman Ford may have flown
up on a commercial flight (without, I believe, reimburse-
ment by U. S. Steel). With this exception, travel between
Philadelphia and Washington was by corporate aircraft,
and not by automobile (as I indicated in my testimony).
All expenses were assumed by U. S. Steel, with the possible
exception, as I noted in my earlier testimony, of caddie
fees.
ORD
- 11 -
Bay Hill
As I wrote you following my testimony, I now
recall two visits by Congressman and Mrs. Ford to the
Bay Hill facility formerly owned by U. S. Steel, and
sold in 1975.
With respect to the 1972 Bay Hill visit, I now
recall that, following the Miami Beach Republican conven-
tion in late August, the Fords drove up from Miami and
stayed for two nights. Also present were three Ford
children, Mr. and Mrs. Clark MacGregor, Mr. and Mrs.
Markley, and our son. I remember that the entire party
attended Disney World with me on the Saturday of that
weekend. A VIP tour of Disney World was arranged by
Disney people down there and we all assumed at the time
FO
that our tour was free of charge. A month later, however,
- 12 -
I received a bill from Disney World. This bill, and all
other expenses except perhaps caddie fees, were paid by
U. S. Steel. It is my recollection that the party
returned to Washington on Sunday by commercial aircraft,
and that my transportation was reimbursed by the Company.
With respect to the second Ford visit to Bay
Hill, it is my present recollection that this occurred
in 1973 over the weekend from March 31 through April 2,
and not in 1970 as my letter erroneously stated. The
visit was in connection with a meeting at Disney World
of the United States Chamber of Commerce. I was Chairman
of the Public Affairs Committee and Congressman Ford
spoke to that Committee. Expenses at Bay Hill were paid
for by U. S. Steel. The Fords flew down and back on
commercial flights, but U. S. Steel paid the cost of
their transportation on behalf of the Chamber of Commerce.
Rolling Rock
I further recall a trip with then-Congressman
and Mrs. Ford to the Rolling Rock Club in Ligonier,
Pennsylvania. This is not a facility owned by or operated
by. U. S. Steel. My recollection is that this trip occurred
from August 15 to August 21, 1970. We used guest cards
for the club furnished by Buckley Bycrs of Washington,
D.C. I believe that each couple drove up in their own
- 13 -
car. I further recall that each couple paid for its own
room at the club, and that golfing expenses were divided
among us. I may have purchased a few lunches and dinners
for the Fords and was reimbursed by the corporation for
these expenses, and for the cost of my own room and golf.
Caribbean Trips
In my testimony, I referred to four trips to
the Caribbean with the Fords in the 1960's. I now recall
six Caribbean trips, over a span from 1965 to 1972. Let
me summarize the facts of each, as best as I can recon-
struct them.
The first Caribbean trip was to Eleuthera in
1965, from April 18 to April 25. The Whytes, the Fords
and some 29 other couples in a charter-type group stayed
in beach cottages at the Cotton Bay Club. My recollec-
tion is that Mrs. Whyte and I flew down by commercial
aircraft. We shared a cottage with the Fords, and each
couple paid for its fair share of the lodging expenses.
I do not believe that I was reimbursed for my own expenses
by the Company. Both the Fords and we returned to
Washington on a plane owned by another company.
The second trip, also to Eleuthera, occurred in
April 1966. The Fords and the Whytes were joined by
STATES FORD
- 14 -
the Perkins McGuires, and we stayed at the McGuires'
home on the island. Virtually all of the meal expenses
were assumed by the McGuires. I might have paid for
some of Mr. Ford's golf, but find no record of this or
of reimbursement for such expenses. I am sure that Mr.
Ford paid for some of his expenses. We flew down commer-
cially, but we flew back on a U. S. Steel corporate air-
craft. I had wanted to stop over in Freeport to see a
new cement plant constructed by U. S. Steel, and I invited
Mr. Ford to join me. Consequently, a corporate plane
took us from Eleuthera to Freeport for this purpose. We
spent the night in Freeport (where the cost of Mr. Ford's
hotel was probably assumed by U. S. Steel), toured the
plant and returned to Washington on the next day by
corporate plane.
The third Caribbean trip was to Jamaica in
February 1968. Mrs. Whyte and I had gone down to the
Tryall Golf Club, around February 4 or 5. The Fords
joined us from February 13 through February
18. I recall that the cost of accommodations, meals and
golf was shared between us. I do not believe that I was
reimbursed for any of my expenses. I further recall that
both couples flew down commercially. On the trip back,
we stopped off in Boca Raton, Florida for a meeting of
FORD
- 15 -
the Board of Directors of the National Association of
Manufacturers; Mr. Ford was to address the group. For
this reason we flew from Jamaica to Boca Raton on a U. S.
Steel corporate aircraft, and flew back to Washington the
same way. I referred to the Boca Raton trip on page 76
of my testimony.
The fourth Caribbean trip was to Eleuthera
in April 1969, again to the home of the McGuires. This
time, the Fords and Whytes were joined by the MacGregors.
We had no lodging expense. Some incidental expenses for
golf, food and drinks were paid for by me, with reimburse-
ment by the corporation. I am also sure that Mr. Ford
paid for some of his expenses. I believe that travel to
and from Eleuthera on this trip was by corporate aircraft.
Our last two trips with the Fords to the
Caribbean occurred in November of 1970 and 1972, following
the elections in each year. On each occasion we were
joined by the Markleys. In 1972, we were also joined by
Congressman and Mrs. John Jarman. On each occasion, we
stayed at the Tryall Golf Club. I have seen memoranda
from Mr. Markley which make clear that all expenses of
the two trips were shared equally. I do not believe
that I received reimbursement from U. S. Steel for my
- 16 -
expenses. I further recall that commercial transportation
was used by all of us both to and from the island.
Hawaii
In May 1974, then Vice-President Ford and Mrs.
Ford joined Mrs. Whyte and me for golf at the Mauna Kea
Beach Hotel in Hawaii, following an official visit to
Hawaii by the Vice-President during which he spoke at the
national Boy Scout convention, an organization in which
I have long been active. The Fords flew out and back on
Air Force 2. Although I initially paid the hotel bill
for both families (Mr. Ford returned to Washington before
I did), Mr. Ford shortly thereafter paid me an amount to
cover his room and board and certain incidental expenses.
The remaining portion of the bill was reimbursed by
U. S. Steel.
Let me make three further observations about
the trips with the Fords that I have just discussed.
First, as you can perhaps gather, I have spent -
considerable time attempting to reconstruct the facts that
relate to these trips. In doing so, I have confined
myself to overnight trips and have excluded one-day
excursions with the Fords of which there have probably
been many over the course of a more-than-20 year friendship.
- 17 -
Second, while I have done my best to recall all
trips with the Fords of longer than one day, I cannot,
under oath, exclude the possibility that I may have
forgotten one or more.
Finally, you should not take away the impression
that my relationship with Mr. Ford is confined to these
trips. In addition to fairly frequent golf here in
Washington, the Fords and the Whytes have entertained
each other frequently and on a reciprocal basis -- in
our homes and elsewhere.
Let me turn finally to my testimony in response
to questions concerning payments, loans, property,
benefits, or other things of value made or given by
U. S. Steel or U. S. Steel executives to Mr. Ford, his
campaigns, candidates at his behest, or other governmental
officials.
In any event, I
believe that amplification of my previous testimony would
be appropriate:
-- concerning testimony on pages 29 and 32
I am aware that the Company maintains
hotel suites, principally for employees,
but occasionally for guests. I am
specifically aware of one such suite
- 19 -
-- on page 86, to the extent small gifts to
Mr. Ford, Mrs. Ford and their children
are "other things of value," I did on
occasion give such gifts. These gifts,
including birthday and Christmas gifts
and a wedding gift, were modest in
amount and were reciprocated. On some
but not all occasions, I sought reimburse-
ment from U. S. Steel for the cost of
such gifts.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
November 16, 1976
Dear Mr. Pitt:
You have asked by telephone and letter about possible
information or records of the President while he was
a member of Congress related to the subject of those
portions of a statement by William G. Whyte of the
United States Steel Corporation which appear in the
parts of a transcript furnished with your letter of
October 27, 1976.
Mr. Whyte's statements reflect the occasions when he
and the President were together on outings or trips
away from the Washington area, but the President has
no records or information of payments from corporate
funds, if any, for expenses incurred by Mr. Whyte on
those occasions.
The relationship between the Ford family and the Whyte
family was that of a close personal friendship, and
their social and recreational activities together and
exchanges of presents were regarded by the Ford family
as incidents of that relationship, with no awareness
on the part of the Fords that corporate expenditures
may have been involved. Exceptions are the reported
official activities, namely, speaking engagements by
the then Republican Leader of the House of Representa-
tives before the Board of Directors of the National
Association of Manufacturers in 1968, and before the
Public Affairs Committee of the United States Chamber
of Commerce in 1970, and the time when he was asked
to accompany Mr. Whyte on a visit to a new facility
of U. S. Steel Corporation; and these are instances
when Congressman Ford would have expected to have
his expenses paid or reimbursed by the sponsoring
organization, but he has no records of the amounts
involved.
- 2 -
Beyond this, there is no information available here
to explain or amplify on the matters reported to you
by Mr. Whyte.
Sincerely,
Philyie Buchen Buchen
Counsel to the President
Mr. Harvey L. Pitt
General Counsel
Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D. C. 20549