March 24, 1977
Page 8991
Mr. MUSKIE. I am not going to indulge in any extended repetition of what I said the other day, but I must support the amendment of the distinguished Senator from Texas.
He is absolutely right. Normally, I would be impressed by these questions that are suggesting difficulties that would be involved for Members who are in one way or another running afoul or who would run afoul of the restriction the Senator's amendment would propose. But I have lost all sensitivity to those problems because the sensitivity is not reciprocated.
Perhaps the only way you can get the Senate to focus on the realities of unearned income as well as earned is to adopt an amendment of this kind, and I enthusiastically support the amendment.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. President, will the Senator from Texas yield?
Mr. TOWER. I yield to the Senator from Wyoming.
Mr. HANSEN. Mr. President, I, too, shall support this amendment not because I agree at all with what the result of the amendment, if it were to become law, would be, but rather because, as was expressed by the Senator from Maine, it does clearly point up the hypocrisy of what we are doing here.
I supported the Senator from Maine, as did some 33 or 34 others in this body. For reasons that I do not understand, being on the minority side, we did not do too well that afternoon, as I remember. But, at least, I would like to assure my friend from Texas if he will stay hitched, the Senator from Maine and I will assure him there will be three votes for it.
Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I must say to the distinguished Senator from Texas that he achieved a level of eloquence that matched the eloquence of the Senator from Maine the other day, and I have never seen the Senator so sincere about an amendment before in my life. If there is no objection, I will accept the amendment.
Mr. TOWER. Good. [Laughter.]
Mr. NELSON. I just want to see how many people here wanted to kill the code of conduct.
Let me point out—
Mr. TOWER. Is there objection? There does not appear to be any objection.
Mr. NELSON. I think I will move to table it.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that title 18, section 431, respecting contracts with Members of Congress, and section 433 of title 18 of the United States Code be printed in the RECORD.
They prohibit payments to Members of Congress based upon contracts with the Government, but they make exceptions for the Reconstruction Finance Corporation Act, the Agricultural Adjustment Act; the Federal Farm Loan Act, the Emergency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933, the Farm Credit Act of 1933, the Homeowners Loan Act of 1933, the Farm Home Administration Act of 1948, the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act or as to crop insurance agreements or contracts or agreements of the kind which the Secretary of Agriculture may enter into with farmers.
I ask unanimous consent that both of those sections be printed in whole in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the sections were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:
TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE § 431. Contracts by Member of Congress.
Whoever, being a Member of or Delegate to Congress, or a Resident Commissioner, either before or after he has qualified, directly or indirectly, himself, or by any other person in trust for him, or for his use or benefit, or on his account, undertakes, executes, holds, or enjoys, in whole or in part, any contract or agreement, made or entered into in behalf of the United States or any agency thereof, by any officer or person authorized to make contracts on its behalf, shall be fined not more than $3,000.
All contracts or agreements made in violation of this section shall be void; and whenever any sum of money is advanced by the United States or any agency thereof, in consideration of any such contract or agreement, it shall forthwith be repaid; and in case of failure or refusal to repay the same when demanded by the proper officer of the department or agency under whose authority such contract or agreement shall have been made or entered into, suit shall at once be brought against the person so failing or refusing and his sureties for the recovery of the money so advanced. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 702; Oct. 31, 1951, ch. 655, § 19, 65 Stat. 717.)
.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Reviser's Note.— Based on title 18, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 204 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 114,35 Stat. 1109) .
Word "agency" was inserted in three places to eliminate any ambiguity as to scope of section. (See definition of department or agency under section 6 of this title.)
Minor changes were made in phraseology.
AMENDMENTS
1951— Act Oct. 31, 1951, struck out ": exceptions", following "Congress" in catch line of section.
CROSS REFERENCES
Contracts not affected by this section, see section 433 of this title.
Counterfeiting and forgery of contracts, see section 495 of this title.
Interest in contracts with government prohibited, see section 22 of title 41, Public Contracts.
Loans or payments made under Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938 as not affected by this section, see section 1386 of title 7, Agriculture.
SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS
This section is referred to in section 433 of this title; title 10 section 219; title 15 section 714m; title 22 section 2676.
§ 433. Exemptions with respect to certain contracts.
Sections 431 and 432 of this title shall not extend to any contract or agreement made or entered into, or accepted by any incorporated company for the general benefit of such corporation; nor to the purchase or sale of bills of exchange or other property where the same are ready for delivery and payment therefor is made at the time of making or entering into the contract or agreement. Nor shall the provisions of such sections apply to advances, loans, discounts, purchase or repurchase agreements, extensions, or renewals thereof, or acceptances, releases or substitutions of security therefor or other contracts or agreements made or entered into under the Reconstruction Finance Corporation Act, the Agricultural Adjustment Act. the Federal Farm Loan Act, the Emergency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933, the Farm Credit Act of 1933, or the Home Owners Loan Act of 1933,the Farmers' Home Administration Act of 1946, the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act, or to crop insurance agreements or contracts or agreements of a kind which the Secretary of Agriculture may enter into with farmers.
Any exemption permitted by this section shall be made a matter of public record. (June 25, 1948, ch. 645, 62 Stat. 703; Oct. 4, 1961, Pub. L. 87353, § 3(o), 75 Stat. 774.)
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
Reviser's Note.—Based on section 1514(f) of title 7, U.S.C. 1940 ed., Agriculture; sections 264w, 598, 1188d(e), 1441(e) 1467(d) of title 12 U.S.C. 1940 ed., Banks and Banking; section 616(e) of title 15, U.S.C., 1940 ed., Commerce and Trade; title 18, U.S.C. 1940 ed., § 206 (Mar. 4, 1909, ch. 321, § 116, 35 Stat. 1109; Dec. 23, 1913, ch. 6, § 22(j), as added June 19, 1934, ch. 663, § 3, 48 Stat. 1107; Jan. 22, 1932, ch, 8, § 16(c), 47 Stat. 12; July 22, 1932, ch. 522, § 21, 47 Stat. 738; June 13, 1933, ch. 64, § 8, 48 Stet. 135; June 16, 1933. ch. 98, § 64, 48 Stat. 268, 269; Jan. 25, 1934. ch. 5, 48 Stat. 337; Jan. 31, 1934, ch. 7, § 13, 48 Stat. 347; June 27, 1934, ch. 847, title V, § 510, 58 Stat. 1264; May 28, 1935, ch. 150, 11 20, 21, 49 Stat. 298; Aug. 23. 1935, ch. 614, § 101, 48 Stat. 703; Aug. 20, 1937, ch. 821, 50 Stat. 838, Feb. 10, 1938, ch. 30, title V, § 514, 52 Stat. 77).
These sections were consolidated with such changes of phraseology as were necessary to effect consolidation. Said section 206 of title 18, U.S.C. 1940 ed., was the principal source of this section, but the enumeration of the kinds of commitments exempted was drawn from the various sections of said title 12 set forth above. The reference to crop insurance agreements is drawn from section 1514(f) of Title 7, Agriculture.
The applicability provisions of the sections here consolidated were unclear and of doubtful value. As revised the section preserves everything of value without change of substance.
References to the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act and the Farmers' Home Administrative Act of 1946 were included in this revised section notwithstanding the omission (and consequent repeal) of former subsection (d) of section 52 of the said Bankhead-Jones Act (1937) (Title 7, U.S.C., 1940 ed., § 1026) in the amendment of said section 52 of such Act by section 3 of the said Farmers' Home Administration Act of 1946 (August 14, 1946, ch. 964, 60 Stat. 1062). The essential nature of the transactions under the several acts would render inconsistent any attempt to include some and exclude others.
REFERENCES IN TEXT
The popular name acts referred to in the text have been classified to the Code as follows:
Reconstruction Finance Corporation Act.—Sections 601, 603, 605, 606, 807, 608, 609, and 611 of Title 15, Commerce and Trade.
Agriculture Adjustment Act. —Sections 601604, 607, 608, 608a, 608b, 608c, 608d, 608e—1, 608f—812, 613, 614619, 620, 623, and 624 of Title 7, Agriculture.
Federal Farm Loan Act—Sections 641, 642, 651, 656, 658664, 672, 673678, 691697, 701, 711723, 731734, 741744, 745747, 751757, 761, 771, 772, 781, 791, 801808, 811824, 831, 841844, 851857, 881864, 871886, 891899, 901903, 911915, 921, 931, 932, 933, 941943. 951953, 961963, 964967, 971973, 991, 992, 993, 1011, 1012, 10211023, 10241026, 10311033, 10411045, 10511053, 1061, 1072, 1081, 10911095, 1101, 1111, and 1129 of Title 12, Banks and Banking.
Emergency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933.—Sections 347, 462b, 636, 723, 771, 781, 810, 823 note, 992, 993, and 10161019 of Title 12, Banks and Banking.
Farm Credit Act of 1933.—Sections 639, 640, 659, 674, 677a, 694, 723, 744a, 771, 781, 791, 874, 876, 878880, 884, 952, 964, 971, 972, 992, 10161018, 1022, 1031, 1131c1131e, 1131f, 1131g, 1131h, 11311, 11341134m, 11381138c, 1138e, 1141c, 1141d, 1141e, 1141f, 1141j, 1148a, and 1151a of Title 12, Banks and Banking, and section 610 of Title 7, Agriculture.
Home Owners' Loan Act of 1933.—Sections 1424, 14611463, 14641466, and 1468 of Title 12, Banks and Banking.
Farmers' Home Administration Act of 1946.Sections 1001, 1001 notes, 10021005d, 1007, 1008, 1009, 1015, 1015 note, 10161025, and 10271031 of Title 7, Agriculture, sections 371, and 1702 note of Title 12, Banks and Banking, and section 82h of Title 31, Money and Finance.
Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act.—Sections 10001005d, 1006c, 1006d, 1007, 10081012, 10141025, and 10271029 of Title 7, Agriculture.
AMENDMENTS
1961—Pub. L. 87353 struck out "the Federal Farm Mortgage Corporation Act," following "the Emergency Farm Mortgage Act of 1933,".
ABOLITION OF HOME OWNERS' LOAN CORPORATION
The Home Owners' Loan Corporation, which was created by the Home Owners' Loan Act of 1933, referred to in this section, was dissolved and abolished by act June 30, 1953, ch. 170, § 21, 67 Stat. 126, set out in note under section 1463 of Title 12, Banks and Banking.
ABOLITION OF RECONSTRUCTION FINANCE CORPORATION
The Reconstruction Finance Corporation which was created by the Reconstruction Finance Corporation Act, referred to in this section, was abolished by section 6(a) of 1955 Reorg. Plan No. 1, eff. June 30, 1957, 22 F.R 4633, 71 Stat. 647, set out in the Appendix to Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
CROSS REFERENCES
Exemptions from requirement of express conditions in contracts involving interest of Member of Congress, see section 22 of Title 41, Public Contracts.
Financial control of government corporations, see chapter 14 of Title 31, Money and Finance.
Secret Service, detection and arrest of violators, see section 3056 of this title.
SECTION REFERRED TO IN OTHER SECTIONS
This section is referred to in section 3056 of this title; title 12 section 209.
Mr. NELSON. I intend to move to table the amendment of the Senator from Texas.
Does anybody wish to have time or is the Senator prepared to yield back the time?
Mr. TOWER. I will yield it back in just a moment.
Again I want to say in all seriousness that a lot of questions have been raised about the scope of this. The scope is admittedly very broad indeed. We got a lot of levity and a lot of fun over this amendment, but really is it any laughing matter if we purport to establish standards of ethical conduct for ourselves and tell the public this is what we have done, when a number of us profit from enterprises that are impacted by legislation we pass? It occurs to me if one form of income from a private sector of this economy is evil, all forms should be.
No, I do not think this amendment is really good, but I do not think any limitation on income is good. I think full disclosure is enough, and let the people decide. We are taking the decision making process away from the people, that is what we are doing.
Why not full disclosure and let the people decide? But if we are going to limit income and say we have removed potential corrupting influences from the Senate, let us be honest about it. We have been patently dishonest to this moment when we say that one kind of income is corrupting and, therefore, we removed it; it does not affect many people.
I think the Senator from Maine properly raised the possibility this may be a rich man's body one of these days. It is called an exclusive club, and it is going to get even more exclusive, and we are going to find it more difficult by virtue of proscriptions on income to get people to serve in the Senate.
There is no difference between income in the sense that if it comes from the same source it is incorruptible or corruptible; it is in terms of the form in which you get it.
I say we are being hypocrites. We are being dishonest if we suggest we removed every potential for corruption of the Senate by removing one type of income. When a man's pocketbook can be vastly more influenced by a vote he casts in the Senate on a matter from which he derives a regular earning than a vote he casts on a matter in which some association he has spoken to has an interest, I think we are being dishonest.
Why put a $1,000 limit? Does that mean Senators can be bought for $2,000 but they cannot be bought for $1,000? What does that mean? What is the going price for a Senator? Or if indeed getting honoraria from 25 different organizations is more corrupting than getting it from 8 different organizations, what kind of sense does that make? It does not make any sense; it does not make any at all.
So why do we not confess what we are doing here in engaging in some PR gimmickry — that is what we are doing. We are not really setting a rigid ethical standard for the Senate to follow, because you can still go on with your real estate deals, fellows, you can still get involved in some promotional "sweetheart" deals.
Some of your constituents can tell you and say they have a little promotional scheme; "Put in $500, we will put you down and we will make it $10,000 in 6 months." You can do that, that is ethical, by definition it is ethical, by virtue of what we do here.
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? The Senator might be interested to know the other evening after I returned to my office after that overwhelming vote against my amendment I was advised by my staff I had received several invitations from colleges to visit their campuses and to lecture on the new Senate code of ethics.
Mr. TOWER. New Senate what?
Mr. MUSKIE. To lecture on the new Senate code of ethics.
It seems to me my answer has got to be that next year, if I have already earned $8,600 from honoraria, that accepting their invitation will be unethical, but if I have not yet reached that ceiling, I can ethically accent their invitation.
That is the ridiculousness of the situation in which we have been put, and I cannot imagine an argument against the Senator's amendment which would be more ridiculous than the implications of what we have already voted on in the Senate.