Goodlatte Statement at Markup of H. Res. 111

Washington, D.C. – House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) today delivered the following remarks during the House Judiciary Committee’s markup of H. Res. 111. Chairman Goodlatte: On February 9th, Representative Nadler introduced this resolution of inquiry requesting that the Attorney General transmit documents to the House of Representatives relating to the financial practices of the President.  Pursuant to Rule 13 of the Rules of the House of Representatives, this Committee must act on this resolution within 14 legislative days of its introduction or we could be discharged from our referral of the resolution.  Accordingly, we have scheduled the resolution for markup today—our last scheduled markup before the 14-day window expires—in order to preserve the Judiciary Committee’s referral. I understand that some have accused us of trying to bury this resolution by scheduling it for markup today.  Far from it.  By scheduling this resolution for consideration in Committee, we are merely following what has been the practice in the House for the last 30 years regardless of which party has been in control. Over the last thirty years, 71 resolutions of inquiry have been introduced in the House.  Of those 71 only two were considered on the House floor, but even those two resolutions were marked up in committee. On the merits of the resolution, I have moved that the Committee report the resolution unfavorably to the House, because I believe that this resolution is unnecessary, premature, and not the best way for this Committee or the House to conduct oversight over the issues covered by the resolution. At the last meeting of the Committee, we adopted the Committee’s oversight plan.  In that plan the Committee stated that it will “conduct oversight into allegations of misconduct by Executive Branch officials [and] continue to conduct oversight into allegations of leaks of classified information as well as allegations of improper interference with our democratic institutions or efforts to improperly or illegally interfere with our elections.”  The Committee also committed to “investigate any threat to independence or efficacy of the Office of Government Ethics.”  In other words, the Committee has committed itself to conduct robust and thorough oversight of the Executive Branch. In fact, the Committee has already taken action to address some of the issues raised in the resolution.  For instance, Chairman Chaffetz and I have asked the Justice Department’s Inspector General to examine the allegations of mishandling of classified information.  I have also requested a briefing from DOJ regarding Russia’s alleged interference in the U.S. election and any potential ties to President Trump’s campaign. Having not received a briefing on this matter, I plan to send, along with any willing members of this Committee, a letter requesting that the Attorney General proceed with investigations into any criminal conduct regarding these matters. Simply put, to the extent that there is any merit to the subject matter covered by this resolution, the resolution is premature. Moreover, let’s be clear, this resolution would have no effect at all on the Attorney General’s obligation to produce documents to Congress.  Resolutions of inquiry are not subpoenas—they have no legal force or effect.  Rather, this resolution of inquiry if acted upon by the House would have no greater legal force than sending the Attorney General a letter requesting this information. As I previously stated, we intend to send such a letter this week. But this resolution is about politics, not information.  Indeed, one not need look any further than the sponsor’s press release announcing this resolution to see this.  According to the gentleman from New York’s press team: “Congressman Nadler introduces Resolution of Inquiry to force GOP vote on Trump.” Our oversight efforts can, and should, be better than that.  There is no compelling reason to use today’s meeting of the House Judiciary Committee as yet another forum to debate whether Russia hacked the election or whether Jared Kushner should have a job in the West Wing. We can and will investigate any credible allegations of misconduct by the Executive Branch to the extent such allegations fall within this Committee’s jurisdiction, but we will not do so through politically-charged resolutions of inquiry that could jeopardize the integrity of the very investigations the resolution calls for. I urge my colleagues to join me in voting to report this resolution unfavorably to the House.