Jun 12, 2006 -- Reform Groups Strongly Oppose Use of Pre-Approval Process by House Ethics Committee to Legitimize Privately-Funded Trips for Members
Reform Groups Call on Ethics Committee and House to Support Ban on Privately-Funded Trips

In a letter sent today to members of the House Ethics Committee, five reform groups strongly opposed ''the use of a pre-approval system by the House Ethics Committee as a basis for allowing private interests to continue to finance trips taken by members of Congress.''

The reform groups include Campaign Legal Center, Democracy 21, the League of Women Voters, Public Citizen and U.S. PIRG.

A copy of the House Ethics Committee letter was sent to all House members.

Instead of adopting ''any such procedures to deal with a fundamental House ethics problem,'' the reform groups urged the Committee ''to recommend an end to the serious abuses arising from privately-funded trips for Members.''

According to the letter, ''The Committee could do this by endorsing the ban on privately-funded trips proposed by House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL). Alternatively, the Committee could accomplish this by endorsing the restrictions on privately-funded trips contained in H.R. 4682, the lobbying and ethics bill introduced by House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA).''

The letter states, ''We strongly oppose the use of pre-approval by the House Ethics Committee to legitimize privately-funded travel for two basic reasons.''

According to the letter, ''First, pre-approval by the House Ethics Committee of privately-funded trips will not stop the widespread abuses that have occurred in the House as a result of private groups paying for trips by Members whose decisions and votes they are trying to influence. At the same time it will reduce a Member's own accountability for taking privately-funded trips.''

The letter continues, ''Second, the House Ethics Committee has no public credibility. The Committee has failed to enforce even the limited existing House ethics rules governing travel, failed to investigate the Jack Abramoff lobbying scandals and failed to even function during most of this Congress.''

The letter adds, ''There is no reason for the public to have any confidence in decisions by the House Ethics Committee about what is acceptable privately-funded travel, even if such a process was an effective way to end travel abuses by Members, which it is not.''

The letter states, ''If members of Congress are traveling on official business for public purposes, it is the public that should pay for such trips, not private interests.''

According to the letter, ''Citizens certainly understand why many private interests that lobby Congress are interested in paying for trips by Members, trips which are often made to luxurious and vacation-type settings in the United States and around the world.''

The letter states, ''According to a recent study by the Center for Public Integrity, for example, during the period from January 2000 through June 2005, members of Congress and their staffs received at least 200 privately-funded trips to Paris, 150 to Hawaii and 140 to Italy.''

The letter adds, ''Privately-funded trips give private interests the opportunity to provide substantial financial perks to Members, while also having the Members as a captive audience during the trips for access and lobbying purposes. And if private interests have company planes available to fly the Members on the trips, they gain sole access to Members, often for hours at a time.''

The letter continues, ''According to an article in The Washington Post (June 6, 2006) reporting on the study by the Center for Public integrity, 'Over 5 1/2 years, Republican and Democratic lawmakers accepted nearly $50 million in trips, often to resorts and exclusive locales, from corporations and groups seeking legislative favors, according to the most comprehensive study to date on the subject of congressional travel.'''

The letter further cites the Post article as stating, ''From January 2000 through June 2005, House and Senate members and their aides were away from Washington for more than 81,000 days--a combined 222 years--on at least 23,000 trips, according to the report, issued yesterday by the nonpartisan Center for Public Integrity.''

According to the letter, ''A list of the top House spenders on privately-funded trips, including their staffs, shows that the funders of these private trips are not providing them at random, but rather are focusing on the most influential members of the House.''

The letter states, ''According to the Center for Public Integrity study, nine of the top eleven House spenders on privately-funded travel, including their staffs, included the House Speaker; the former House Majority Leader; the House Majority Whip; the former Chairman of the House Education and the Workforce Committee and current House Majority Leader; the Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee; the Chairman of the House Energy Committee; the former Chairman of the House Energy Committee; the Chairman of the House Financial Services; and the Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, who previously served as Chairman of the House Resources Committee.''

The letter adds, ''There is no reason to believe that a system of pre-approval of privately-funded trips for Members is going to stop the vacation-type trips for Members to Paris, Hawaii, Italy and the like.''

The letter continues, ''There is no reason to believe that a system of pre-approval of privately-funded trips for Members is going to stop private interests from using privately-funded trips to gain special access to and influence with Members, and in particular the most powerful members of the House.''

The letter concludes, ''Our organizations strongly urge the House Ethics Committee not to establish a system of pre-approval for privately-funded travel by Members, and instead to recommend new House ethics rules to prevent private interests from funding trips for Members.''

A copy of the letter can be found here.

# # #