The CHAIRMAN. You have been handling the Juvenile Delinquency Subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee. Senator HENDRICKSON. Yes, sir. The CHAIRMAN. How many meetings have you had where there were always two members present? Senator HENDRICKSON. You mean public hearings? The CHAIRMAN. That is right, or executive hearings, either kind. Senator HENDRICKSON. I would say in a majority of our hearings we only had two members present. The CHAIRMAN. And at many of your hearings I presume you only had one member present? Senator HENDRICKSON. You are correct about that, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Please proceed. Senator HENDRICKSON. I am going to conclude, Mr. Chairman, by saying that basically the problem before us is one of protecting the rights of individuals without impairing the performance of the investigative function. The procedures employed by a few investigating committees in recent years have caused widespread public criticism of Congress, and I think the result has been to damage its prestige considerably. Congress may continue to decline in popular esteem unless steps are promptly taken to check the abuse of its investigative powers. Voluntary adoption of procedural rules by particular committees is a step in the right direction, but self-restraint and self-discipline cannot be guaranteed. I strongly recommend, therefore, that a uniform code of fair conduct for all investigating committees be adopted by the Senate as part of its Standing Rules. As I said before, I have no pride of authorship in any legislation introduced on this subject, but there are some mighty fine proposals in the measures which you have under consideration and anything that I can do, in my remaining days as a Member of the Senate, to help you promote a more balanced formula for handling public hearings, I want to do, to the utmost of my ability. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator. Senator Hayden, do you have any questions? Senator HAYDEN. I say to the Senator from New Jersey, as a member of this subcommittee, I would appreciate any effort he may make to examine and comment upon the several proposals that are before this committee. It is going to be quite difficult, in view of the voluminous nature of some of these proposals, to boil them down to what we generally justify in a report to the Senate; and, based upon his experience on the Committee on Rules, and the experience he has had in conducting investigations as a chairman of a subcommittee, I would like to have his definite suggestions at any time it is convenient for him to provide us with them. Senator HENDRICKSON. Mr. Chairman, I am glad the distinguished Senator from Arizona raised this point, because I am in the course of preparing now, in my office, an analysis of all these measures before the committee. It wasn't ready to bring with me here for your hearing this morning, but if you will give me unanimous consent I will ask that this analysis be incorporated in the record at the conclusion of my remarks. Senator HAYDEN. By all means, Mr. Chairman, you should grant that consent. The CHAIRMAN. I didn't hear that. I beg your pardon. Senator HENDRICKSON. I asked the committee to grant me unanimous consent to include, as a part of my remarks, an analysis of all of these measures which are before you and under consideration. The CHAIRMAN. Surely; that will be granted, Senator. Without objection the material will be inserted in the record following Senator Hendrickson's remarks. Senator HENDRICKSON. Thank you. The CHAIRMAN. Senator Hayden, I notice this joint resolution, Senate Joint Resolution 157, introduced by Senator Hendrickson, is to establish a Joint Committee on Internal Security. I wonder, technically speaking, if we have jurisdiction to act. What is your opinion? Senator HAYDEN. If we haven't, who has? The CHAIRMAN. I don't know. The resolution provides for the establishment of a Joint Committee on Internal Security. Senator HENDRICKSON. May I suggest to the chairman- Senator HENDRICKSON. I was going to suggest to the chairman I would think the Judiciary Committee would be the appropriate committee for the consideration of such a resolution. The CHAIRMAN. I just wanted to raise that point on the record. Senator HAYDEN. Inasmuch as the Judiciary Committee has jurisdiction over that particular subject matter, in a general way of the rules, I would be inclined to agree. Merely looking at it as a change in the rules, it would come to our committee. I think you very properly raise that point. The CHAIRMAN. Yes. Senator HENDRICKSON. Mr. Chairman, I think this analysis I am preparing will be very helpful to the committee. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much. We appreciate your coming here this morning. Senator HENDRICKSON. I want to thank you for the privilege of appearing here this morning. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. (The analysis supplied by Senator Hendrickson is as follows:) [Submitted by Senator Robert C. Hendrickson] With regard to the problems of fair committee hearings now being considered by the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration, it seems to me that of the 8 resolutions under consideration, only 2 constitute comprehensive codes of fair procedure. The analysis of the two resolutions follows: ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF SENATE RESOLUTION 253 AND SENATE RESOLUTION 253 Section 1: A bill or resolution authorizing an investigation shall clearly define its subject matter and purpose. Section 2: Amends the title of rule XXV of the Standing Rules to read "Powers and Duties of Committees." SENATE RESOLUTION 256 Same except may be amended upon a majority vote of the committee with a majority actually present. No comparable provision. SENATE RESOLUTION 253 Section 3: Unless otherwise provided, 1 member shall constitute a quorum for taking testimony and evidence; no witness, however, shall be compelled to give oral testimony before less than 2 members. Section 4: The following subsections are added to rule XXV: 5. Committee rules are applicable to subcommittees. Additional rules may be adopted. 6. All committee hearings shall be public except executive sessions to mark up bills or vote, or where voted by a majority. 7. Unless otherwise provided, committee action shall be by a majority vote of a quorum. 8. Authorizes an investigating subcommittee only by majority vote. 9. Prohibits hearings without specific committee authorization. 10. All hearings are to be held in the District of Columbia, unless otherwise authorized by a majority vote of the committee. 11. No measure, finding, or recommendation shall be reported unless a majority of the committee were actually present. 12. No testimony or material from an executive session shall be made public unless authorized by a majority vote of the committee. 13. Committee approval for persons employed or assigned to investigative activities is required. SENATE RESOLUTION 256 Section 3 (e): Provides that no testimony shall be taken in executive session unless at least two members of the committee are present. No comparable provision. No comparable provision. No comparable provision. Section 2 (a): Chairman may appoint subcommittees, subject to the approval of a majority. Subcommittees to be not less than three members, unless a lesser number approved by majority, and a proportionate ratio of the members shall be from the minority party. Subjects subcommittee designations to the approval of the majority and minority members in caucus. Section 2 (c): Prohibits hearing or investigation unless by a majority vote at a meeting at which a majority of the committee is actually present. No comparable provision. Section 2 (f): No committee report shall be issued unless a draft is submitted to the office of each committee member 24 hours in advance of the meeting at which it is to be considered and is adopted at a meeting at which a majority is actually present. Section 2 (g): No testimony given in executive session shall be disclosed without committee authorization by a vote at which a majority of the members are present. No committee release or statement based upon testimony or evidence adversely affecting a person shall be disclosed unless accompanied by rebuttal evidence and testimony. Section 2 (h): The secrecy rule as to executive sessions shall apply to members and employees of the Senate for a period following such session until the committee has had a reasonable time to conclude the investigation and issue a report. Section 6: The selection and retention of the professional and clerical staff shall be subject to the vote of a majority of the members of the committee. SENATE RESOLUTION 253 14. Subpenas shall be issued only by the authority of the committee, signed by the chairman or any member designated by him. 15. No witness may be compelled to testify for news and entertainment media. 16. Permits the chairman or any member designated to administer oaths and preside over the hearings. 17. Witnesses may be advised by counsel of their legal rights while giving testimony and unless the presiding member otherwise directs, may be accompanied by counsel at the stand. 18. Proper order and decorum shall be maintained by all persons at the committee hearings and counsel shall observe the standards of legal ethics and deportment. Chairman may punish breaches by censure or exclusion from the hearing and committee may punish by citation for contempt. 19. Provides the following additional procedures to be observed by the committee, whenever it determines that evidence may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate witnesses: (a) Subject of each hearing shall be clearly stated and evidence elicited shall be pertinent to the subject. (b) Permits preliminary staff inquiries by the chairman, but prohibits the development of any major phase of the investigation without committee approval. (c) All testimony shall be under oath. (d) Permits counsel for witnesses, in the discretion of the presiding member and as justice may require, to be heard on points of right and procedure, to examine their clients for purposes of clarification, and to address written interrogatories to other witnesses whose testimony pertains to their clients. SENATE RESOLUTION 256 Section 5: Subpenas shall be issued by the chairman only upon written notice to all committee members of the identity of the witness or material and their relevancy to the investigation. Any member may question whether a subpena shall be issued or remain in force, subject to a majority vote. Section 7 (b): Same except objection may be made only on the ground of distraction, harassment, or physical handicap; Section 7 (a): Requires that there be equal access for coverage of hearings for various media of communication, and that they may not unreasonably distract, harass, or confuse the witness. No comparable provision. Section 3 (a): Permits witnesses to have counsel of their own choosing to advise witnesses of their rights and make brief objections to the relevancy of questions and procedure. No comparable provision. Section 4 (a): Provides that a person shall be considered adversely affected by evidence or testimony if the committee determines that the evidence or testimony (1) would constitute libel or slander if not presented before a Senate committee, or (2) alleges crime or misconduct or tends to disgrace or otherwise expose the person to public contempt, hatred, or scorn. (See sec. 3 (a), supra, for right of counsel at any hearing.) 20. Following procedures shall be observed by the committee whenever it determines that any testimony or release relating to the inquiry may tend to defame, degrade, or incriminate persons not witnesses: (a) Such persons shall be offered an opportunity to appear. Testimony relating to the adverse evidence or utterance shall be subject to applicable provisions of the subsection 19 of this rule. (b) Persons in lieu of appearing may submit sworn statements for the record. 21. Requires chairman or a member to consult Federal law-enforcement agencies on an investigation which may result in exposing the commission of crimes. The results of the consultation shall be reported to the committee before witnesses testify. SENATE RESOLUTION 256 (b) Persons to be investigated or about whom adverse information is to be presented at a public hearing shall be fully advised. Material reflecting adversely on the character or reputation of any individual and to be presented at a public hearing shall be first reviewed in executive session as to reliability and probative value, and shall not be presented except by majority vote. (See sec. 2 (f), (g), and (h), supra.) (See sec. 3 (f), infra, for special right of witnesses to give explanations of answers and make statements.) (See sec. 3 (g), infra, as to stenographic transcripts generally.) (See sec. 3 (g) infra, for witness' right to inspect or purchase transcripts of testimony.) (See sec. 2 (g), supra, for prohibition against disclosure of executive session testimony.) (c) A person adversely affected by evidence or testimony given at a public hearing shall have the right to: (i) appear and testify or file a sworn statement, (ii) have adverse witnesses recalled within 30 days after their testimony, (iii) be represented by counsel, (iv) cross-examine, (v) obtain, at the committee's discretion, committee subpenas for witnesses and evidence in his defense. Opportunity for rebuttal shall be prompt. Limits cross-examination to 1 hour per witness, unless extended by a majority vote. (See section 4 (a), (b), (c), supra, and (d), infra, for determination of persons adversely affected and resultant rights.) Section 2 (e): Same. |