According to the NY Times: (www.nytimes.com/2017/01/02/us/politics/with-no-warning-house-republicans-vote-to-hobble-independent-ethics-office.html?_r=2) "House Republicans, overriding their top leaders, voted on Monday to significantly curtail the power of an independent ethics office set up in 2008..."
I have looked at the Congressional Record for confirmation, but haven't been able to find anything regarding this. I am guessing this has more to do with my lack of familiarity with the Record - I hope to learn how to find things easier moving forward.
My understanding is that they are removing the independent nature of the Committee on Ethics and claiming this will strenghten the Committee. According to Mr. Goodlatte's website:
"The Goodlatte amendment builds upon and strengthens the existing OCE by maintaining its primary area of focus – accepting and reviewing constituent complaints – while improving upon due process rights for individuals under investigation, as well as witnesses called to testify." (from goodlatte.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=735)
I have sent an email to Jason Amash asking for clarification:
Dear Mr. Amash
I read in the NY Times about House Resolution 5 - also know as The Goodlatte Amendment regarding the Ethics Committee. I was unable to find anything about this on Congress.gov. I am sure that is more a result of my poor searching skills on the site, and not for lack of information. I would appreciate it if you could provide a link to any discussion on the record regarding this amendment.
I would like you to explain this amendment to me and how you voted. If it is true that this amendment removes the Committee's independence from Congressional oversize, that is troublesome to me.
I look forward to you response.
I will post any update I get.
It seems to me, any ethics committee must be independent of the ones they are overseeing. Otherwise it would be just for show, and not allow them to do their job. If it is true that this amemdment will strengthen the Committee, then I am for it. But that is not what many sources are claiming.