{
  "id": "R44213",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "R44213",
  "active": true,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 445954,
      "date": "2015-09-25",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-06T18:18:50.611875",
      "title": "Altering House Ethics Committee Sanction Recommendations on the Floor: Past Precedent and Options for Action",
      "summary": "The Constitution provides Congress with the power to punish and discipline its Members. Since the House Committee on Ethics was created during the 90th Congress, it has been authorized to investigate allegations of misconduct against Members and staff, and if necessary, recommend sanctions that are then considered by the whole House. This report examines instances when the House Ethics Committee has recommended a sanction, and amendments or alternatives have been considered on the House floor. Since the committee\u2019s creation, the House has attempted to amend sanction recommendations only a handful of times. These instances, however, are instructive of the overall approach to discipline and the relationship between the Ethics Committee and the House floor.\nWhen a sanction recommendation\u2014expulsion, censure, or reprimand\u2014is brought to the floor, three options have been used to attempt to offer an alternative to that sanction. These are (1) offering a motion to recommit with amendatory instructions, (2) offering an amendment to the sanctions resolution, or (3) offering a separate resolution. \nSince the House Ethics Committee was created (as the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct) in 1967, 16 ethics cases have been brought to the House floor to impose a sanction. Of these 16 cases, seven (43%) have included attempts to alter the sanction recommendation, and three (42% of the seven cases and 18% of all cases) have been successful. While not a majority of cases, the offering (and sometimes adoption) of an alternate sanction illustrates that altering a sanction recommendation, although a difficult process, can be done.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": true,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/R44213",
          "sha1": "8f0ee1ebb1611efd4f0038d5378394f0aff52c77",
          "filename": "files/20150925_R44213_8f0ee1ebb1611efd4f0038d5378394f0aff52c77.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R44213",
          "sha1": "c28cc87feb16722469c99c7399e80f4e8138ec70",
          "filename": "files/20150925_R44213_c28cc87feb16722469c99c7399e80f4e8138ec70.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Legislative Process"
  ]
}