Ch. 8 § 11 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS expenditures to the Clerk and in- As to exclusion—or denial by dicated his intention once in the House of the right of a Mem- Washington to complete and file ber-elect to a seat—by majority the required forms. vote, the House has the power to On June 2, 1936, the House de- judge elections and to determine clared the contestee entitled to his that no one was properly elected seat.(4) to a seat. If violations of the elec- tion campaign statutes are so ex- tensive or election returns so un- § 12. Expulsion, Exclusion, certain as to render an election void, the House may deny the and Censure right to a seat.(8)
[Note: For full discussion of cen- sure and expulsion, see chapter 12, infra.] Expulsion Under article I, section 5, clause 2 of the United States Constitu- § 12.1 In the 77th Congress, the tion, the House may punish its Senate failed to expel, such Members and may expel a Mem- expulsion requiring a two- ber by a vote of two-thirds. thirds vote, a Senator whose In the 90th Congress, the Sen- qualifications had been chal- ate censured a Member in part for lenged by reason of election improper use and conversion of fraud and of conduct involv- campaign funds.(5) And the Com- mittee on House Administration ing moral turpitude. recommended in a report in the On Jan. 3, 1941, at the con- 74th Congress that a Member or vening of the 77th Congress, Mr. Delegate could be censured for William Langer, of North Dakota, failure to comply with the Corrupt took the oath of office, despite Practices Act.(6) However, the charges from the citizens of his House and the Senate have gen- state recommending he be denied erally held that a Member may a congressional seat because of not be expelled for conduct com- campaign fraud and past conduct mitted prior to his election.(7) involving moral turpitude.(9)
4. 80 CONG. REC. 8705, 74th Cong. 2d For discussion of the House as Sess. (H. Res. 521). judge of qualifications for seats, see 5. See § 12.3, infra. Ch. 7, supra. 6. See § 12.4, infra. 8. See Parliamentarian’s note in § 12.2, 7. See 2 Hinds’ Precedents §§ 1284– infra. 1289; 6 Cannon’s Precedents §§ 56, 9. 87 CONG. REC. 3, 4, 77th Cong. 1st 238. Sess.
924 ELECTIONS AND ELECTION CAMPAIGNS Ch. 8 § 12
The petition against Senator The right to be sworn of Sen- Langer charged: control of election ator-elect Bilbo had been chal- machinery; casting of illegal elec- lenged through Senate Resolution tion ballots; destruction of legal 1, which read in part: election ballots; fraudulent cam- Whereas the Special Committee To paign advertising; conspiracy to Investigate Senatorial Campaign Ex- avoid federal law; perjury; brib- penditures, 1946, has conducted an in- ery; fraud; promises of political fa- vestigation into the senatorial election vors.(10) in Mississippi in 1946, which inves- tigation indicates that Theodore G. After determining that a two- Bilbo may be guilty of violating the thirds vote was necessary for ex- Constitution of the United States, the pulsion, the Senate failed to expel statutes of the United States, and his Senator Langer.(11) oath of office as a Senator of the United States in that he is alleged to Exclusion have conspired to prevent citizens of the United States from exercising their § 12.2 A Senator-elect, whom constitutional rights to participate in the said election; and that he is alleged Members of the Senate to have committed violations of Public sought to exclude from the Law 252, Seventy-sixth Congress, com- 80th Congress for corrupt monly known as the Hatch Act; and campaign practices and past Whereas the Special Committee To Investigate the National Defense Pro- abuse of congressional office, gram has completed an inquiry into died while his qualifications certain transactions between Theodore for a seat were still undeter- G. Bilbo and various war contractors mined. and has found officially that the said Bilbo, ‘‘in return for the aid he had On Jan. 4, 1947, at the con- given certain war contractors and oth- vening of the 80th Congress, the ers before Federal departments, solic- credentials of Senator-elect Theo- ited and received political contribu- dore G. Bilbo, of Mississippi, were tions, accepted personal compensation, laid on the table and never taken gifts, and services, and solicited and accepted substantial amounts of money up again due to his intervening for a personal charity administered ( ) death. 12 solely by him’’ . . . and . . . ‘‘that by these transactions Senator Bilbo mis- 10. 88 CONG. REC. 2077–80, 77th Cong. used his high office and violated cer- 2d Sess., Mar. 9, 1942. tain Federal statutes’’; and 11. 88 CONG. REC. 3064, 77th Cong. 2d Whereas the evidence adduced be- Sess., Mar. 27, 1942. fore the said committees indicates that 12. 93 CONG. REC. 109, 80th Cong. 1st Sess. For the announcement of Nov. Bilbo’s death, see 93 CONG. REC. 17, 1947, concerning Theodore G. 10569, 80th Cong. 1st Sess.
925 Ch. 8 § 12 DESCHLER’S PRECEDENTS
the credentials for a seat in the Senate of the Senate Select Committee on presented by the said Theodore G.Bilbo Standards of Official Conduct, re- are tainted with fraud and corruption; and that the seating of the said Bilbo ported Senate Resolution 112, cen- would be contrary to sound public pol- suring Senator Thomas J. Dodd, icy, harmful to the dignity and honor of Connecticut, for having engaged of the Senate, dangerous to the perpet- in a course of conduct over five uation of free Government and the preservation of our constitutiSnal lib- years of exercising his power and erties. . . .(13) influence as a Senator to obtain Parliamentarian’s Note: The Su- and to use for personal benefit preme Court has held, in the case funds obtained from the public of Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. through political testimonials and 486 (1969), that a Member-elect of political campaigns.(14) the House could not be excluded, The resolution, which was laid by a majority vote, other than for before the Senate on June 13, failure to meet the express con- 1967,(15) accompanied by Senate stitutional qualifications for the Report No. 193, read as follows: office. But since the House or Sen- ate is the judge of elections and Resolved, That it is the judgment of the Senate that the Senator from Con- returns under the U.S. Constitu- necticut, Thomas J. Dodd, for having tion (art. I, § 5, clause 1), and has engaged in a course of conduct over a the power to regulate elections period of five years from 1961 to 1965 (art. I, § 4, clause 1), the House or of exercising the influence and power Senate may determine by majority of his office as a United States Sen- vote that a candidate was not val- ator, as shown by the conclusions in idly elected. the investigations by the Select Com- mittee on Standards and Conduct, Censure (a) to obtain, and use for his per- sonal benefit, funds from the public § 12.3 The Senate Select Com- through political testimonials and a political campaign, and mittee on Standards and (b) to request and accept reim- Conduct reported a resolu- bursements for expenses from both tion censuring a Senator, in the 90th Congress, for his 14. 113 CONG. REC. 10977, 90th Cong. personal use of campaign 1st Sess. 15. 113 CONG. REC. 15663, 90th Cong. contributions. 1st Sess. (resolution laid before the On Apr. 27, 1967, Senator John Senate). For discussion thereof, see Stennis, of Mississippi, Chairman 113 CONG. REC. 15663, 15735, 15773, 15998, 16104, 16269, 16348, 13. 93 CONG. REC. 7, 8, 80th Cong. 1st 16560, 16976, 16978, 17005, 90th Sess., Jan. 3, 1947. Cong. 1st Sess., June 13–23, 1967.
926 ELECTIONS AND ELECTION CAMPAIGNS Ch. 8 § 13
the Senate and private organizations § 12.4 A committee on elections for the same travel, recommended that a deserves the censure of the Senate; contestee would be subject to and he is so censured for his conduct, censure by the House but not which is contrary to accepted morals, derogates from the public trust ex- to forfeiture of his seat pected of a Senator, and tends to bring where there were mitigating the Senate into dishonor and disre- circumstances involved in pute. his violation of the Corrupt On June 23, 1967, the Senate Practices Act. adopted the first portion of the On May 21, 1936,(17) a com- resolution of censure relating to mittee on elections reported in the the use of political funds by Sen- election contest case of McCand- ator Dodd for private purposes: (16) less v King, for the seat of Dele- gate from Hawaii. In its report, Resolved, (A) That it is the judgment House Report No. 2736, the com- of the Senate that the Senator from mittee concluded that there were Connecticut, Thomas J. Dodd, for hav- mitigating circumstances in the ing engaged in a course of conduct over contestee’s failure to fully comply a period of five years from 1961 to 1965 of exercising the influence and with the reporting requirements power of his office as a United States of the Corrupt Practices Act. The Senator, as shown by the conclusions committee recommended that Mr. in the investigation by the Select Com- Samuel Wilder King be declared mittee on Standards and Conduct, to entitled to the seat but stated in obtain, and use for his personal ben- its report that Mr. King could be efit, funds from the public through po- subject to censure by the House. litical testimonials and a political cam- On June 2, 1936, the House paign, deserves the censure of the Sen- adopted House Resolution 521, de- ate; and he is so censured for his con- claring the contestee, Mr. King, duct, which is contrary to accepted entitled to the seat.(18) morals, derogates from the public trust expected of a Senator, and tends to bring the Senate into dishonor and dis- repute. § 13. Investigations by The Senate then proceeded to Standing Committees consider and agree to the remain- Investigations of specific elec- der of the resolution, censuring tions or election practices are usu- Senator Dodd for improper use and solicitation of travel funds. 17. 80 CONG. REC. 7765, 74th Cong. 2d Sess. 16. 113 CONG. REC. 17011, 90th Cong. 18. 80 CONG. REC. 8705, 74th Cong. 2d 1st Sess. Sess.
927