mr. speaker , i rise in opposition to the rules package . 
every house member should vote to put the house on record against ethical and procedural abuses that contaminate this institution . 
the stench of special interest corruption is overwhelming congress , and repulsing the public . 
it is time the house rules reflected the ethical standards and common sense of the american people . 
i came to this house 30 years ago , and our historic incoming class brought with it one of the strongest tides of reform ever seen : rules were changed , chairmen were replaced , procedures were modernized so that the voice of the people was heard , and respected , in this house of the people . 
ten years ago , the republicans took control of the house , promising a new era of reform . 
to read the national newspapers , it is evident to everyone -- except themselves -- that the republicans have betrayed their promise of reform . 
they have tolerated misconduct and enshrined special interests as never before . 
today , we give them , and all members , an opportunity to restore public trust by voting for two commonsense amendments to the house rules . 
first , no sitting member should negotiate for a new job with any organization that has had business before his or her committee for a year . 
that 's not hard to understood : no one should be shaping public policy with an eye on a future private sector salary . 
second , no bill should be brought to the house floor unless members have had 3 days to read it first . 
that 's not hard to understand : we should not be passing bills that are hundreds of pages in length -- sometimes over 1 , 000 pages -- without ever having seen what is in the bill . 
ronald reagan thought it was a bad idea ; surely today 's house republicans can agree . 
let 's be honest about it : 99 percent of the american people outside the beltway will agree with both of these principles -- no negotiating for new jobs with special interests ; members should know what they are voting on before it becomes law . 
we should n't even have to have a debate . 
but we do . 
less than a month ago , the nation was stunned to learn that the committee chairman who had fashioned a blatantly pro-drug industry , anti-senior , anti-consumer prescription drug law was retiring and taking a job with the pharmaceutical industry . 
in fact , our former colleague assumes his job with phrma today , just as we are taking our oaths of office . 
mr. tauzin will reportedly be earning a salary nearly 13 times what he earned when he wrote that pro-industry bill -- one of the best paid lobbyists in washington . 
he earned it . 
that prescription drug law will enrich him , but it takes billions of dollars out of the pockets of america 's senior citizens -- by prohibiting them from purchasing cheaper drugs from canada , and by prohibiting the federal government from negotiating with the pharmaceutical industry -- his new employer -- for lower drug prices . 
that 's worth billions to the drug industry . 
while the deal was not announced until last month , the discussions began a year ago , as was widely reported at the time . 
in fact , a top aide to the republican leadership was quoted last january 24 on cnn.com as saying that republican congressman tauzin 's negotiation with pharma `` does n't look very good. '' it does n't look `` very good '' today either , as millions of seniors face higher drug prices thanks to the tauzin bill , and bill tauzin takes office to improve the tattered image of the drug industry . 
we all know this stinks . 
and so do our constituents . 
let 's put an end to it today by barring negotiations for private jobs by members of congress . 
that 's what our constituents would want us to do . 
and at the same time , let 's put an end to the outrageous practice of voting on complex and lengthy bills before congress has had time to read them -- bills like that prescription drug bill bill tauzin wrote while he was listening to pharma 's whispers in his ears . 
is n't it bad enough that republicans majority writes the bills in secret , without input from the democrats who represent 48 percent of the country ? 
without scrutiny by the press ? 
without review by the public must we also vote on secret legislation , without reading it , without knowing the tax breaks and earmarked spending for special interests that have been stuck in without any review ? 
i urge all members to put party aside and vote the way your constituents would want you to vote : an end to private job negotiations while serving in public office , and full disclosure of the contents of legislation before we vote . 
mr. speaker , i also vigorously oppose the proposed rule change that would allow an ethics investigation to end after 45 days of the ethics committee of five democrats and five republicans remained deadlocked . 
today , the republicans are once again putting partisan politicians ahead of ethics by moving forward with their plan to shield their embattled majority leader -- tom delay -- from any further investigation . 
the goal of this change is to block the ethics committee from considering pending and future matters that could prove to be damaging to their party . 
under the present rules , if the chair and the ranking minority member of the ethics committee can not agree whether to investigate a complaint , the committee begins an initial investigation into the matter . 
but , under the republicans ' proposed rule change , the republican chairman of the ethics committee -- who is handpicked by the speaker -- could simply refuse to examine a complaint . 
after 45 days , the complaint would be dropped , without even an initial investigation into the matter . 
this new rule would allow republicans to block pending ethics matters and prevent future investigations from moving forward . 
and the reason is very simple : there are at least two matters currently pending against republican leaders , including majority leader tom delay . 
contrary to this morning 's press reports , the republicans have n't backed away from their attempts to shield delay from further investigation , they 've simply become a little more deceptive in how they 're doing it . 
last year , when the ethics committee admonished delay three times , it deferred action on another serious charge -- his role in funneling illegal soft money into texas races through his state pac -- until after the investigation against him had been completed . 
the rule change now proposed by his republican colleagues would allow the republican chairman of the committee to block any further investigation of delay 's activities , shielding the minority leader from further admonishments even if he is indicted by a grand jury . 
also pending is an investigation of republican lobbyist , jack abramoff , and former delay staffer , michael scanlon , and their ties to several republican members . 
changing the ethics rules would permit the republicans to halt any investigation of the abramoff scandal and the members who could be implicated in their outrageous looting of native americans . 
i urge a `` no '' vote on this unbalanced and improper rules package . 
