[House Report 106-527]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
House Calendar No. 178
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
106th Congress Report
2d Session HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 106-527
_______________________________________________________________________
CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS
AGAINST DR. MILES JONES
__________
R E P O R T
of the
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE
ON THE
CONGRESSIONAL PROCEEDINGS AGAINST
DR. MILES JONES FOR FAILURE TO
APPEAR PURSUANT TO A DULY
AUTHORIZED SUBPOENA
March 16, 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be
printed
-------
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
79-006 WASHINGTON : 2000
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE
TOM BLILEY, Virginia, Chairman
W.J. ``BILLY'' TAUZIN, Louisiana JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan
MICHAEL G. OXLEY, Ohio HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
MICHAEL BILIRAKIS, Florida EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts
JOE BARTON, Texas RALPH M. HALL, Texas
FRED UPTON, Michigan RICK BOUCHER, Virginia
CLIFF STEARNS, Florida EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
PAUL E. GILLMOR, Ohio FRANK PALLONE, Jr., New Jersey
Vice Chairman SHERROD BROWN, Ohio
JAMES C. GREENWOOD, Pennsylvania BART GORDON, Tennessee
CHRISTOPHER COX, California PETER DEUTSCH, Florida
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois
STEVE LARGENT, Oklahoma ANNA G. ESHOO, California
RICHARD BURR, North Carolina RON KLINK, Pennsylvania
BRIAN P. BILBRAY, California BART STUPAK, Michigan
ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York
GREG GANSKE, Iowa TOM SAWYER, Ohio
CHARLIE NORWOOD, Georgia ALBERT R. WYNN, Maryland
TOM A. COBURN, Oklahoma GENE GREEN, Texas
RICK LAZIO, New York KAREN McCARTHY, Missouri
BARBARA CUBIN, Wyoming TED STRICKLAND, Ohio
JAMES E. ROGAN, California DIANA DeGETTE, Colorado
JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois THOMAS M. BARRETT, Wisconsin
HEATHER WILSON, New Mexico BILL LUTHER, Minnesota
JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona LOIS CAPPS, California
CHARLES W. ``CHIP'' PICKERING,
Mississippi
VITO FOSSELLA, New York
ROY BLUNT, Missouri
ED BRYANT, Tennessee
ROBERT L. EHRLICH, Jr., Maryland
James E. Derderian, Chief of Staff
James D. Barnette, General Counsel
Reid P.F. Stuntz, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
(ii)
House Calendar No. 178
106th Congress Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session 106-527
=======================================================================
CONTEMPT OF CONGRESS AGAINST DR. MILES JONES
_______
March 16, 2000.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be
printed
_______
Mr. Bliley, from the Committee on Commerce, submitted the following
R E P O R T
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 1
Facts, Background and Chronology................................. 2
Authority and Legislative Purpose................................ 4
Conclusion....................................................... 4
Hearings......................................................... 4
Committee Consideration.......................................... 5
Committee Votes.................................................. 5
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 8
Committee on Government Reform Oversight Findings................ 8
New Budget Authority, Entitlement Authority, and Tax
Expenditures; Committee Cost Estimate; Congressional Budget
Office Estimate; and Federal Mandates Statement................ 8
Advisory Committee Statement..................................... 8
Constitutional Authority Statement............................... 8
Applicability to Legislative Branch.............................. 8
Section-by-Section Analysis of the Legislation................... 8
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............ 8
purpose and summary
The purpose of this report is to set forth the basis for
finding Dr. Miles Jones in contempt of Congress for his failure
to appear and testify before the Subcommittee on Health and
Environment of the Committee on Commerce, as required by a
properly issued and served subpoena ad testificandum.
Upon adoption by the Commerce Committee and the House, this
report and accompanying resolution would direct the Speaker to
certify and refer the matter to the U.S. Attorney for the
District of Columbia for prosecution in accordance with the
statutory provision for contempt of Congress, 2 U.S.C.
Sec. 192. That offense carries a sentence of no less than one
month and no more than one year in prison, plus fines up to
$100,000.
facts, background and chronology
On November 9, 1999, the House of Representatives adopted a
resolution introduced by Representative Tom Tancredo calling
upon the Congress to conduct an investigation into whether
human fetuses and fetal tissue are being bought and sold in
violation of Federal law (H. Res. 350). The statute at issue is
42 U.S.C. Sec. 289g-2(a), which makes it a felony to knowingly
acquire, receive or transfer human fetal tissue for valuable
consideration. ``Valuable consideration'' is defined to exclude
``reasonable payments associated with the transportation,
implantation, processing, preservation, quality control, or
storage of human fetal tissue.'' 42 U.S.C. Sec. 289g-2(d)(3).
The resolution was based on information that came to the
attention of Congress indicating that at least one commercial
fetal tissue broker had developed a price list for the sale of
various fetal body parts, with prices that did not appear on
their face to be reflective of differing cost structures and in
some cases seemed unreasonably high (attached as Exhibit A).
This price list was for a company named Opening Lines, an
entity that acquires human fetal tissue and then provides it to
the research community. Opening Lines was founded and is
operated by Dr. Miles Jones, who is a pathologist by training.
Following the passage of the House resolution, the
Committee on Commerce launched an investigation into whether
Opening Lines or others involved in procuring, selling, or
buying fetal tissue were operating in compliance with Federal
law. The Committee also began reviewing related questions
concerning whether other requirements of Federal law in this
area were being observed, particularly, whether clinics and
fetal tissue brokers were receiving informed consent from women
before providing their fetuses for research purposes, and
whether the timing, method, or procedures of abortions were
being altered solely for the purpose of obtaining fetal tissue
for research. While these latter restrictions apply only to
Federally-funded transplantation research, the patient safety
and ethical concerns that are the basis for these restrictions
are relevant to all fetal tissue procurement.
In order to investigate this matter fully, the Committee
began making formal and informal inquiries to fetal tissue
brokers to obtain information relating to their fee structures
and other relevant practices. As part of this investigation,
Chairman Bliley wrote to Dr. Miles Jones of Opening Lines on
two separate occasions (January 31 and February 16, 2000;
attached as exhibits B and C), requesting pursuant to Rules X
and XI of the Rules of the House of Representatives that he
respond to specific questions relating to Opening Lines'
business practices. Dr. Jones failed to respond to either
letter. Committee staff telephoned Dr. Jones well in excess of
25 times asking that he respond to the Chairman's questions.
Dr. Jones did not respond to any of those Committee staff
telephone calls.
During the same time period, Chairman Bliley was
interviewed by the ABC news program 20/20 about the Committee's
investigation. During the course of this interview, Chairman
Bliley was shown portions of an undercover videotape that 20/20
had taped in connection with its own investigation into the
fetal tissue brokerage industry. Chairman Bliley was shown
these segments in order to gain the Chairman's reaction to Dr.
Jones' statements concerning his business practices. During
this taped conversation, Dr. Jones asserted that during some
weeks he could make up to $50,000 from buying and selling fetal
tissue and fetal body parts. He clearly stated that ``market
force'' determines the prices at which he sells fetal body
parts ``it's what you can sell it for,'' he said, in response
to a question about what price he charges for a fetal brain or
kidney. He also asserted that the cost of procuring the fetus
``is the same, whether you get one kidney or you get two
kidneys, a lung, a brain, a heart.'' The rest, he agreed, was
``just money in the bank.'' Dr. Jones also made statements
during this undercover interview about the level of informed
consent by women who donate fetal tissue.
Given these facts, and Dr. Jones' failure to respond to
voluntary Committee requests for information, Chairman Bliley
(after consultation with the Minority) authorized and issued,
pursuant to clause 2(m)(3)(A)(i) of rule XI of the rules of the
House of Representatives and rule 19 of the Rules of the
Committee on Commerce, a subpoena ad testificandum on February
29, 2000, commanding Dr. Jones' appearance and testimony at a
hearing of the Subcommittee on Health and Environment on March
9, 2000, at 2:00 p.m. This subpoena was lawfully served upon
Dr. Jones by the U.S. Marshals Service on March 1, 2000. A copy
of the subpoena and its proof of service is attached to this
report as Exhibit D. Subsequent to service, Committee staff
made several additional attempts to contact Dr. Jones to
inquire whether he would comply with the subpoena, to no avail.
The Subcommittee convened pursuant to notice on March 9,
2000, to hold a hearing entitled ``Fetal Tissue: Is It Being
Bought and Sold in Violation of Federal Law?'' The purpose of
the hearing, as evidenced by the Committee hearing memorandum,
was to ``hold a limited, investigatory hearing to consider
evidence that fetal tissue may have been acquired and sold for
valuable consideration in contravention of Federal law.''
Besides Dr. Jones, several other witnesses were invited and/or
subpoenaed to attend this hearing to discuss their knowledge of
or roles in the procuring or selling of fetal tissue.
Following opening statements from the Members of the
Subcommittee, Subcommittee Chairman Michael Bilirakis called
the scheduled witnesses to the witness table, but Dr. Jones did
not appear as commanded by his subpoena. At that point, full
Committee Chairman Bliley offered a unanimous consent request
that the hearing stand in recess, and that the Subcommittee
waive all applicable notice requirements or other rules and
immediately proceed into a business meeting for the purpose of
considering a resolution finding Dr. Jones in contempt for his
contumacious failure to comply with a subpoena ad
testificandum.
Without objection, and with a quorum present, Chairman
Bilirakis recessed the hearing and convened a business meeting
of the Subcommittee. Chairman Bliley then offered a resolution
(attached as Exhibit E) finding that Dr. Jones was lawfully
served with a validly issued subpoena commanding his appearance
and testimony at the Subcommittee hearing on March 9, 2000, at
2:00 p.m.; finding Dr. Jones in contempt of Congress for his
contumacious failure to appear as commanded by the subpoena ad
testificandum; and directing that a report be prepared and
forwarded to the full Committee for appropriate action. The
resolution was approved by a record vote of 27 ayes and no
nays.
Authority and legislative purpose
Clause 1 of rule X of the Rules of the House of
Representatives grants the Committee on Commerce jurisdiction
over public health and quarantine, biomedical research and
development, health and health facilities, and interstate and
foreign commerce generally. Clause 2 of rule X grants the
Committee authority to review ``whether laws and programs
addressing subjects within the jurisdiction of [the Committee]
are being implemented and carried out with the intent of
Congress.'' As such, it is within the oversight authority of
the Committee to investigate whether fetal tissue is being
bought or sold in interstate commerce in violation of Federal
law, as well as the health and research-related questions
surrounding that matter.
The Committee also has a clear legislative purpose in
conducting such oversight, given that it could lead the
Committee to consider strengthening Federal requirements in
this area or mandating additional oversight or enforcement
mechanisms by the Executive Branch agencies with
responsibilities in this area.
Conclusion
Chairman Bliley lawfully authorized and issued a subpoena
ad testificandum upon Dr. Miles Jones, pursuant to House and
Committee rules and in furtherance of a valid legislative
purpose within the Committee's authority, responsibility and
jurisdiction. De spite being served with this subpoena, Dr.
Jones failed to appear at the scheduled hearing of the
Subcommittee on Health and Environment, and his refusal to do
so was both willful and contemptible.
Accordingly, the Committee recommends to the House the
following resolution:
Resolved, That pursuant to sections 102 and 104 of
the Revised Statutes of the United States (2 U.S.C.
Sec. Sec. 192, 194), the Speaker of the House of
Representatives shall certify the report adopted by the
Committee on Commerce, detailing the failure of Dr.
Miles Jones to appear and testify before the
Subcommittee on Health and Environment on March 9,
2000, pursuant to a duly authorized and served subpoena
ad testificandum, to the United States Attorney for the
District of Columbia, to the end that Dr. Miles Jones
be proceeded against in the manner and form provided by
law.
Hearings
The Subcommittee on Health and Environment held a hearing
on March 9, 2000, to receive testimony from Dr. Miles Jones,
among other witnesses.
committee consideration
On March 9, 2000, the Subcommittee on Health and
Environment met in open session to consider a resolution of
contempt against Dr. Miles Jones for failure to appear and
testify as commanded by subpoena, and directing the
Subcommittee to report such finding to the full Committee for
such action as the Committee deems appropriate. The resolution
was approved, without amendment, by a record vote of 27 yeas
and no nays.
On March 15, 2000, the Committee on Commerce met in open
markup session and agreed to a motion (attached as Exhibit F)
by Mr. Bilirakis adopting this report, and directing the
Chairman of the Committee to file this report with the House
and to take such other actions as may be necessary to bring
this report to the House for its consideration. The motion was
agreed to by a record vote of 34 yeas and no nays.
committee votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee to list the record votes
on the motion to report legislation and amendments thereto. The
following are the record votes on the motion to adopt this
report, including the names of those Members voting for and
against. Also included is the record vote of the Subcommittee
on Health and Environment adopting the resolution of contempt
against Dr. Miles Jones.
committee oversight findings
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee held an oversight
hearing and business meeting, and made findings that are
reflected in this report.
committee on government reform oversight findings
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, no oversight findings have been
submitted to the Committee by the Committee on Government
Reform.
new budget authority, entitlement authority, and tax expenditures;
committee cost estimate; congressional budget office estimate; and
federal mandates statement
The Committee finds that clauses 3(c)(2) and (3) of rule
XIII, section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, and
section 423 of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act are
inapplicable to this report. Therefore, the Committee did not
request a cost estimate from the Congressional Budget Office
and makes no findings as to the budgetary impact of this
report.
advisory committee statement
The Committee finds that section 5(b) of the Federal
Advisory Committee Act is inapplicable to this report.
constitutional authority statement
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the
House of Representatives, the Committee finds that the
Constitutional authority for this report is provided in Article
I, section 8, clause 3, which grants Congress the power to
regulate commerce with foreign nations, among the several
States, and with the Indian tribes.
applicability to legislative branch
The Committee finds that the report does not relate to the
terms and conditions of employment or access to public services
or accommodations within the meaning of section 102(b)(3) of
the Congressional Accountability Act.
section-by-section analysis of the legislation
This report does not accompany legislation.
changes in existing law made by the bill, as reported
This report does not amend any existing Federal statute.