John Conyers: “this should not be too difficult. The amendment should be made in order because it reiterates that the independent…”

“this should not be too difficult. The amendment should be made in order because it reiterates that the independent counsel is included in the group of individuals covered under the McDade amendment, specifying that the definition of employee or other attorney acting under the authority of the Attorney General shall include the independent counsel. House rule XXI(2)(c) provides that, ``No amendment to a general appropriation shall be in order changing the existing law.'' This amendment does not change existing law; it is a perfecting amendment. My amendment does not create additional legislation nor does it extend the range of the term ``employee'' in the amendment. It simply reiterates the fact that under the current law, the independent counsel under Section 28 of the U.S. Code is appropriate. There are several supporting sources in current law supporting the clarification, 28 U.S.C. 594(a), 28 U.S.C. 596(a), and the Supreme Court decision in Morrison v. Olsen. We have all kinds of cases that I presume that the distinguished chairman and his able Parliamentarian have found. I urge that this perfecting amendment be considered in order.”