Jim Jordan: “But, Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. It is unfortunate in a bill that has been worked on by both…”

“But, Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment. It is unfortunate in a bill that has been worked on by both sides so well that we have an amendment now that I think is going to be somewhat divisive. But I believe the amendment may arise from the U.S. Attorney's investigation that consumed so much of our time earlier in this session, particularly the time on the Judiciary Committee. That investigation showed no wrongdoing in the dismissal of U.S. Attorneys and no undermining of the institutions of the Department of Justice. As time drags on, though, people wonder, why did we spend so much time on this issue? Maybe the majority feels the need to show some results. Perhaps that is why we have this amendment before us today. But the U.S. Attorney's investigation did not show any need to realign the responsibilities of the Office of Professional Responsibility and the Office of the Inspector General. It certainly did not show that OIG should swallow up OPR, which would be the effective result of the amendment before us this afternoon.”