H.R. 1059senamdt: Senate Amendment to protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes

H.R. 1059senamdt

Senate Amendment to protect the safety of judges by extending the authority of the Judicial Conference to redact sensitive information contained in their financial disclosure reports, and for other purposes

Sponsor
Rep. John Conyers Jr.

Date
December 20, 2011 (112th Congress, 1st Session)

Staff Contact
Communications

Floor Situation

On Monday, December 19, 2011, the House is scheduled consider a Senate Amendment to H.R. 1059 under a suspension of the rules, requiring a two-thirds majority vote for passage.  The resolution was introduced by Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) on March 14, 2011 and was approved by the House on September 12, 2011 by a vote of 384-0.  The bill was passed with an amendment in the Senate by unanimous consent on November 17, 2011.

Bill Summary

H.R. 1059 would correct a misspelling set forth in the redaction portion of the Ethics in Government Act (“Marshals” instead of “Marshall”).  The Senate Amendment would extend the sunset provision—currently December 31, 2011—that applies to the redaction authority to the year 2017.  The House version struck the sunset provision entirely.

Background

Judges and certain other judicial branch employees are required to file annual financial disclosure reports under the Ethics in Government Act.  Given the security risks that confront members of the Judiciary, however, the Judicial Conference is authorized to redact sensitive information from these reports that could otherwise be used to compromise the safety of the filers or their families.  The statutory authority of the Judicial Conference to redact this information expires on December 31, 2011.  H.R. 1059 permanently extends the authority beyond this date. 

Cost

According to the Congressional Budget Office, implementing H.R. 1059 would have no significant impact on the federal budget.  Enacting the bill would not affect direct spending or revenues; therefore, pay-as-you-go procedures do not apply.