Three House Republicans have expressed their discontent over a late addition to a government funding bill passed by the Senate. This added provision would give senators targeted in the “Arctic Frost” investigation the ability to sue the U.S. government for at least $500,000 each if their Senate data was improperly accessed.
During a House Rules Committee hearing, Representatives Chip Roy, Morgan Griffith, and Austin Scott pushed back against the provision. Scott was the first to draw attention to it, stating that the language allows senators whose data has been “acquired, subpoenaed, searched, accessed, or disclosed” in violation of the guidelines to take civil action against the government. “This language did not go through any committee markup,” Scott explained. “This language was not shared with the House of Representatives prior to it being put in the bill.” He firmly believes it should be removed.
Roy echoed Scott’s sentiments, emphasizing that such an insertion, made without adequate discussion, raises troubling questions. “It certainly shouldn’t have been inserted at the eleventh hour without deliberation and back and forth,” he said. Roy pointed out that this kind of last-minute maneuvering seems self-serving. He warned, “I think there’s gonna be a lot of people… who see it as a self-serving, self-dealing kind of stuff. And I don’t think that’s right.”
The backdrop to this frustration involves the investigation led by former Special Counsel Jack Smith, which has stirred significant controversy. Eight Republican senators had their phone records subpoenaed without notice as part of the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot investigation. The senators included notable figures such as Lindsey Graham and Josh Hawley.
In response to the backlash, Smith’s attorneys clarified in a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley that the subpoena was not as invasive as opponents have claimed. They noted, “A number of people have falsely stated that Mr. Smith ‘tapped’ Senators’ phones… Toll records merely contain telephonic routing information.” This emphasizes that the inquiry did not involve listening in on live conversations, a point intended to lessen the impact of the surrounding allegations.
Griffith, also present at the committee hearing, speculated that senators gearing up for reelection might shy away from making claims against the government. He expressed a willingness to vote on the matter but made clear that he is not in favor of prolonging government shutdowns over this issue.
Despite the dissatisfaction with the provision, GOP leaders do not anticipate this will derail the House’s scheduled vote on the funding bill. Any move to strip the provision would require returning to the Senate, indicating that while frustration exists, legislative momentum is still in play.
This incident illustrates tensions within the Republican Party and raises broader questions about transparency and accountability in government investigations. The differing perspectives on the motivations behind such provisions highlight the ongoing political divides that characterize current congressional dynamics.
"*" indicates required fields
