Advanced Search
CDF on Tax Cut Plan
Conservative Democratic Forum (CDF) members Charles Stenholm (D-TX), Kent Hance (D-TX), and Gillespie "Sonny" Montgomery (D-MS) stand behind U.S. House Representative Richard Shelby (D-AL), who believes that the meeting showed an ability to compromise with the Reagan Administration. It's unknown whether the compromise will end up being with the CDF or with the Chairman of the Ways and Means Committee Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL), but hopes it will be a Democratic compromise. If not, Rep. Shelby is still hopeful that the CDF can come up with a package that the administration can endorse.
Capitol Journal - Abortion
Doug Johnson of the National Right to Life Committee talks about a Constitutional Ammendment to ban abortion. As you know, a Constitutional Ammendment requires a 2/3 vote in each House and of the state legislatures. We don t have 2/3 in either of the houses for a Constitutional Ammendment right now. That remains our ultmiate goal I think that the Supreme Court decision on abortion has never been so precarious. We feel that it s likely that in the not distant future it is likely that the decision will be overturned by the court itself.
LAWMAKERS June 21, 1984 - Abortion Clinic Protests
Ann Lewis, Political Director of Democratic National Committee, says no candidate wants to be the target of attacks, or that millions of dollars can be raised out of state to oppose them, but the bottom line shows that pro-life groups have lost a lot of their effectiveness. U.S. House Representative Chris Smith (R-NJ) believes that the movement can support or provide of volunteers into any given Congressional race. Pro-life poster of fetus in an office: "Speak out for the silenced minority"; zoom out to adult Caucasian female volunteers working at a table, stuffing envelopes.
CONGRESS: WE THE PEOPLE
14.13.01-A witness testifies about a provision of the Tax Bill. Dole chairing the hearing, asks for a recess to discuss parts of the bill. Library of Congress scholar says that the presence of reporters and lobbyists can stretch out the proceedings. Shots of dozing lobbyists in the committee chamber. C/U of butt-filled ashtray and empty Tab bottle with donut wrapper on committee bench. Shot of Dole chairing hearing. Dole jokes about not inviting a member to testify. V.O.-discussion of how parochial interests work their way into the debate. Sen. HARRY BYRD (VA) gripes about a CIGARETTE TAX increase. Rep. JOHN DUNCAN (R-TN) says that the cigarette tax hurts the working class most. DOLE expresses concern about the tobacco tax increase as a tax that will impact states unevenly. V.O.-discusses the procedural bind that forced Senators to accept the tobacco tax increase. Rep. ROSTENKOWSKI announcing that the tobacco tax is going to stay in the bill. DOLE says that he's got no choice but to go along because the House doesn't have a proposal to compromise with. V.O.-discussion of the approval of conference committee bills. 14.18.00-Library of Congress scholar says that once a bill goes through Conference, no one wants to have to go through the whole process again, so there's a drive to compromise and get the bill approved. Newman-discusses compromise in the Conference committees. Ornstein-discusses the conflict in conference between House Democrats and Senate Republicans over the 1981 budget cuts. Shots of Conference committee session. Rep. HENRY WAXMAN (D-CA) discusses negotiations. Shots of members in conferences. Shot of staffers in meeting. WAXMAN says there's a lot of "trading". Ornstein discusses the bargaining/extortion of the conference process. WAXMAN says he agreed to promote "Teen Chastity Centers", a Senate conservative program, in exchange for protecting funds for family planning. Ornstein-the final reports of a conference never pleases everyone. Newman-recaps the summary of the compromises of the legislative process. Signs off. 14.21.40-closing credits/WETA credit/funding credits/PBS ID 14.23.46--OUT
Hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committe on the Nomination of Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court
Senator Orrin Hatch (R - Utah). First of all, I would like to put Juan Williams' article into the record at this point. Senator Joseph Biden (D - Delaware). Without objection. Senator Orrin Hatch (R - Utah). "The phone calls came throughout September," Juan Williams said. "Did Clarence Thomas ever take money from the South African government? Was he under orders from the Reagan White House when he criticized civil rights leaders? Did he beat his first wife? Did I know anything about expense account charges he filed for out-of-town speeches? Did he say that women don't want equal pay for equal work? And finally, one exasperated voice said, 'Have you got anything on your tapes we can use to stop Thomas.'" "The calls came from staff members working for Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee." I didn't say that. I am just repeating it, but I know it's true. "They were calling me, because several articles written about Thomas have carried my byline. When I was working as a White House correspondent in the early '80's, I had gotten to know Thomas as a news source and later wrote a long profile of him." "The desperate search for ammunition to shoot down Thomas has turned the 102 days" - this is just as few days ago - "102 days since President Bush nominated him for a seat on the Supreme Court into a liberal's nightmare. Here is indiscriminate, mean-spirited mudslinging supported by the so-called champions of fairness: liberal politicians, unions, civil rights groups and women's organizations," all of whom Juan Williams has regard for, or at least did up until this article. I am just reading excerpts. "Now the Senate has extended its attacks on fairness, decency and its own good name by averting its eyes, while someone in a position to leak has corrupted the entire hearing process"--it couldn't have been said better in one paragraph, somebody on this committee--by releasing a sealed affidavit containing an allegation that had been investigated by the FBI, reviewed by Thomas' opponents and supporters on the Senate committee and put aside as inconclusive and insufficient to warrant further investigation to stop the committee's final vote." It is an interesting article. I commend it to everybody.
"Operation Abolition": HUAC Film on U Cal Protest
Congressman Francis E Walter (D - Pennsylvania) describing the Communist mission "Operation Abolition" - the purpose of which is destroy the House Committee on Un-American Activities. Operation Abolition, this is what the Communists call their current drive to destroy the House Committee on Un-American Activities, to weaken the Federal Bureau of Investigations, to discredit its great director, J Edgar Hoover, and to render sterile the security laws of our government. The Communist Party has given top priority to Operation Abolition and has assigned agents trained in propaganda and agitation to this project. The scenes which you will be viewing were taken by newsreel photographers during hearings of the Committee on Un-American Activities in San Francisco, California on May the 12th, 13th and 14th, 1960. During the next few minutes, you will see revealed the long time classic Communist tactic, in which a relatively few, well trained, hard core Communist agents are able to insight and use non-Communist sympathizers to perform the dirty work of the Communist Party. You will see Archie Brown, second in command of the Communist Party in California, Harry Bridges, an international Communist agent and leader of the international longshoreman s union, who recently returned from conferences held with other leaders of Communist lead longshoreman s groups, Ralph Izard, one of the top Communist propagandists, who was welcome guest of the Red Chinese government while American soldiers were giving their lives in the Korean War. You will see Douglas Wachter, an agent trained to specialize in youth activities, William Mandel, another Communist propagandist who serves the conspiracy in the fields of radio and television, Bertram Edises, who is one of the elite core of Communist lawyers, Frank Wilkinson, recently convicted of contempt of Congress, who is in charge of The Citizens Committee to Preserve American Freedoms, the West Coast headquarters of Operation Abolition. You will see these and others in action and the shocking technique which they use to insight other to violence. We are all too familiar with the pattern of Communist led revolution and rioting in Venezuela, Cuba and more recently in Japan. Can it happen here on American soil? This film showing Communism in action will answer that question.
LAWMAKERS
WETA "LAWMAKERS" 6/09/1983 IN 19.59.20-WETA credit/sponsor credits/title sequence 20.00.14-PAUL DUKE/LINDA WERTHEIMER/COKIE ROBERTS-on program-HOUSE DEMOCRATS attack REAGAN TAX CUT PROGRAM to try to reduce benefits to the RICH. The BUDGET continues to be heated debate. Controversy over ending aid to CONTRAS in NICARAGUA and the role of CIA COVERT ACTIONS in NICARAGUA. WERTHEIMER-the HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE session on issue was angry and polarized. 20.01.35-Clip of REAGAN address to Congress to push for LATIN AMERICA POLICY-assistance to EL SALVADOR and to CONTRAS. WERTHEIMER v.o.-REAGAN'S speech raised the tension in Congress. C/S REAGAN saying that CENTRAL AMERICA is key to U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY, implying that DEMOCRATS will be wrong to oppose his policies. Shot of HOUSE FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE session, Rep. LEE HAMILTON (D-IN) arguing against COVERT ACTION in NICARAGUA, says it makes the U.S. look bad, the whole world knows what is going on. C/S Rep. HENRY HYDE (R-IL) says Congress should help people "fight for freedom", Communism is a Cancer. C/S Rep. STEPHEN SOLARZ (D-NY), questioning the motives of REAGAN'S policies, says that COVERT ACTION in NICARAGUA is not to prevent revolution in EL SALVADOR, but to overthrow the NICARAGUAN GOVERNMENT, REAGAN refuses to work for peaceful solutions. Rep. GERALD SOLOMON (R-NY) gets up and leaves the room. 20.04.23-Committee chair CLEMENT ZABLOCKI (D-IL) reacts, asks if SOLOMON wants to insist on a point of order to break up the meeting. SOLOMON insists, says that the Committee is going to "sell the U.S. down the drain" by "abetting Communism". Storms out again. C/S Rep. TED WEISS (D-NY) says it's wrong for REPUBLICANS to question DEMOCRATS' patriotism because they disagree about policy. Rep. SOLOMON says that's not what he's doing, then he does it. C/S Rep. WILLIAM BROOMFIELD (R-MI), says he regrets the partisanship. C/S Rep. ROBERT GARCIA (D-NY), says the differences are that DEMOCRATS want LATIN AMERICA to determine it's own course. C/S Rep. LARRY SMITH (D-FL) the next day, says he's still angry about REPUBLICANS partisan tirades. 20.06.54-C/S Rep. GERRY STUDDS (D-MA), says REAGAN ADMINISTRATION has not been honest about COVERT ACTION in NICARAGUA, it's plainly oriented toward overthrowing the SANDINISTAS, a policy that will lead to war and mass bloodshed, not peace. C/S HYDE, says that REPUBLICANS do want "peace and self-determination", gives a specious statement that "Hitler would never have been defeated without covert aid" [referring no doubt to the covert World War conducted in total secrecy?]. Rep. SMITH says DEMOCRATS are entitled to disagree about how to oppose Communism in LATIN AMERICA. WERTHEIMER-DEMOCRATS won the vote to outlaw COVERT AID to NICARAGUAN REBELS. C/S Rep. ZABLOCKI, says this is the worst partisan debate in his 35 years on committee.
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(10:45:26) In his report on Mr. Foster's death, Special Counsel Robert Fiske determined, and I quote--and if you've ever heard convoluted words I quote "what we can conclude is that there is no evidence that he"--Mr. Foster-"did have a concern against a background in Whitewater/Madison issues were neither a matter of expressed concern in the White House nor the subject of media attention." Now, when you filter that, what Robert Fiske said was that there was no evidence the White House scandal had anything to do with Mr. Foster's state of mind prior to his death. From the prior Whitewater hearings, we know that is false and not true. In the course of these hearings, I think it will become obvious not only was Mr. Foster concerned about Whitewater, but so were several other White House officials, including White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum and Hillary Clinton's Chief of Staff and longtime friend Maggie Williams. Both have admitted to removing Whitewater documents from Mr. Foster's office after his death. In fact, a Secret Service agent will testify he personally watched Maggie Williams take documents from Vince Foster's office the night of his death. Ms. Williams has denied that she took any documents that night and claims to have passed a lie detector test, but we have not been given a copy of the test or the results of the test, nor do we know how many tests she took, and these are crucial in determining the accuracy of the test or tests. Mr. Chairman, this Committee should demand to get a copy of that test and the results of all questions asked, and should know if there were more than one test. Today, I call on the White House to release the test or tests, however many there were, and all information relating to them to this Committee. Why were so many people concerned about the failed Whitewater land deal of President and Mrs. Clinton? The facts show that the reason for such great concern is that the Clintons claim to be equal, 50/50 partners with Jim McDougal in Whitewater. In reality, Jim McDougal used a federally-insured savings and loan to bail out the Clintons, and that savings and loan went broke, costing the taxpayers of this country, costing over $50 million, It fell upon Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster to help determine whether or not the Clintons should declare a loss on their tax return for the Whitewater fiasco In a handwritten note found in his files, Mr. Foster expressed great concern about reporting the loss on the Clintons' 1992 tax re. turn. Because being required to document them in an audit would be-and I quote, and we've heard earlier, but-"a can of worms you shouldn't open." I think that's something we need to focus on, "a can of worms you shouldn't open." The can of worms has been opened, mainly as a result of Mr. Foster's death and in no thanks to the White House, which has consistently impeded this investigation. Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt that Vince Foster was a man of the highest ethical integrity. In fact, in a commencement speech at his alma mater shortly before his death, Vince Foster said-and I quote---"the reputation you develop for intellectual and ethical integrity will be your greatest asset or your worst enemy." Unfortunately, for this White House, their reputation for ethical integrity has become their worst enemy. Mr. Chairman, I want to dispel the notion that we keep hearing of White House cooperation. Anything we have gotten from the White House has been comparable to eating ice cream with a knitting needle. We pick out a little, and they let a little and hold a little. The White House has said they want to cooperate fully with our investigation, yet they require a 24-hour armed guard stand watch over the documents they submit to this Committee. Now, this is far better than they were able to do on the night of Vince Foster's death. Everyone who sees the documents has to sign a confidential agreement, yet the White House has leaked excessively to reporters to get their story out.
July 18, 1995 - Part 2
(10:45:26) In his report on Mr. Foster's death, Special Counsel Robert Fiske determined, and I quote--and if you've ever heard convoluted words I quote "what we can conclude is that there is no evidence that he"--Mr. Foster-"did have a concern against a background in Whitewater/Madison issues were neither a matter of expressed concern in the White House nor the subject of media attention." Now, when you filter that, what Robert Fiske said was that there was no evidence the White House scandal had anything to do with Mr. Foster's state of mind prior to his death. From the prior Whitewater hearings, we know that is false and not true. In the course of these hearings, I think it will become obvious not only was Mr. Foster concerned about Whitewater, but so were several other White House officials, including White House Counsel Bernard Nussbaum and Hillary Clinton's Chief of Staff and longtime friend Maggie Williams. Both have admitted to removing Whitewater documents from Mr. Foster's office after his death. In fact, a Secret Service agent will testify he personally watched Maggie Williams take documents from Vince Foster's office the night of his death. Ms. Williams has denied that she took any documents that night and claims to have passed a lie detector test, but we have not been given a copy of the test or the results of the test, nor do we know how many tests she took, and these are crucial in determining the accuracy of the test or tests. Mr. Chairman, this Committee should demand to get a copy of that test and the results of all questions asked, and should know if there were more than one test. Today, I call on the White House to release the test or tests, however many there were, and all information relating to them to this Committee. Why were so many people concerned about the failed Whitewater land deal of President and Mrs. Clinton? The facts show that the reason for such great concern is that the Clintons claim to be equal, 50/50 partners with Jim McDougal in Whitewater. In reality, Jim McDougal used a federally-insured savings and loan to bail out the Clintons, and that savings and loan went broke, costing the taxpayers of this country, costing over $50 million, It fell upon Deputy White House Counsel Vince Foster to help determine whether or not the Clintons should declare a loss on their tax return for the Whitewater fiasco In a handwritten note found in his files, Mr. Foster expressed great concern about reporting the loss on the Clintons' 1992 tax re. turn. Because being required to document them in an audit would be-and I quote, and we've heard earlier, but-"a can of worms you shouldn't open." I think that's something we need to focus on, "a can of worms you shouldn't open." The can of worms has been opened, mainly as a result of Mr. Foster's death and in no thanks to the White House, which has consistently impeded this investigation. Mr. Chairman, I have no doubt that Vince Foster was a man of the highest ethical integrity. In fact, in a commencement speech at his alma mater shortly before his death, Vince Foster said-and I quote---"the reputation you develop for intellectual and ethical integrity will be your greatest asset or your worst enemy." Unfortunately, for this White House, their reputation for ethical integrity has become their worst enemy. Mr. Chairman, I want to dispel the notion that we keep hearing of White House cooperation. Anything we have gotten from the White House has been comparable to eating ice cream with a knitting needle. We pick out a little, and they let a little and hold a little. The White House has said they want to cooperate fully with our investigation, yet they require a 24-hour armed guard stand watch over the documents they submit to this Committee. Now, this is far better than they were able to do on the night of Vince Foster's death. Everyone who sees the documents has to sign a confidential agreement, yet the White House has leaked excessively to reporters to get their story out.
August 2, 1994 - Part 5
(15:51:30) Hearing resumes: AFTERNOON SESSION The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will come back into session and our witness this afternoon will be Mr. Roger Altman. Do you want to come on up to the table, Mr. Altman. Let me just say as you I re being seated that I know you have a statement to make and all the Members of the Committee, I believe, now have a copy of that statement before. them. Let us now, in the normal order of things, ask you to stand and raise your right hand. Do you swear that the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help you God. TESTIMONY OF ROGER ALTMAN, DEPUTY SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY; FORMER ACTING CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, RESOLUTION TRUST CORPORATION, WASHINGTON, DC Mr. ALTMAN. I do. The CHAIRMAN. Very good. You have a statement for us and we're going to make the full statement a part of the record. You deliver whatever part of it you want at the outset and then we'll go to questions. Mr. ALTMAN. Good afternoon. The CHAIRMAN. Incidentally, before you begin, let me just say that these mikes sometimes have been working strongly and sometimes not. I would encourage you to pull it as close to yourself as you can so you can be heard throughout the room. Thank you. Mr. ALTMAN. Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, my name is Roger Altman. Senator SHELBY. Mr. Chairman, can he pull the mike. Thank you. Mr. ALTMAN. My name is Roger Altman. On January 21, 1993, 1 was unanimously confirmed by the Senate as Deputy Secretary of the Treasury and have served in that capacity since then. That was the second time I was unanimously confirmed to serve in the Treasury. Over the 4 years of the Carter Administration, I served as Assistant Secretary for Domestic Finance and had the privilege of working closely with this Committee at that time, especially on the Chrysler and on the New York City rescues. I feel privileged to have served in these capacities. Public service has always been an important part of my life, as it was for my parents. Over those years, and in those positions, I may have made some poor decisions or other mistakes, but my integrity has never been questioned. Now, Mr. Chairman, I read that I've already been convicted and sentenced even though the trial hasn't taken place. I hope and I believe today's process will be fairer than that. I intend to demonstrate convincingly that I conducted myself properly, and I testifi- 406 fied accurately and when I finish today, I believe reasonable Members of this Committee will reach the same conclusion. Let me address, first, the very basic issue as to whether a:% effort was made by the Treasury or White House staff to impede or alter in any way the criminal or civil processes of the RTC as they relate to Madison Guaranty. I include within that question the issue of whether any information was improperly imparted to the White House. To the best of my knowledge there was no effort on the part of any White House or Treasury staff to impede or affect in any way the- RTC investigations. Moreover, no Member of the RTC or Treasury staff to my knowledge, improperly imparted any information about Madison Guaranty to the White House. I did not do so myself and I am not aware of anyone else doing so.
CONGRESS: WE THE PEOPLE
WETA "CONGRESS: WE THE PEOPLE" IN 09.57.00-WETA credit/funding credits/title sequence 09.57.44-Shots of Town Hall in downtown Alexandria, VA. Host Ed Newman inside the City Council chamber of the hall. Says that Congressmen are likely to use local town halls to meet and keep touch with their constituents. 09.58.36-Shots of a series of Texas voters who say that they will still support PHIL GRAMM even after he switched parties from DEMOCRAT to REPUBLICAN. The gist is that GRAMM is a CONSERVATIVE regardless of party title. Shots of farmland in Gramm's district. Graphic show the district within state of Texas. Still of former Rep. "Tiger" Teague. Shots of GRAMM in 1978 campaign when he was first elected. Shots of GRAMM meeting some ditch diggers. Shot of GRAMM on the House Budget Committee where he is advocating REAGANOMICS spending cuts. Shot of TIP O'NEILL in well of House, shot of REAGAN speaking, GRAMM in well of House. Shots of GRAMM campaigning for the special election in 1983 after switching parties. GRAMM says that he wasn't elected to follow the party leaders but to represent the conservative people of his district. Shots of Gramm in Budget Committee. Shot of Reaganomics Co-Conspirator Delbert Latta (R-OH). V.O.-GRAMM'S collaboration with the enemy infuriated the Democratic leaders who had given GRAMM an influential committee post only to see him work with the opposition. 10.00.53-GRAMM says that his only crime was trying to do what he told the voters he would do. Shots of Gramm boarding an airplane. V.O.-disc. of Gramm's resignation from Congress to run again as a Republican. Political Scientist-says that Gramm planned to paint himself as a martyr and take his chances on voter loyalty. Shots of series of Texas voters who say that GRAMM'S party affiliation isn't important as his conservative ideas. Shots of Gramm campaigning for the special election, tells a store clerk that he'll "keep Government's hand out of your cash register". Shots of Gramm meeting other voters. A Texas state legislator says that Gramm makes people think it's "them versus us", naming people from Boston as a special part of "them". Shot of Gramm accepting victory in special election. GRAMM in office, says voters now will vote for him if he runs on a "laundry ticket". 10.03.30-Host Newman-GRAMM built a relationship with voters sufficient to switch parties and win. Some Representatives don't. Norm Ornstein-a legislator can go to Washington, develop new ideas, and no longer be in touch with the home district's ideas. 10.04.05-Shot of former Rep. AL ULLMAN, discussing the choices he made that alienated him from the home voters. Long shot of Mt. HOOD, OREGON. Shots of truckstops, farm machinery, Dairy Cattle, Llamas, and skiers, people on street in an Oregon city. V.O.-people in this district are largely conservative, but vote independent of party. Shot of fly fisherman, farmer. ULLMAN says that his district was larger than average, and difficult to cover, so many people didn't know them. Shots of ULLMAN in hearings of House Ways and Means Committee. V.O.-ULLMAN'S chairmanship led him to spend a lot of time away from the district and to have perspective on national issues not shared by the locals. Shot of Oregon Bank President, says ULLMAN got to be an "Eastern Politician", Ullman didn't keep the district's needs first. Shot of Ullman in a Ways and Means Committee hearing. V.O.-ULLMAN'S 1979 proposal for a "value added tax" on sales was the end of his career.
Iran-Contra Hearings - Testimony of Colonel Oliver North.
In Studio: Judy Woodruff-What difference does it make if the National Security Council did violate the Bowen, if the White House, if the President violated the Bowen Amendment? What have we if that. In Studio: Elizabeth Drew-We have a breakdown of the constitutional system. But what people are so disturbed about, at the heart of these hearings is the question of can you check the excesses of the executive, if there are some? The founding fathers back to them are going to be celebrated this week down in Philadelphia. One of their major concerns when they broke from England was a king. They didn t want a king. They wanted checks and balances to check the excesses of the executive. That was their term so they have these checks and balances. Therefore, if this happened, if they violated the Bowen Amendment and they said it doesn t apply to us and so on. What you have is the executive branch saying if Congress passes a law and we don t like it we re not going to abide by it. Then we have a complete constitutional break down and that s really what is basic in the minds of many of the members in that committee. In Studio: Judy Woodruff-We should say that even though Congressman Hyde is of course a very sympathetic member of the committee towards Congressman, sorry toward Colonel North and towards the Reagan administration. That even he said during his statement that he did not think it was right for the White House to be conducting an effort to support the Contras privately in the White House. Elizabeth tomorrow I guess we re going to have another dozen members who will carry on their questions and as we just heard following Colonel North s testimony. We will hear once again from Former White House National Security Advisor, Robert McFarlane, and after him perhaps tomorrow perhaps the next day a National Security Official at the White House. Thank you Elizabeth Drew. We will be back tomorrow morning nine o clock eastern daylight time to hear testimony from Colonel Oliver North. I am Judy Woodruff, thank you for joining us.
July 19, 1995 - Part 1
(11:52:13)(tape #10110 begins) to be easy, but I hope we can do that. If we do, we will serve the American people well, and if we do, I will tell you afterwards I voted wrong when I voted against creating this Committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. Senator, thank you for your very thoughtful statement. That is not to mean that all of our other colleagues have not made thoughtful statements. Senator Murkowski. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR FRANK H. MURKOWSKI Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you and Senator Dole for appointing me to be a Member of this Special Committee. It's my hope that the Committee will provide a service to the public in finally resolving hopefully most, if not all, of the issues relating to Whitewater, and finally putting to rest the questions surrounding the death of White House Counsel Vincent Foster. When the United States Park Service Police discovered the body of Vincent Foster on the Federal park land in Virginia, many questions were raised about the Park Service's handling of the investigation At that time I was the Ranking Member of the Energy Subcommittee with jurisdiction over the Park Service. At that time I tried to get the Subcommittee to make some inquiries and potentially hold some hearings relative to the jurisdiction which we had. The Park Service Police declined, saying that the matter was under the Department of Justice and, therefore, was out of their area of jurisdiction. 38 Mr. Chairman, there have been numerous stories in the press as to the events surrounding the death of Vincent Foster, who did what in the White House in the hours and days following his death. What we do know is certain, that the Federal law enforcement personnel, including the Park Service Police, the FBI and the Justice Department, were impeded by the White House in conducting their investigation. Law enforcement officers were denied access to documents In Vince Foster's office. Instead, all the documents in his office were screened by Bernard Nussbaum, many of which were packaged in boxes and sent to the Clintons' personal living quarters. As evidence will show, Bernard Nussbaum and other White House officials visited Foster's office soon after his death in an effort to locate a note that might explain his motive for committing suicide. Law enforcement professionals know that in the vast majority of suicides, a note is left and the absence of such a note could be an indicator of some other motive. (09:29:06) Opens to various shots of Senate hearing room where Senators, the press and audience are slowly filling the room (09:37:35) Hearing begins: INVESTIGATION OF WHITEWATER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND RELATED MATTERS WEDNESDAY, JULY 19,1995 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS, SPECIAL COMMITTEE TO INVESTIGATE WHITEWATER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND RELATED MATTERS, Washington, DC. The Committee met at 9:30 a.m., in room 216 of the Hart Senate Office Building, Senator Alfonse M. DAmato (Chairman of the Committee) presiding. OPENING COMMENTS OF CHAIRMAN ALFONSE M. DAMATO The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will come to order. Yesterday we were not able to conclude our examination and the inquiries that were being put forth to Mr. Hubbell. It was the decision of the Committee to put over the rest of the questioning from our colleagues until today. We thank Mr. Hubbell for being with us again and I will turn to Senator Shelby for the questions that he is going to put forth. Senator Shelby. OPENING COMMENTS OF SENATOR RICHARD C. SHELBY Senator SHELBY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Hubbell, yesterday we left off talking about a conversation that you apparently had had with Phil Heymann who, just to put it back in the record, was the Deputy Attorney General over at the Justice Department at that time; is that correct? CONTINUED SWORN TESTIMONY OF WEBSTER HUBBELL FORMER ASSOCIATE ATTORNEY GENERAL U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE Mr. HUBBELL. That is correct. Senator SHELBY. We were trying to get into the record about some of the difficulties that Mr. Reymann apparently had with Mr. Nussbaum, who's the White House Counsel, over how the search of, Vince Foster's office was conducted or was to be conducted. Would you just, for the record this morning, tell us again what was the difficulty that Mr. Heymann had with Mr. Nussbaum's attitude about searching the office of the White House Deputy Counsel? Mr. HUBBELL. Obviously, Mr. Heymann is the one who did this because I was in Little Rock at the time, but what he related to me was that any 74 Senator SHELBY. When you got back over to the Justice Department is when lie related to you this? Mr. HUBBELL, That's correct. Senator SHELBY. At that time, you were the number three person at the Justice Department? Mr. HUBBELL. That's correct, What he had told me is he and Bernie had had some discussions about how the review of the files would occur. Then, when, I believe, the Park Police, FBI agents and several people from the Justice Department were there, that Bernie had wanted to go about it in a different way. Senator SHELBY. What did Mr. Heymann say to you about Nussbaum's idea of searching the office? Obviously, this was the crux of the conversation. Mr. HUBBELL. The crux of the conversation was actually that the Park Police had complained about the procedure and that he had to talk to Bernie about it to get it resolved. Senator SHELBY. The Park Police, who were doing the initial investigation of the death of Mr. Foster and so forth, had complained to the Justice Department?
LAWMAKERS
01.11.15-Shots of walls of WHITTEN'S huge office, WHITTEN being interviewed, says he always wants to be knowledgeable about the issue, always communicative on issues. Shot of WHITTEN entering committee hearing. Shots of an agricultural lobbyist, says WHITTEN is impressively tough, intelligent, and patient to work through the tough bills. WHITTEN in his office, discussing his loose-reined style of leadership in committee. Shots of WHITTEN in debate in House. WERTHEIMER v.o.-WHITTEN'S staff gets the most respected Computer figures on the Budget of anyone in Congress. Shot of WHITTEN arguing for Congress to override a REAGAN veto of a BUDGET bill, says CONGRESS must act to preserve its independence. 01.14.05-WHITTEN in office, says he's disturbed by the way Congress is rolling over for REAGAN and forsaking its obligation to vote the people's interests. Series of old stills of WHITTEN. TOM FOLEY v.o.-disc. of WHITTEN'S career, changing styles of committee leadership. Shot of WHITTEN in office, says he adapts to the possible, leads the most effective way he can. 01.16.12-ROBERTS-intro report on Rep. SILVIO CONTE (R-MA), the ranking REPUBLICAN on HOUSE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE. Shots of CONTE in CHEF OUTFIT, preparing ITALIAN FOOD for lunch, grating cheese, comparing making legislation to cooking. Conte opens lids on food trays, showing trays of steaming pasta dishes. Shots of congressmen coming in to eat a luncheon with CONTE. Shot of CONTE in a committee meeting, talking about making tough choices. 01.18.26-Shot of CONTE in debate, arguing against REAGAN'S cuts in SOCIAL SERVICES. Gets very angry, asks whether other REPUBLICANS want to "hit [the poor] in the head" while they're at it. Shot of CONTE in office, discusses the need for CONGRESS to protect its committee system, says REAGAN is wrong to try to circumvent the process and jackboot laws through congress. 01.19.38-Shots of a main street in MASSACHUSETTS small town, including front of a small TOWN HALL. ROBERTS v.o.-CONTE'S constituents are mostly DEMOCRATS, so CONTE has to defend social programs in Congress. Shots of WORKERS in a GASWORKS. Shot of sign over door of TOWN HALL of GRANBY, MA. Shots of voters inside, casting ballots. ROBERTS v.o.-despite DEMOCRATIC majority, CONTE regularly wins by big margins in Massachusetts. Shot of CONTE in office, says voters respect his independence, notes that three times, voters from both parties nominated him to run. Shots of GUN RACK and HUNTING TROPHIES on CONTE'S wall. Shot of CONTE going ape in debate, CONTE says he enjoys debating, believes in fighting hard for his issues. Shot of another Congressman calmly disagreeing with CONTE. CONTE responding even more angrily than before, pounding fist, red in the face, etc. Says that mostly at the end of the debate, he invites his opponents for a drink. More shots of CONTE getting riled up in debate. Shot of CONTE in office, says he enjoys "give and take". 01.22.46-shots of CONTE taking field as manager of REPUBLICANS in CONGRESSIONAL BASEBALL GAME, wearing uniform of BOSTON RED SOX. CONTE v.o.-says that lately too many "intellects" have come to Congress and the REPUBLICANS had a losing streak in the annual baseball game. CONTE discussing injuries suffered in the game, laughs. CONTE bemoans growth of partisanship and loss of collegiality in HOUSE, says new crop of Congressmen don't have that spirit, old-timers are important to give perspective and experience to new Congressmen. 01.25.34-ROBERTS-says CONTE will be back again, although some "old-timers" won't be back. DUKE signs off. Closing credits/transcript order information/WETA credit/Sponsor credits/PBS ID 01.27.29--OUT
LAWMAKERS
20.18.38-DUKE already three seats are vacant in the 98th Congress. Rep. BENJAMIN ROSENTHAL (D-NY) passed of Cancer a day after the swearing in. C/S House Chaplain reading a memorial to ROSENTHAL. C/S ROSENTHAL in well of house and on committee panels. ROSENTHAL arguing against the retrenchment of the FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION under REAGAN'S deregulatory regime. An FTC commissioner gives sideways answer to the questions. ROSENTHAL tears into the commissioner. DUKE v.o.-ROSENTHAL one of first congressmen to oppose Vietnam war and one of the first to oppose MILITARY AID to EL SALVADOR. C/S ROSENTHAL in well of House, urging a cutoff of EL SALVADOR aid. C/S GILLIS LONG (D-LA) in office, says ROSENTHAL was the epitome of a good LIBERAL and good DEMOCRAT. C/S Rep. RICHARD OFFINGER (D-NY) in well of House, says ROSENTHAL was well-loved member, champion of Human Rights and the consumer. 20.21.42-DUKE-Rep. JACK SWIGERT (R-CO) died of cancer before getting to serve a day in Congress. C/S Rep. DON FUQUA (R-FL) discussing SWIGERT'S APOLLO 13 experiences and legacy of courage. C/S Rep. S. BOEHLERT (R-NY) calls SWIGERT a hero. C/S Rep. EDWARD ZSCHAU (R-CA) in well of House, pledges to uphold SWIGERT'S legacy of courage. 20.23.19-DUKE-Congress will take two weeks off before the STATE OF THE UNION ADDRESS. Signs off Closing Credits/Transcript order information/WETA credit/sponsor credits/PBS ID 20.25.33-OUT
UN Special on Red China interview with George HW Bush, US Ambassador to United Nations
Robert MacNeil. That s an extraordinarily candid interview for a UN Ambassador wasn t it? I haven t heard anything like that from a UN Ambassador for as long as I can remember. Sander Vanocur. Well, he s an extraordinarily frank man. And he probably was put here for a purpose, Robert. When he was appointed by the President there was criticism because he wasn t a conventional diplomat. But indeed we haven t had conventional diplomats representing us at the UN for some time. We had Adlai Stevenson, Arthur Goldberg, George Bush, these are not the conventional Robert MacNeil. He s much more the conventional politician. Sander Vanocur. Oh, sure. Because they never served in the House of Representatives or on the House Ways and Means Committee. And George Bush, who was a former Congressman from Houston, went to school at the feet of the expert, Wilbur Mills, the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. Now unlike here at the UN, down at Ways and Means rarely a vote is taken, chairman Mills rarely moves before he has a consensus. But I suppose he has learned a great deal in that regard, because I suspect he won t move here for a vote unless he knows he has the votes. And that s a very good thing I think to have here. It s good also because if this has to be sold, if it gets very rough here, with members of the House, especially on the Republican side of the aisle, George Bush having come from the club, so to speak, can go back and try another kind of persuasion on them. So you have really here a dual tracking, the work here at the UN on a diplomatic level, and the political side which I suppose is giving Mr. Nixon some problems. I m not sure the problem is as great as some have suggested, but it s a problem nevertheless. So you ve got two tracks that you re trying to cover both.
Emerging Technology Exhibition - Part 1
Emerging Technologies in Communications and Information (ET/83), U.S. House Representative Edward Markey (D-MA) being interviewed by adult Caucasian female, who asks if he can identify any legislation highlighting Congress' lack of technological understanding. Markey points to deregulation of telecommunications industry, the Telecommunications Sub-Committee wanting to promote competition, as telecommunications have evolved beyond simply being telephone companies. Those variations should be encouraged and developed, otherwise the Japanese and West Germans will get ahead of the U.S. Woman asks if the age gap in Congress contributes to the lack of technological understanding. Rep. Markey thinks there's a problem among all members of Congress; teenagers seem to adapt well, but only with video games. Markey gets tongue-tied, tries a couple times to say that everyone in Congress needs an education in tech developments because it is a fast-evolving field.
August 2, 1994 - Part 10
(01:30:07) Hearing resumes: The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will resume. Senator Mack of Florida. Senator MACK. Thank you Mr Chairman. Senator SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if it would be possible to do--since most Members said 5 minutes, whether we could go to 5 minute rounds recognizing that Senator Gramm, of course, as more--maybe, he could do 10 minutes when be gets his round. Senator MACK. I indicated I didn't think I would go over 5 but I do want to have the opportunity to go through with my questions. Senator SARBANES. I'll withdraw then. 528 The CHAIRMAN. We'll stick with the 10-minute rounds and if you don't need that long, you can just yield the time back. Very good Senator Mack. Senator MACK. Just before the break, Senator Kerry said kind of toward the end of his questions, Mr. Altman, you are not answering my question. And frankly, that's been a constant refrain from both sides during this hearing. My impression is that you have no interest in finding the truth or providing it to the Committee. I say that for many reasons, the latest of which is the conversation you had with Mr. Podesta on March 1, 1994. Mr. Podesta called you about a week after your testimony on February 24 and raised Significant concerns about the accuracy of your testimony. There were several areas he thou ght you should correct. I'm going to focus on the omission of the fall meetings between White House Counsel staff and Treasury officials. When Mr. Podesta brought up those meetings to you, you told him you didn't even want to hear about it. Mr. ALTMAN. Senator, that's not what I said. Senator MACK. I'll give you an opportunity to respond. I'm going to read out of the transcript here. Now a whole group of attorneys down at the White House Counsel's Office thought you should correct the record and you didn't even want to hear about it. That's certainly the impression that we drew. Mr. ALTMAN. That's not what I said, Senator. Senator MACK. Members of the White House Counsel's Office undertook a very serious analysis of the accuracy of your testimony. Question: What was the conclusion of that serious analysis? Answer: The conclusion of the analysis was that in whatever capacity Ms. Hanson, or Mr. DeVore, or Mr. Steiner were over there, the Committee needed to be aware of these contacts. Question: The testimony? Answer., We thought this was very serious. Question: The testimony needed to be supplemented in some way? Answer: Yes. Question: What did Mr. Altman say on March I when you either read or paraphrased that second question? Answer: From February 24? (And he's referring there to Senator Bond's questions about contacts.) He said that-he again said it was an accurate statement. I said to him that there may be information that he would have to acquire to supplement this answer. He said I don't know whether we should be even having this conversation or something to that effect. Then I said well, you may have a duty to supplement your testimony from the perspective of an agency witness. He, I think at that point, did not want me to give him specific information about contacts that I was aware of because I think he was at the point just not sure about whether he should be learning additional facts subsequent to the hearings. The next day you sent this Committee your first of what turned out to be 4 letters to correct the record. in that letter, you continued to be, again in, my opinion, evasive as you were in the February 24 hearing, and I'm going to read from that letter. It is basically a three-paragraph letter, third paragraph: But I have learned today of two conversations which did take place between Treasury staff and White House personnel on this matter. My information is that both related to handling of press inquiries. Let's take the position that you had no knowledge about these last two conversations. Why in the world wouldn't you have taken the opportunity to inform the Committee as fully as possible? And frankly, I have watched the testimony now for hours and you have repeatedly given nonresponsive answers, which you justify with se- 529 mantic gymnastics. I believe you have continued tonight the evasive course which you adopted on February 24 and continue through a series of incomplete and misleading letters written to the Committee. I can't help but conclude that your every statement to this Committee is to evade, not to inform. So I say why in the world wouldn't you take this opportunity to inform the Committee as fully as possible in those four letters.
August 1, 1994 - Part 5
(17:00:20) At page 55 of the printed record of the Committee's hearings, the following question was asked by Senator Gramm: 102 Have you, or any member of your staff, had any communication with the Presi- dent, the First Lady, or any of their or any member of their White House Savings & Loan? representatives, including their legal counsel staff, concerning Whitewater or the Madison Although Mr. Altman responded affirmatively to this question and described his discussion at the February 2, 1994, White House meeting about the statute of limitations, his answer did not include a description of the recusal discussion. I believed it was appropriate to wait until we could discuss his answer and the reasons that he had not mentioned the subject of recusal, to decide how best to supplement the record. As I have indicated, that opportunity never arrived. As I left the hearing on February 24, 1994, 1 spoke with Steven Harris, the Committee Staff Director and Chief Counsel Mr. Harris told me that there were going to be follow-up questions for Mr Altman from the Committee. The next day, Mr. Harris emphasized that we should expect many follow-up questions. On the following Tuesday, I was given a copy of a Reuter's transcript of a colloquy between Senators Riegle and DAmato in which Senator DAmato set forth over a dozen questions that he wanted answered about the White House meetings described in Mr. Altman' s testimony. Senator Riegle responded to Senator DAmato that, ' "The Committee record is still open," and that Senator D'Amato's questions should be submitted to Mr. Altman so that they could be answered and included in the record. Based on this and on what Mr. Harris had told me the previous week, I fully expected that we would receive written follow questions which would be answered in conjunction with a thorough review of the transcript of the testimony. There was no doubt in my mind that all of these conversations and meetings would be disclosed and described fully to the Committee, and that every question would be answered. However, as I stated, with the service of the Grand Jury subpoenas by the Independent Counsel the normal process of reviewing and, if necessary, correcting the record was overtaken by the many investigations that followed. As my description of the events of last fall and this past winter makes clear each of the conversations between White House and Treasury officials at which I was present served a legitimate governmental purpose, and was not intended to, and, in fact, did not, further any private interests or bestow benefits on any individual. The same cannot be said, however, for the RTC employee, or employees, who leaked information about the criminal referrals to news reporters, breaching the Office of Government Ethic's ethical standards and RTC regulations. No action was ever taken against them. I think it is important for all of us to maintain our focus. Much has been made in the press about purported inconsistencies between some of my recollections and those of Secretary Bentsen and Deputy Secretary Altman. I have the highest respect for both Sectary Bentsen and Deputy Secretary Altman. It is my honor and privilege to serve with them and report to them. The fact that we have differences in recollections should come as no surprise. Wit- nesses to events often have differing recollections and, frankly, the differences here are not important. They are not important because no one, not me, not anyone at Treasury,and no one at the White 103 House, attempted to interfere in the substance or processes of any criminal referrals, or the substance or processes of any potential civil claims, involving Madison. The criminal referrals were made, the civil claims continue to be explored, and Mr. Altman recused himself from any involvement in the Madison matter almost half a ear ago, never having made, or having been asked to make, a substantive decision.
July 18, 1995 - Part 1
(10:00:42) In essence, he seems to be saying that the option that supports the public statements is something he can't pursue. The third document is number 237. 1 believe you have focused in on "$1,000 basis so no tax effect, but arbitrary and still risk audit." I believe as well "0 basis with $1,000 gain. Avoid any audit of issue." Here, again, Mr, Foster appears to be going over his options and how he can possibly keep the IRS from auditing the Clintons. He thinks about claiming "$1,000 basis so no tax effect, but arbitrary and still risks audit." He appears to then compare the scenario to the possibility of "0 basis with $1,000 gain," which would "avoid any audit of issue," Despite the fact that he recognizes it is arbitrary, this is ultimately the option Foster chooses. What all these documents tell me is the White House certainly had reason to worry about a Department of Justice search of Vince Foster's office. The documents tell me that, contrary to the assertions the White House has made for many months and as recently as this past weekend, this is not a harmless issue about tax returns. Rather, it's about the finances of Whitewater Development and the fact that Vince Foster couldn't square the First Couple's public statements with reality. Imagining the nervousness of the White House suspecting that these documents and others existed and that they were easily discoverable during the suicide investigation, a great deal of odd behavior is explained. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. We have some time remaining, but we're going to turn. As I said, each side will take approximately a half hour, then we'll go to 10-minute segments as necessary. Senator Sarbanes. Senator SARBANES. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I take it after the half hour on this side, we'll go back to that side for 10 minutes and then back to this side for 10 minutes? The CHAIRMAN. Correct. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PAUL S. SARBANES Senator SARBANES. Mr. Chairman, first of all, I subscribe to the necessity of conducting fair, impartial and thorough hearings. I think it's important that the facts be laid out in a civil manner, that this not become a partisan exercise. The Senate approved resolutions authorizing an examination of the handling of the documents in Foster's office, both last year and again this year. In June 1994, the Senate passed Resolution 229 authorizing The first phase of this investigation, and that resolution provided that the Committee should conduct hearings into whether improper con- duct occurred regarding the way in which White House officials handled documents in the office of White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster at the time of his death. Now, those hearings were not held last year in response to a letter from the Independent Counsel, then Mr. Fiske, who said that there were questions unanswered at this point with respect to the handling of the documents that they were trying to resolve before they could complete the investigation. They therefore asked if the 9 Committee last summer wanted to do public hearings on this particular subject, and the Committee acceded to that request. This year, when we passed the resolution S. Res. 120, which is the resolution governing the activities of this Committee and which provides in section 4 that Consistent with the rights of persons subject to investigation and inquiry, the Special Committee shall make every effort to fulfill the right of the public and Congress to know the essential facts and implications of the activities of officials of the United States Government and other persons and entities with respect to the matters under investigation and study, as described in section 1. The matters outlined for investigation and study in that resolution included in section I are, and I quote:
July 29, 1994 - Part 2
(12:19:30) OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CAROL MOSELEY- BRAUN Senator MOSELEY BRAUN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, under Senate Resolution 229, this Committee is directed to review whether improper conduct occurred regarding: One, communication between White House officials and RTC or Treasury officials regarding Whitewater or Madison Guaranty. Two, the Park Service Police investigation into the death of White House Deputy Counsel, Vincent Foster. Three, the way White House officials handled documents in Vincent Foster's office at the time of his death. At the outset, let me say, Mr. Chairman, I would like to associate myself with the remarks of Senators Bennett and Boxer regarding the Vincent Foster issue. We are not conducting an investigation into a suicide. Our investigation is only into. propriety of the investigation surrounding his tragic and untimely death. My condolences and sympathy also go out to his wife and family. This is no doubt a very painful time for them, and it's probably more painful to them that this matter has not yet been put to rest, However, we do have an obligation, nonetheless, to the public to ensure that no untoward or inappropriate activities occurred that would reflect on the remaining issues before this Committee. The first part of this hearing, I believe, will rightfully look into the process by which that investigation took place. What this means, therefore, Mr. President, is that at least in part, we are still dealing with the legacy of the savings and loans crisis. I was not in the Senate in the 1980's as that crisis exploded onto the scene. Like every Illinoisan, and I imagine every person in the country, I watched it develop with horror. It made me and my service here determined everything I could to prevent anything similar from ever happening again and to see that everything possible was done to minimize the public cost of completing the resolution of the savings and loan debacle. That is why, along with Senator Murray and a number of others on this Committee, I joined in insisting that a final taxpayer payment to the Resolution Trust Corporation include a wide variety of management and other reforms designed to bring more order and discipline to the RTC and to improve its efficiency. It is most important for us to protect the public interest in the final stages of the savings and loan issue and to ensure the integrity of the process in which that resolution occurs. Madison Guaranty is one of the thousands of savings and loan failures that 40 formed that crisis. It cost the taxpayers $60 million to make good the Federal Government's deposit insurance obligation to the Madison depositors. That is a very large amount of money, It is, however, chilling for us to remember what the savings and loan crisis cost each American. The Madison failure alone represents less than 5/100 of I percent of the $125 billion we are spending to resolve the savings and loan failure debacle overall. Madison is not, of course, the only savings and loan worthy of the attention of this Committee. There are many billion dollars- plus failures that deserve and need our attention. These hearings that are beginning today, however, involve only the Madison situation. The reason for that, Mr. Chairman, is all too obvious. It is because the President of the United States before be became President was involved in a real estate partnership with Madison's then CEO. The President was not a stockholder in Madison. He was not an officer of Madison. He was not a director of Madison, but he did have a tangential relationship to Madison. I believe that the media has done its job in bringing the President's connection to a failed savings and loan to the attention of the American public. The Special Counsel, the Resolution Trust Corporation, the Banking Committee of the House, and this Committee are now doing our jobs. We are all investigating matters that in some way relate to Madison or its fallout, These investigations are time- consuming and they are expensive. By the time all is said and done it is very possible that the Federal Government will windup spending as much money investigating Madison and the real estate partnership commonly known as Whitewater, as it cost the Federal Government to close Madison down in the first place. I support and appreciate the public demand for careful review of this issue, which is why I supported the appointment of Special Counsel, Also, Mr. Chairman, at this point I'd like to congratulate you for the careful attention that you have given to this matter and the kind of thoroughness of your persistence in following this through. Given that the heart of the matter before the Special Counsel involves reviewing a time before the President took office, I think that the obligation of Congress now is to let the Special Counsel do his work. This Congress should, therefore, not bold bearings on matters which are the subject of open investigations by the Special Counsel. The judgment of the Senate, as expressed in S. Res. 229, is entirely correct, In fact-, I would make the point even more strongly. Congress must not take actions that can undermine the Special Counsel's ability to do his job. The subject matters before the Committee today, however, relate directly to the times since January 29, 1993, when Governor Clinton became President Clinton. They are clearly appropriate for Congressional hearings. They clearly relate to the performance of the President and of public officials of the White House, and of a number of governmental departments and agencies. This Committee will meet its responsibilities in these areas. The Committee has already conducted 37 depositions and reviewed over 10,000 pages of documents, I hope this Committee's bearings will meet the public's expectations for a fair and balanced review of the matters before us.
Washington Week Show - #4526
The conversation moves seamlessly to discussion of the re-authorization of the Patriot Act. Senator Bill Frist says "But the Democrats obstructed that, flat out obstructed that, they killed it and they celebrated. So I made a decision not to, a few hours ago to extend since they did kill it, and they should be ashamed of that, made the decision to extend it for six months." (D) Wisconsin says "Not a single one of us ever wanted the act to expire, it was only the President and the White House and Attorney General Gonzales who wanted to play that game of chicken, and they lost the game of chicken." Short clip of House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Sensenbrenner at podium. The panel discusses how the Patriot Act may change, how long will it be extended, and how this issues affects politicians on the campaign trails.
CDF on Tax Cut Plan
Conservative Democratic Forum (CDF) members, Reps. Gillespie "Sonny" Montgomery (D-MS), Ken Hance (D-TX), Carroll Hubbard (D-KY), Richard Shelby (D-AL), Ralph Hall (D-TX), and Phil Gramm (D-TX) behind podium on table; U.S. House Representative Charles Stenholm (D-TX) takes questions from offscreen adults. Man asks how many members want the 2 or 3 year tax bill, whether there's a preference for "across the board tax cuts" or something more targeted. Stenholm says the division between the bills was close; "across the board tax cuts" are not a topic of great concern. Stenholm replies to question on how long CDF will wait on the House Ways and Means Committee by stating that placing deadlines are not helpful, but time is of the essence. Woman asks about specific tax savings under CDF program, only to be told that there are no specifics, only generalities and compromise being discussed.
Forestry Legislation Debate : Land Use Areas
U.S. House Representative Sydney Morrison (R-WA) continues explaining the legislative procedures taken in committee to further strengthen House Resolution 24 and make the Hector Land Area in New York a part of the Green Mountain National Forest. He notes that this would be the only National Forest in all of New York and urges his colleagues to support the bill before yielding time to Rep. Frank Horton (R-NY). Rep. Horton uses his time to explain how Congressional action started with regards to the Hector Land Area, noting that he has no problem with selling off land that has no recreation, legal, or ecological protection, but this land is different. Rep. Horton also remarks upon the history of the Hector Land Area, its importance to the state of New York and how it has been already administered by the U.S. Forest Service as though it were already a National Forest.