Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 27, 1974
Impeachment Hearings: House Judiciary Committee, July 27, 1974
[00.15.19] Mr. RANGEL. Mr. Chairman? The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Rangel. Mr. RANGEL. I want to join in the praise given to the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey for withdrawing his motions to strike in the interests of saving time, -and then ask the distinguished gentleman from Alabama if indeed it is his purpose to bring facts before this committee as relates to specifies of Presidential wrongdoing, and certainly not to strike but to serve as an educational function and recognizing that a motion to strike may serve as that parliamentarian vehicle. I was wondering whether the distinguished gentleman from Alabama would accept either staff or members reciting specific dates and Times that support that particular article. I Think if the question really is one to educate the general public, then perhaps we could recite that information , but certainly whether any of the members of this committee agree on the standard of evidence that we will be using, there is no question that we do know what evidence we are using at this time. We may differ on the quality and the quantity that we think is necessary to support an article of impeachment, but I ask the, distinguished gentleman from Alabama that if indeed he wants to educate the general public and have specifies, would he not consent to those specifies being either by staff or members to support the article, so we can move on and finally get an opportunity to vote on this historic question. Mr. FLOWERS. Is this directed to me, Mr. Rangel? Mr. RANGEL. Yes. I yield to the gentleman from Alabama. Mr. FLOWERS,. I think that the only way in which we can elicit this information is through this vehicle or motion as it, Pertains to each one of the subparagraphs which tend to support the general statement in paragraph 2. My purpose is to elicit the information and to find out' what evidence there is. and I would hope that the staff and members of the committee would be able to respond expeditiously, as my friend from Illinois says, and we, will not, take a great amount of time, but I do not think that we should sacrifice thoroughness for expedition here. Mr. RANGEL. No. My question is, Mr. Flowers, if we were to read paragraph 2 and' if In fact staff or a member of this committee would give, you information and specifics as to what the President did or did not do to support that paragraph would you accept that and be prepared to allow the committee to vote as to whether or not this is sufficient evidence to support that paragraph? Mr. FLOWERS. I will say to the gentleman from New York that the only way a member can win the floor is to offer an amendment at this point, and there is no other parliamentary device for a member to, gain the floor, having already used up the 5 minutes which we were allocated in general debate on this article and, for that, purpose, I do not see that the parliamentary situation would allow that. Mr. RANGEL. If you stick to the -word "debate," there is no question that we have to deal with the motion to strike, but I am certain that the Chair would allow us as Mr. Sarbanes goes down the paragraphs, to give that specific information which we have used to support it and then, if that was done, there would be no need for 38 members to debate it. It would be a question as to whether we agreed with it and we could vote on it. I yield back the balance of my time. Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, parliamentary inquiry, The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will state it, Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Chairman, I have, as you know, a proposed article and proposed article III, and I just want to be sure that I understand what our procedure will be for today. I understand that you will entertain perfecting amendments which will be discussed and that then you propose that with respect to motions to strike, articles, for purposes of--- The CHAIRMAN. Debates. Mr. McCLORY [continuing]. Debates, and for getting additional information such as the gentleman from Alabama suggests, that you will entertain a motion to close debate, a motion on the previous question at the end of 1 hour's time with regard to each one, of the paragraphs. Is that correct ? The CHAIRMAN. Or if a member would move the previous question earlier. Mr. McCLORY. But not to exceed 1 hour of discussion with regard to information on with respect to each of the subparagraphs. The CHAIRMAN. That is correct. Mr. McCLORY. Thank You, Mr. Chairman. Mr. LATTA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have an inquiry. Let me say I concur in Mr. Sandman's statement. We are certainly not bowing just because we want to be bowing. We are bowing to the obvious and the obvious is that we do not have the votes. We are not deserting our position. We think it was a proper position. Yesterday those who believed as deeply as we did were not resorting to dilatory tactics, as has been reported in some places, but we definitely felt that the President of the United States should be able to answer the, charges that were being made against him, and they were not specific. They are still general, and that is the way they are going to be, they are going- to remain. But I vould like to at this juncture, Mr. Chairman, point out That there, has been some misinformation going Out across the country that, had we been successful and made these articles specific, that they could not have been amended on the floor of the House. I know the Chair knows and every member of this committee knows that we are not going to grant in the Rules Committee a closed rule on this matter. It will be, an open rule and subject to amendment on the floor. So if there are any additional charges that -wish to be brought or times or places under any of the articles that have been mentioned here that wish to be included, it could have been included by amendment on the floor of the house. I would just like to make the record straight that here is one member and I am sure that there are going to be 14 other members on the Rules Committee when this matter comes up there, going to be voting an open rule. [00.21.59]