July 29, 1994 - Part 1
July 29, 1994 - Part 1
(10:00:00) PBS funding credits (10:00:10) Coverage title screens (10:00:21) In tv studio hearing hosts KEN BODE and NINA TOTENBERG, they introduce and discuss day's hearing HEARINGS RELATING TO MADISON GUARANTY S&L AND THE WHITEWATER DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION-WASHINGTON, DC PHASE VOLUME I FRIDAY, JULY 29, 1994 U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON BANKING, HOUSING, AND URBAN AFFAIRS, Washington, DC. The Committee met in room 106, of the Dirksen Senate Office Building at 10 a.m., Senator Donald W. Riegle, Jr. (Chairman of the Committee) presiding.] (10:03:15) OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN DONALD W. RIEGLE, JR. The CHAIRMAN. The Committee will come to order. Let me invite all those that are standing to find seats so that we can begin. Good morning to everyone and welcome to all those in attendance this morning. Today, the Senate Banking Committee begins the public hearing phase of our inquiry on the so-called Madison Guaranty/Whitewater matter. We do so under specific legislative instructions from the full Senate, Senate Resolution 229 mandated this inquiry and it instructed our Committee to begin these public hearings by today, July 29, 1994. The scope of our present effort was carefully defined by the Senate Resolution 229 to pursue only three specific matters in order to not interfere or compromise in any way the full-scale inquiry being directed by independent Counsel, Robert B. Fiske, Jr. Now, Mr. Fiske's effort began on January 20, 1994, when Attorney General Janet Reno announced the appointment of this respected former prosecutor to serve as Independent Counsel to investigate allegations relating to Whitewater/Madison. He has full Federal authority to prosecute any violations of both civil and criminal laws. On March 7, then, Mr. Fiske, aware that some in Congress were pressing for hearings on this subject, wrote to our Committee requesting that we not bold hearings that might compromise his investigation and jeopardize any later prosecutorial efforts he might undertake. The Senate itself recognized the importance and the primacy of Mr. Fiske's concerns on March 17 by a unanimous vote of 98 to zero. The Senate passed a resolution authorizing bearings into all matters related to Whitewater but carefully provided that any Senate hearings should, and I quote: 116 Be structured in sequence in such a manner that in the judgment of the leaders, the would not interfere with the ongoing investigation of Special Counsel Robert B. Fiske, Jr. The Senate was very explicit on that matter. So for this reason, Senator DAmato and I have met periodically with Mr. Fiske. We have done so in order to carefully structure our investigative process in a way that preserves the integrity of Fiske's inquiry and protects any prosecutorial effort he may later undertake, while at the same time providing our Committee with access to the information that we need to meet our investigative mandate from the Senate. Now, Senate Resolution 229 directed this Committee to conduct hearings on three specific matters in this phase. No. 1, and I'm quoting directly: Communications between officials of the White House and the Department of the Treasury or the Resolution Trust Corporation relating the Whitewater Development Corporation and the Madison Guaranty Savings Loan Association. No. 2, 1 quote again: The Park Service Police investigation into the death of White House Deputy Counsel Vincent Foster. And No. 3, and I quote: 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. Mr. Fiske later informed us on July 15-that ' s just 2 weeks ago-that contrary to his earlier expectation, he had not yet con- cluded his inquiry into the handling of Mr. Poster's documents. He, therefore, asked that we not address this issue at this time, and, in deference to his request, we have put it aside until he indicates his work in this area is completed, In every step we have maintained direct working contact with Mr. Fiske to discuss and resolve any matters of potential conflict and in that regard, I will now make available for the record 12 different letters that illustrate this careful line-drawing process that we have followed. So these current hearings will focus upon two specific areas, and our purpose will be to examine all the relevant facts in order to determine whether any "improper conduct" may have occurred.