July 29, 1994 - Part 1
July 29, 1994 - Part 1
(11:01:09) OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR JIM SASSER Senator SASSER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to compliment you, Mr. Chairman. You~ve well laid out the issues that are under scrutiny in this hearing, and the boundaries that should govern our inquiry, It's pretty clear that the subject before us today can be put to various political uses. Nevertheless, I cling to the hope, however faint, that we can do our jobs without political rancor here over the next few days. We all have a mutual interest in getting the facts. There are some legitimate questions of Government here but I believe we can get to the truth and keep the matters before US in perspective and also bring to them some ordinary standards of human decency. I hope, we can all agree, that there's no place in this hearing room for lurid speculation about the tragic circumstances surrounding the suicide of Vincent Foster. The Special Counsel has spoken on this issue. The Justice Department and the Park Police have concurred. The Foster family has suffered enough. Now, with regard to the contacts between the Resolution Trust Corporation, the Department of Treasury, and the White House concerning Madison Guaranty, there are some questions to be answered. Documents and depositions contain conflicting accounts of who talked to whom, about what, and when they talked with each other. I think we can begin with at least one fundamental certainty. The criminal referrals involving Madison Guaranty proceeded on schedule, without interference, through the regulatory and criminal justice system, These criminal referrals are now in the hands of the Republican Independent Counsel and before a grand jury. So any contact that might be alleged or even confirmed, we should be clear did not hinder this is process. Now, this is the bottom line. The Independent Counsel found no obstruction of justice and no criminal behavior at all in these contacts, As my distinguished colleague, Senator Dodd, said, this isn't Watergate. This isn't Iran-Contra. No direct abuse of Presidential power is at issue before this Committee in these hearings. Now, our charge under statute demands, however, that we go deeply. We're to determine whether or not "improper behavior" occurred in any of the matters under review. Obviously, there's no bright line task for ascertaining whether so vague a standard has indeed been breached. But Lloyd Cutler, the White House Counsel, has already acknowledged that mistakes have been made and I believe this Committee must examine dispassionately the circumstances surrounding these mistakes in judgment and get to the bottom of what happened. 18 We face issues, perhaps serious, about whether Congress bad been misled in the testimony before this Committee. We do have conflicting statements from high Treasury officials about what contacts were made and at whose direction they were made. But most important, our inquiry will be conducted in the ambiguous area of overlap between the Executive Branch's regulatory powers and its other responsibilities and interests. Now, this is uncertain terrain, to say the least. But clearly, we have reason to question the sensitivity of some in this affair. The bar on matters of this kind, as has been stated earlier, is set very high. People in positions of power must avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. But having said that, let's not pull this matter out of proportion. The subject of this hearing is not comparable to the abuses of Executive Power we've seen in the recent past. As we move through these bearings, we should keep clearly in -mind the conclusions of the Independent Counsel, and I think it's worthwhile to quote them here. He said, and I quote: The evidence is insufficient to establish that anyone at the White House or the Department of Treasury acted with the intent to corruptly influence an RTC investigation. So Mr. Chairman, I look forward to bearing from the witnesses as these hearings unfold, and I thank you for your leadership in this hearing. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. Senator Mack.